2015 BAR EXAMS

I.
Alden and Stela were both former Filipino citizens. They were married in the
Philippines but they later migrated to the United States where they were
naturalized as American citizens. In their union they were able to accumulate
several real properties both in the US and in the Philippines. Unfortunately,
they were not blessed with children. In the US, they executed a joint will
instituting as their common heirs to divide their combined estate in equal
shares, the five siblings of Alden and the seven siblings of Stela. Alden
passed away in 2013 and a year later, Stela also died. The siblings of Alden
who were all citizens of the US instituted probate proceedings in a US court
impleading the siblings of Stela who were all in the Philippines.
a) Was the joint will executed by Alden and Stela who were both former
Filipinos valid? Explain with legal basis. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes because they are already Americans at the time of the execution
of the joint will.
Article 818 of the New Civil Code provides that two or more persons
cannot make a will jointly, or in the same instrument, either for their
reciprocal benefit or for the benefit of a third person. Article 819 of
the same code states that wills, prohibited by the preceding article,
executed by Filipinos in a foreign country shall not be valid in the
Philippines, even though authorized by the laws of the country
where they may have been executed.
This prohibition is applicable only in joint wills executed by Filipinos
in a foreign country, it does not apply to joint wills executed by
aliens.
b) Can the joint will produce legal effect in the Philippines with respect to the
properties of Alden and Stela found here? If so, how? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes.
Under Article 816 of the New Civil Code, the will of an alien who is
abroad produces effect in the Philippines if made with the
formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, or
according to the formalities observed in his country, or in
conformity with those which this code prescribes.

The same applies to the case at bar. Here, the joint will of Alden and
Stela produces effect in the Philippines if made with the formalities
prescribed by the law of the US or in conformity with Philippine
laws. The joint must be admitted for probate in order to give effect
for those testamentary provisions that affects property within
Philippines.
c) Is the situation presented in Item I an example of dpecage? (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. It is not an example of dpecage. The probate proceedings were
instituted in a US Court albeit the siblings of Stela were all in the
Philippines, the NCC provides that the capacity to succeed is
governed by the law of the nation of the decedent (Stela). In this
case, US Law is applicable. Therefore, no Philippine Law is involved
in the aforementioned situation.
(Note: Dpeage refers to a concept in the conflict of laws whereby different
issues within a particular case may be governed by the laws of different
states. In common law countries dpeage is usually used to refer to a single
contract which provides that different parts of the contract shall be governed
by different laws.)
II.
Marco and Gina were married in 1989. Ten years later, or in 1999, Gina left
Marco and lived with another man, leaving their two children of school age
with Marco. When Marco needed money for their children's education he sold
a parcel of land registered in his name, without Gina's consent, which he
purchased before his marriage. Is the sale by Marco valid, void or voidable?
Explain with legal basis. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Void under Art. 96, The administration and enjoyment of the
community property shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of
disagreement, the husband's decision shall prevail, subject to
recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be
availed of within five years from the date of the contract

implementing such decision.

Here, the consent of Gina is needed before Marco could validly sell a
parcel of land. The property is presumed to be part of the absolute
community property regime since they are married after the
effectivity of the Family Code. Since the sale was made without such
consent, it is void.
In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to
participate in the administration of the common properties, the
other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These
powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority
of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the
absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or
encumbrance shall be void.
However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on
the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be
perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other
spouse or authorization by the court before the offer is withdrawn
by either or both offerors.

III.
Julie had a relationship with a married man who had legitimate children. A
son was born out of that illicit relationship in 1981. Although the putative
father did not recognize the child in his certificate of birth, he nevertheless
provided the child with all the support he needed and spent time regularly
with the child and his mother. When the man died in 2000, the child was
already 18 years old so he filed a petition to be recognized as an illegitimate
child of the putative father and sought to be given a share in his putative
father's estate. The legitimate family opposed, saying that under the Family
Code his action cannot prosper because he did not bring the action for
recognition during the lifetime of his putative father.
a) If you were the judge in this case, how would you rule? (4%)
b) Wishing to keep the peace, the child during the pendency of the
case decides to compromise with his putative father's family by
abandoning his petition in exchange for 1/2 of what he would have
received as inheritance if he were recognized as an illegitimate child.
As the judge, would you approve such a compromise? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:

a) I will deny the petition of the illegitimate child.

Under Art 175 par 2 of the Family Code, it says that the action
to establish filiations of an illegitimate child must be brought
within the same period specified in Art 173 except when the
action is based on the second paragraph of Art 172, in which
case the action must be brought during the lifetime of the
alleged parent.
In the case at bar, the putative father did not acknowledge the
child as his in the record of birth. He only provided the child
with all the support he needed and spent time regularly with
the child and his mother but never signed any document to
prove filiation.
b) Yes. Under Article 2028 of the Civil Code, a compromise is a
contract
whereby
the
parties,
by
making
reciprocal
concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already
commenced. Accordingly, a compromise is either judicial, if the
objective is to put an end to a pending litigation, or
extrajudicial, if the objective is to avoid a litigation.
As a contract, a compromise is perfected by mutual consent.
However, a judicial compromise, while immediately binding
between the parties upon its execution, is not executory until
it is approved by the court and reduced to a judgment.15 The
validity of a compromise is dependent upon its compliance
with the requisites and principles of contracts dictated by law.
Also, the terms and conditions of a compromise must not be
contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public
order.
Source - Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Heirs of Spouses Jorja RigorSoriano

IV.
Bert and Joe. both male and single. lived together as common law spouses
and agreed to raise a son of Bert's living brother as their child without legally
adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took care of their home and the boy. In
their 20 years of cohabitation they were able to acquire real estate assets
registered in their names as co -owners. Unfortunately. Bert died of cardiac

arrest. leaving no will. Bert was survived by his biological siblings. Joe. and
the boy.
a) Can Article 147 on co -ownership apply to Bert and Joe. whereby all
properties they acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by their
joint industry and shall be owned by them in equal shares? (2%)
b) What are the successional rights of the boy Bert and Joe raised as their
son? (2%)
c) If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of their cohabitation to
jointly adopt the boy. would they have been legally allowed to do so?
Explain with legal basis. (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
a. No. Article 148 applies not art 147. There was clearly a legal
impediment considering that both were male and cannot
validly get married.
In cases of cohabitation not falling under Article 147, only the
properties acquired by both of the parties through their actual
joint contribution of money, property, or industry shall be
owned by them in common in proportion to their respective
contributions.
In the absence of proof to the contrary, their contributions and
corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The same rule
and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of money and
evidences of credit.
b. Bert died intestate and was survived by his biological siblings.
since the boy is actually Bert's nephew, he has a right to
representation with regard to his biological father's share in
case his biological father dies or otherwise becomes
incapacitated to inherit pending the intestate proceeding and
until such time Bert's estate has been finally partitioned
among his surviving sibling-heirs.
Article 960. Legal or intestate succession takes place:
(1) If a person dies without a will, or with a void will, or one
which has subsequently lost its validity;
Article 962. In every inheritance, the relative nearest in
degree excludes the more distant ones, saving the right

of representation when it properly takes place.

Article 970. Representation is a right created by fiction of
law, by virtue of which the representative is raised to the
place and the degree of the person represented, and
acquires the rights which the latter would have if he were
living or if he could have inherited.
c. No. Article 336 of the Family Code provides that only the
husband and wife may jointly adopt. Parental authority shall,
in such case, be exercised as if the child were their own by
nature.

V.
Mrs. L was married to a ship captain who worked for an international maritime
vessel. For her and her family's support, she would claim monthly allotments from
her husband's company. One day, while en route from Hong Kong to Manila, the
vessel manned by Captain L encountered a severe typhoon at sea. The captain was
able to send radio messages of distress to the head office until all communications
were lost. In the weeks that followed, the search operations yielded debris of the
lost ship but the bodies of the crew and the passengers were not recovered. The
insurance company thereafter paid out the death benefits to all the heirs of the
passengers and crew. Mrs. L filed a complaint demanding that her monthly
allotments continue for the next four years until her husband may be legally
presumed dead because of his absence. If you were the magistrate, how would you
rule?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I would rule in against Mrs. L.
Art. 391 of the Civil Code provides, the following shall be presumed dead
for all purposes, including the division of the estate among the heirs: (1) A
person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aeroplane which
is missing, who has not been heard of for four years since the loss of the
vessel or aeroplane.
In absence due to extraordinary causes, the presumption of death
retroacts to the date of disappearance. In the present case, therefore, Mrs
L is not entitled to her monthly allotments.

VI.

Kardo met Glenda as a young lieutenant and after a whirlwind courtship,

they were married. In the early part of his military career, Kardo was
assigned to different places all over the country but refused to accompany
him as she preferred to live in her hometown. They did not live together until
the 12th year of their mirage when Kardo had risen up the ranks and was
given his own command. They moved to living quarters in Fort Gregorio. One
day, while Kardo was away on official business, of his military aides caught
Glenda having sex with the corporal assigned as Kardos driver. The aide
immediately reported the matter to Kardo who rushed home to confront his
wife. Glenda readily admitted the affair and Kardo sent her away in anger.
Kardo would later come to know the true extent of Glendas unfaithfulness
from his aides, his household staff, and former neighbors who informed him
that Glenda has had intimate relations with various men throughout their
marriage whenever Kardo was away on assignment.
Kardo filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage under Article 36.
Based on interviews from Kardo, his aide, and the housekeeper, a
psychologist testifies that Glendas habitual infidelity was due to her
affliction with Histrionic Personality Disorder, an illness characterized by
excessive emotionalism and uncontrollable attention-seeking behavior
rooted in Glendas abandonment as a child by her father. Kardo himself, his
aide and his housekeeper also testified in court. The RTC granted the
petition, relying on the liberality espoused by Te v. Te and Azcueta v.
Republic. However, the OSG filed an appeal, arguing that sexual infidelity
was only a ground for legal separation and that the RTC failed to abide by
the guidelines laid down in the Molina case. How would you decide the
appeal?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will decide in favor of the OSG. The facts of the problem fall
squarely with the case of Ochosa v. Alano and Republic (January 26,
2011). In said case, the Court clarified that in the Te case it did not
mean to declare an abandonment of the Molina doctrine.
The Court simply stressed the need to emphasize other perspective
as well which should govern the disposition of petitions for
declaration of nullity under Article 36. Accordingly, each case must
be judged, not on the basis of a priori assumptions, predilections or
generalizations but according to its own facts.
In the case at bar, the trial court granted the petition based on the
testimony of the psychologist, as well as Kardo, his aide and the
housekeeper.
Granting that these testimonies are credible, they can only be

convincingly traced to the period of time after Glendas marriage to

Kardo and not to the inception of the said marriage. There is
inadequate evidence that her "defects" were already present at the
inception of, or prior to, the marriage.
In other words, her alleged psychological incapacity did not satisfy
the jurisprudential requisite of "juridical antecedence."

VII
Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their children. As they had no intention of
coming back, they offered their house and lot for sale to their neighbors, Mr. and
Mrs. A (the buyers) who agreed to buy the property for 128 Million. Because Mr. and
Mrs. A needed to obtain a loan from a bank first, and since the sellers were in a
hurry to migrate, the latter told the buyers that they could already occupy the
house, renovate it as it was already in a state of disrepair, and pay only when their
loan is approved and released. While waiting for the loan approval, the buyers spent
Pl Million in repairing the house. A month later, a person carrying an authenticated
special power of attorney from the sellers demanded that the buyers either
immediately pay for the property in full now or vacate it and pay damages for
having made improvements on the property without a sale having been perfected.
What are the buyers' options or legal rights with respect to the expenses they
incurred in improving the property under the circumstances? (3%)
Can the buyers be made to immediately vacate on the ground that the sale was not
perfected? Explain briefly. (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The buyer has the following options or legal rights:
Ask for the refund of the necessary expenses incurred or remain in the
property until reimbursed. Article 546 of the Civil Code provides
Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the
possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed
therefor.
Ask for damages. Being a consensual contract, a sale is perfected by both
parties giving their consent to the thing to be sold and the price to be
paid therefor. Article 1170 provides Those who in the performance of
their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, and those who
in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages.
b) No. It is a perfected contract of sale. Article 1475 provides The
contract of sale is perfected at the moment there is a meeting of minds
upon the thing which is the object of the contract and upon the price.
From that moment, the parties may reciprocally demand performance,

subject to the provisions of the law governing the form of contracts.

VIII

X, Y, and Z are siblings who inherited a 10-storey building from their parents.
They agreed in writing to maintain it as a co-owned property for leasing out
and to divide the net profits among themselves equally for a period of twenty
years. O the 8th year, X wanted to get out from the co-ownership so he could
get his 1/3 share in the property. Y and Z refused, saying X is bound by their
agreement to keep their ownership for 20 years. Are Y and Z correct? Explain
(3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.

Under Art 494 of the NCC, No co-owner shall be obliged to remain

in the co-ownership. Each co-owner may demand at any time the
partition of the thing in owned in common, in so far as his share is
concerned.

Nevertheless, an agreement to keep the thing undivided for a

certain period of time, not exceeding ten years, shall be valid. This
term may be extended by a new agreement.

In the case at bar, X cannot be bound by the agreement because the

agreement per se is invalid because it exceeds ten years. Moreover,
X is not obliged to remain in the co-ownership. Furthermore, X may
demand at any time the partition of the thing he owned in common,
in so far as his share is concerned.

IX.

Jose, single, donated a house and lot to his only niece, Maria, who was of
legal age and who accepted the donation. The donation and Maria's
acceptance thereof were evidenced by a Deed of Donation. Maria then lived
in the house and lot donated to her, religiously paying real estate taxes
thereon. Twelve years later, when Jose had already passed away, a woman
claiming to be an illegitimate daughter of Jose filed a complaint against
Maria. Claiming rights as an heir, the woman prayed that Maria be ordered to
reconvey the house and lot to Jose's estate. In her complaint she alleged that
the notary public who notarized the Deed of Donation had an expired
notarial commission when the Deed of Donation was executed by Jose. Can
Maria be made to reconvey the property? What can she put up as a defense?
(4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
NO. Maria cannot be made to reconvey the property. Maria can put
up the following defences: First, the action has already prescribed.
In Imperial vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 112483, October 8, 1999,
316 SCRA 393, the Supreme Court held that donations, the
reduction of which hinges upon the allegation of impairment of
legitime (as in this case), are not controlled by a particular
prescriptive period, for which reason, we must resort to the
ordinary rules of prescription.
Under Article 1144 of the Civil Code, actions upon an obligation
created by law must be brought within ten years from the time the
right of action accrues. Thus, the ten-year prescriptive period
applies to the obligation to reduce inofficious donations, required
under Article 771 of the Civil Code, to the extent that they impair
the legitime of compulsory heirs.
Second, the donation has already been perfected complying with
the legal formalities for the execution of a deed of donation and
ownership has already been transferred to Maria. The requisites of
a donation are:
1. Donor must have Capacity to make the donation
2. He must have donative Intent (animus donandi)
3. There must be Delivery
4. Donee must Accept or consent to the donation during the lifetime
of the donor and of the donee in case of donation inter vivos (Art.
746, NCC); whereas in case of donation mortis causa, acceptance is
made after donors death because they partake of a will (Art. 728,

NCC)

Article 725. Donation is an act of liberality whereby a person

disposes gratuitously of a thing or right in favor of another, who
accepts it (Civil Code of the Philippines).

As clearly defined by the above-cited law, donation is a legally

recognized act of voluntarily transferring ownership over a property
by the owner to his intended recipient who in turn accepts the
donated property.

Article 749. In order that the donation of an immovable may be

valid, it must be made in a public document, specifying therein the
property donated and the value of the charges which the donee
must satisfy.

The acceptance may be made in the same deed of donation or in a

separate public document, but it shall not take effect unless it is
done during the lifetime of the donor.

In other words, for there to be a valid donation, the law requires

that a deed of donation be executed in a public document indicating
the details of the property to be donated and the conditions for the
donation, if any. It is also required that the person receiving the
donation expressly manifests his/her conformity in receiving the
donation in the same document or in a separate document but which
must be executed within the lifetime of the donor. These formal
requirements in this case for the preparation and execution of a
deed of donation has been fully observed. Once the donation is
accepted, it is generally considered irrevocable.

X.

X, a dressmaker, accepted clothing materials from Karla to make two dresses for
her. On the day X was supposed to deliver Karla's dresses, X called up Karla to say
that she had an urgent matter to attend to and will deliver them the next day. That
night, however, a robber broke into her shop and took everything including Karla's
two dresses. X claims she is not liable to deliver Karla's dresses or to pay for the
clothing materials considering she herself was a victim of the robbery which was a
fortuitous event and over which she had no control. Do you agree? Why? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
YES I AGREE with X's contention.
Art. 1262 of the Civil Code provides that:
" An obligation which consists in the delivery of a determinate thing shall
be extinguished if it should be lost or destroyed without the fault of the
debtor, and before he has incurred in delay.
When by law or stipulation ,the obligor is liable even for fortuitous events,
the loss of the thing does not extinguish the obligation, and he shall be
responsible for DAMAGES. The same rule applies when the nature of the
obligation requires the assumption of risk"
Further, Art. 1174 speaks
characteristics of which are:

of

Fortuitous

events

and

the

essential

a) the cause must be independent of the will of the debtor

b) impossibility of foreseeing or avoiding it, even if foreseen
c) the occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for the
debtor to fulifill his obligation in a normal manner.
Furthermore, Art 1165 (3rd par.) gives two instances when a fortuitous
event does not excuse compliance: a) if the obligor "delays" ( this is really
default or mora) b) if the obligor is guilty of bad faith. It is to be noted
that ORDINARY DELAY IS DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL DELAY(DEFAULT).
The first is merely non-performance at the stipulated time; Default is that
delay which amounts to a virtual nonfulfillment of the obligation.( As a
rule to put the debtor in default, there must be a demand for fulfillment,
the demand being either judicial or extrajudicial). In the instant case,
since X, the dressmaker does not incur delay, as there was no judicial or
extrajudicial demand from Karla, the obligation to deliver the specific
thing itself is extinguished for there is no more thing to be given.
But said obligation may be converted into a MONETARY OBLIGATION FOR
DAMAGES. It is in this sense that we say that the "obligation" remains.

XI.
Jackie, 16, inherited a townhouse. Because she wanted to study in an
exclusive school, she sold her townhouse by signing a Deed of Sale and
turning over possession of the same to the buyer. When the buyer
discovered that she was still a minor, she promised to execute another Deed
of Sale when she turns 18. When Jackie turned 25 and was already working,
she wanted to annul the sale and return the buyer's money to recover her
townhouse. Was the sale contract void, voidable or valid? Can Jackie still
recover the property? Explain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The sale contract is VOIDABLE.
An action for annulment of contract is one filed where consent is
vitiated by lack of legal capacity of one of the contracting parties,
or by mistake, violence, intimidation, undue influence or fraud. By
its very nature, annulment contemplates a contract which is
voidable, that is, valid until annulled. Such contract is binding on all
the contracting parties until annulled and set aside by a court of
law. It may be ratified. An action for annulment of contract has a
four-year prescriptive period.(Leonardo v. CA G.R. No. 125485.
September 13, 2004)
Art. 1391. The action for annulment shall be brought within
four years.
This period shall begin:
In cases of intimidation, violence or undue influence, from the time
the defect of the consent ceases.
In case of mistake or fraud, from the time of the discovery of
the same.
And when the action refers to contracts entered into by minors or
other incapacitated persons, from the time the guardianship ceases.
However, in this case, the right of Jackie to annul the contract has
already prescribed since it has been 9 years from the execution of
the contract.

XII.
A. Iya and Betty owed Jun P500,000.00 for advancing their equity in a
corporation they joined as incorporators. Iya and Betty bound themselves
solidarily liable for the debt. Later, Iya and Jun became sweethearts so Jun
condoned the debt of P500,000.00. May lya demand from Betty P250,000.00
as her share in the debt? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.
The remission covers the entire obligation, as such totally
extinguished and the entire juridical relations among the debtors is
altogether terminated.
Iya cannot demand from Betty the amount of P250,000.00 because
remission by its nature is gratuitous, an act of pure liberality of the
creditor, hence, she cannot demand for reimbursement from her co-debtor.

B. Juancho, Don and Pedro borrowed P150,000.00 from their friend Cita to
put up an internet cafe orally promising to pay her the full amount after one
year. Because of their lack of business know-how, their business collapsed.
Juancho and Don ended up penniless but Pedro was able to borrow money
and put up a restaurant which did well. Can Cita demand that Pedro pay the
entire obligation since he, together with the two others, promised to pay the
amount in full after one year? Defend your answer. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Cita cannot demand in full from Pedro. Under the law when the
agreement is silent as to how the debtors are being liable to their
creditors it is deemed to be joint obligation.
In joint obligation, one debtor is liable only for his proportionate share in
the entire obligation. Thus Cita can collect only P50,000.00 from Pedro.

XIII
A. X and Y are partners in a shop offering portrait painting. Y provided the capital

and the marketing while X was the portrait artist. They accepted the P50,000.00
payment of Kyla to do her portrait but X passed away without being able to do it.
Can Kyla demand that Y deliver the portrait she had paid for because she was
dealing with the business establishment and not with the artist personally? Why or
why not? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes. Although death of a partner dissolves the partnership, the

dissolution does not mean that the partners can evade previous
obligations entered into (Testate Estate of Mota v Serra 47 Phil
464).
In the given case, the death of the other partner does not mean that
the obligation of the partnership is also extinguished. Hence, Kyla
can still demand for the performance of the obligation.
B. In this jurisdiction, is a joint venture (i.e., a group of corporations contributing
resources for a specific project and sharing the profits therefrom) considered a
partnership? (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. In Auerbach v Sanitary Wares manufacturing Corp (1989), a
joint venture is a form of partnership and should therefore be
governed by the laws of partnership.

XIV.
A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran over a boy who died instantly. A criminal
case for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide was filed against the driver. He
was convicted and was ordered to pay P2 Million in actual and moral damages to
the parents of the boy who was an honor student and had a bright future. Without
even trying to find out if the driver had assets or means to pay the award of
damages, the parents of the boy filed a civil action against the bus company to
make it directly liable for the damages.
a) Will their action prosper? (4%)
b) If the parents of the boy do not wish to file a separate civil action against. the
bus company, can they still make the bus company liable if the driver cannot' pay
the award for damages? If so, what is the nature of the employer's liability and how
may civil damages be satisfied? (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Yes, the action will prosper. Article 2176 in relation to Article
2180 of the Civil Code allows

an action predicated on quasi-delict to be instituted by the injured

party against the employer foran act or omission of the employee
and would necessitate only a preponderance of evidence toprevail.
Here, the liability of the employer for the negligent conduct of the
subordinate is directand primary.
The enforcement of the judgment against the employer in an action
based onArticle 2176 does not require the employee to be insolvent
since the nature of the liability of the employer with that of the
employee, the two being statutorily considered joint tortfeasors, is
solidary. In the case at hand, civil action against the bus company is
based on quasi-delict which makes the bus company and the driver
jointly and solidarily liable without the need of inquiring the latters
insolvency.
b. Yes, although the bus company is not a direct party to the case
and the cause of action
against the driver is based on delict, the parents of the boy can still
make the former subsidiarily liable under Article 103 of the Revised
Penal Code. In the case of Calang v. People (GR No. 190696, August
3, 2010), the court reiterated that before the employers subsidiary
liability is enforced, adequate evidence must exist establishing that
(1) they are indeed the employers of the convicted employees; (2)
they are engaged in some kind of industry; (3) the crime was
committed by the employees in the discharge of their duties; and
(4) the execution against the latter has not been satisfied due to
insolvency. The determination of these conditions may be done in
the same criminal action in which the employees liability, criminal
and civil, has been pronounced, in a hearing set for that precise
purpose, with due notice to the employer, as part of the
proceedings for the execution of the judgment. In the given, the
requisites above mentioned are present as the driver, being an
employee of Company Z, in the exercise of his duties committed
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and was shown to be
insolvent. Therefore, the bus company has subsidiary civil liability.
XV.
A. Sara borrowed P50,000.00 from Julia and orally promised to pay it within six
months. When Sara tried to pay her debt on the 8th month, Julia demanded the
payment of interest of 12o/o per annum because of Sara's delay in payment. Sara
paid her debt and the interest claimed by Julia. After rethinking, Sara demanded
back from Julia the amount she had paid as interest. Julia claims she has no
obligation to return the interest paid by Sara because it was a natural obligation
which Sara voluntarily performed and can no longer recover. Do you agree? Explain.
(4%)
B. Distinguish civil and natural obligations. (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Yes, I agree with Julia. She is not obligated to return the interest
which Sarah voluntarily
paid. Art. 1423 of the New Civil Code speaks of natural obligations.
It provides that natural
obligations, not being based on positive law but on equity and
natural law, do not grant a right of action to enforce their
performance, but after voluntary fulfillment by the obligor, they
authorize the retention of what has been delivered or rendered by
reason thereof.
When Sara was not able to pay her loan on the 6th month as she
promised, it became her
natural obligation to pay the interest eventhough it was not
originally agreed upon by them.
Applying Art. 1423 in this case, Julia is allowed by law to retain the
interest payment which Sara voluntarily paid to her.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The following are some of the distinctions of civil and natural
obligations:
1. Civil obligations arise from law, contracts, quasi-contract, delicts
and quasi-delicts
(Art.1157, NCC), while natural obligations are not based on positive
law but on equity
and natural law (Art. 1423, NCC); and
2. Civil obligations give a right of action to compel their
performance (Art. 1156, NCC),
while natural obligations do not grant such right of action to
enforce their
performance. (Art. 1423, NCC)

XVI
Donna pledged a set of diamond ring and earrings to Jane for P200,000.00
She was made to sign an agreement that if she cannot pay her debt within
six months, Jane could immediately appropriate the jewelry for herself. After
six months, Donna failed to pay. Jane then displayed the earrings and ring
set in her jewelry shop located in a mall. A buyer, Juana, bought the jewelry
set for P300,000.00.
a) Was the agreement which Donna signed with Jane valid? Explain with legal

basis. (2%)
b) Can Donna redeem the jewelry set from Juana by paying the amount she
owed Jane to Juana? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
c) Give an example of a pledge created by operation of law. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) No, it is not valid for it is Pactum Commissorium. Article 2088 of
the Civil Code provides that the creditor cannot appropriate the
things given by way of pledge or mortgage, or dispose of them. Any
stipulation to the contrary is null and void.
b) No. Donna must not only pay the amount she owed to Juana but
also pay the necessary expenses incurred by the latter in preserving
the property pledged and also the interest. Article 2105 of the Civil
Code provides that the debtor cannot ask for the return of the
thing pledged against the will of the creditor, unless and until he
has paid the debt and its interest, with expenses in a proper case.
c) Art. 2121. Pledges created by operation of law, such as those
referred to in Articles 546, 1731, and 1994, are governed by the
foregoing articles on the possession, care and sale of the thing as
well as on the termination of the pledge. However, after payment of
the debt and expenses, the remainder of the price of the sale shall
be delivered to the obligor.

XVII.
Z, a gambler, wagered and lost P2 Million in baccarat, a card game. He was
pressured into signing a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of the winner
covering a parcel of land with improvements worth P20 Million. One month
later, the supposed vendee of the property demanded that he and his family
vacate the property subject of the deed of sale. Was the deed of sale valid?
What can Z do? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the deed of sale is voidable. One of the essential requisites of
contracts under Article 1318 of the New Civil Code is consent. Art
1318 provides;
There is no contract unless the following requisites concur:
(1) Consent of the contracting parties;
(2) Object certain which is the subject matter of the contract;
(3) Cause of the obligation which is established.

All these elements must be present to constitute a valid contract.

Consent is essential to the existence of a contract; and where it is
wanting or obtain through fraud, violence or intimidation the
contract can be annulled. In a contract of sale, its perfection is
consummated at the moment there is a meeting of the minds upon
the thing that is the object of the contract and upon the price.
Under Art. 1330. A contract where consent is given through mistake,
violence, intimidation, undue influence, or fraud is voidable. In the
instant case, Z was pressured in signing the deed of absolute sale
the consent was not freely given.
Z, can file a petition for annulment of the contract since his
consent was obtain through force or intimidation. The action
for annulment shall be brought within four years. This period
shall begin in cases of intimidation, violence or undue
influence, from the time the defect of the consent ceases. (Art.
1391)
XVIII.
A lawyer was given an authority by means of SPA by his client to sell a parcel
of land for the amount of P 3 million. Since the client owed the lawyer P1
million in attorney's fees in a prior case he handled, the client agreed that if
the property is sold, the lawyer was entitled to get 5% agent's fee plus
P1million as payment for his unpaid attorney's fees. The client, however,
subsequently found a buyer of his own who was willing to buy the property
for a higher amount. Can the client unilaterally rescind the authority he gave
in favor of his lawyer? why or why not? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the lawyer can unilaterally rescind the authority he gave in
favor of his lawyer. Under the law on agency, art 1920 it states that
the principal may revoke the agency at will, and compel the agent to
return the document evidencing the agency. Such revocation may be
express or implied. However, art 1927 provides that an agency cant
be revoked if a bilateral contract depends upon it, or if it is the
means of fulfilling an obligation already contracted. in the case
given, the client can unilaterally rescind the contract of agency
because it is at will of the principal and there's no bilateral contract
depends upon it.

XIX.

Mr. A, a businessman, put several real estate properties under the

name of his eldest son X because at that time, X was the only one of legal
age among his four children. He told his son he was to hold those assests for
his siblings until they become adults themselves. X then got married. After 5
years, Mr. A asked X to transfer the titles over three properties to his three
siblings, leaving two properties for himself. To As surprise, X said he can no
longer be made to transfer the properties to his siblings because more than
5 years have passed since the titles were registered in his name. Do you
agree? Expain. (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. As conveyance of the subject real estate properties to X is in
reliance upon the formers intention to hold it for, or transfer it to
the latters siblings, thereby creating only an implied trust in favour
of X. Furthermore, an implied trust prescribes in ten (10) years in
the absence of fraud, and four (4) years from discovery with respect
to the latter.
In the absence of showing of fraud in the instant case, and while it
is more than 5 years but as long as it was not more than ten (10)
years from the transfer thereof, an action for reconveyance based
on an implied trust will still prosper.
LEGAL BASIS
Article 1453.When property is conveyed to a person in reliance upon
his declared intention to hold it for, or transfer it to another or the
grantor, there is an implied trust in favor of the person whose
benefit is contemplated.
An action for reconveyance based on an implied trust prescribes in
ten (10) years. If based on fraud, the action prescribes in four (4)
years, counted from the discovery of the fraud. (Armamento vs.
Guerrero L-34328, Feb. 21, 1980)
"X" became a trustee of the real properties of Mr. A. Under Art. 1453
of the NCC, "When property is conveyed to a person in reliance upon
his declared intention to hold it for, or transfer it to another or the
grantor, there is an IMPLIED TRUST in favor of the person whose
benefit is contemplated." In essence, laches and prescription may
constitute a bar to enforce an implied trust, and no repudiation is
required unless there is concealment. There are only 3 instances
allowed by the NCC that actions must be brought within 10years
from the time the right of actions accrues: 1)upon written contract;
2)upon an obligation created by law; 3)upon judgment. Therefore,
"X" contention is not tenable.

XX
A. Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz filed an application for
registration of a parcel of land which after due proceedings was granted by
the RTC acting as a land registration court. However, before the decree of
registration could be issued, the spouses Roman and the spouses Cruz sold
the lot to Juan. In the notarized deed of sale, the sellers expressly undertook
to submit the deed of sale to the land registration court so that the title to
the property would be directly issued in Juan's name. Is such a stipulation
valid? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Under the principle of Mutuality of contracts, stipulations made
by the parties in a contract are binding as between them. However,
it can be argued that such a stipulation is invalid pursuant to the
Property Registration Decree which requires proper proceedings for
the issuance of a Certificate of Title and cannot be made by mere
agreement.
B. Distinguish a direct attack from a collateral attack on a title. (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The attack is considered direct when the object of an action is to
annul or set aside such proceeding, or enjoin its enforcement.
Conversely, an attack is indirect or collateral when, in an action to
obtain a different relief, an attack on the proceeding is nevertheless
made as an incident thereof.
(NEMESIO FIRAZA, SR. vs SPOUSES CLAUDIO and EUFRECENA UGAY,
G.R. No. 165838 April 3, 2013)
C. If the title in Item XX. A is issued in the names of the original sellers,
would a motion filed by Juan in the same case to correct or amend the title in
order to reflect his name as owner be considered a collateral attack? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, under PD 1529 Sec.108, a party can seek for amendment upon
the ground that the registered interests of any description, whether
vested, contingent, expectant or inchoate appearing on the
certificate, have terminated and ceased; or that new interest not
appearing upon the certificate have arisen or been created.

Alternative answer: Yes, certificate of tiles can be attacked only in a

direct proceeding. Sec.48 of PD 1529 provides that a certificate of
title shall not be subject to collateral attack. It cannot be altered,
modified, or cancelled except in a direct proceeding in accordance
with law.
2014 BAR EXAMS

I.
Ariz and Paz were officemates at Perlas ng Silangan Bank (PSB). They fell in
love with each other and had a civil and church wedding. Meanwhile, Paz
rapidly climbed the corporate ladder of PSB and eventually became its Vice
President, while Ariz remained one of its bank supervisors, although he was
short of 12 units to finish his Masters of Business Administration (MBA)
degree.
Ariz became envious of the success of his wife. He started to drink alcohol
until he became a drunkard. He preferred to join his "barkadas"; became a
wifebeater; would hurt his children without any reason; and failed to
contribute to the needs of the family. Despite rehabilitation and consultation
with a psychiatrist, his ways did not change.
After 19 years of marriage, Paz, a devout Catholic, decided to have their
marriage annulled by the church. Through the testimony of Paz and a
psychiatrist, it was found that Ariz was a spoiled brat in his youth and was
sometimes involved in brawls. In his teens, he was once referred to a
psychiatrist for t reatment due to his violent tendencies. In due time, the
National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal (NAMT) annulled the union of Ariz and
Paz due to the failure of Ariz to perform and fulfill his duties as a husband and
as a father to their children. The NAMT concluded that it is for the best
interest of Paz, Ariz and their children to have the marriage annulled.
In view of the NAMT decision, Paz decided to file a Petition for Declaration of
Nullity of Marriage of their civil wedding before the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
of Makati City using the NAMT decision and the same evidence adduced in
the church annulment proceedings as basis.
If you are the judge, will you grant the petition? Explain. (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.
I will not grant the petition of declarationof nullityof marriage.
In republic v. molina, (G.R. No.108763, february 13, 1997), the
Supreme court ruled that while the interpretation given by the
National Appellate Tribunal (NAMT) of the catholic church in the
philippines should be given great respect by our court,they are nat
controlling or decisive. Its interpretation is not conclusive on the
court.The court are still required to make their own dertermination
as to the merits of the case,and not rely solelyon the finding of the
NAMT.

It has been held that psychological incapacityas a ground for

nullifying a marriage is confined to the most serious cases of
personality disorders clearly demonstrativeof an utter insensitivity
or inability to give meaning and significance to marriage.The three
essential requisit in order for psychological incapacity to be
appreciated are: 1) gravity, 2) juridical antecendence, and 3)
incurability.Inthe present case, there was no showing that the
psychological incapacity was existing at the time of the celebration
of the marriage.

II.
Crispin died testate and was survived by Alex and Josine, his children from his
first wife; Rene and Ruby, his children from his second wife; and Allan, Bea,
and Cheska, his children from his third wife.
One important provision in his will reads as follows:
"Ang lupa at bahay sa Lungsod ng Maynila ay ililipat at ilalagay sa pangalan
nila Alex at Rene hindi bilang pamana ko sa kanila kundi upang pamahalaan
at pangalagaan lamang nila at nang ang sinuman sa aking mga anak, sampu
ng aking mga apo at kaapuapuhan ko sa habang panahon, ay may tutuluyan

kung magnanais na mag-aral sa Maynila o sa kalapit na mga lungsod."

Is the provision valid? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The provision imposing the in division of the property habang
panahon is invalid. In santiago v. santiago, (G.R. No.179859,
August 9, 2010), a similar provision appears in the will of the
testator.In that case, the court ruled that it is clear that the testator
intended the house and lot in Manila be trasferred in
petitionernames for administration purposes only,and thar the
property be owned by the their In common.
However,the same case ruled that the condition set by the decedent
on the propertys indivisibility is subject to a statutory limitation
provided by Article 1083 of the civil code which state that the period
of indivision imposed by a testator shall not exceed twenty
years.Although the civil code is silent as to yhe effect of the
indivision of a property for more than twety years, it would be
contrary to public policy to sanction co-ownership beyond the
period expressly mandated by the civil code.
Thus,the provision leaving the administrition of the house and lot in
manila to Alex and Rene is valid but the provision imposing the
indivision of the property habang panahon is invalid as to the
excess beyond twenty years, it being contrary to article 1083
limiting the period of indivision that may be imposed by a testator
to twenty years.

III.
The Roman Catholic Church accepted a donation of a real property located in
Lipa City. A deed of donation was executed, signed by the donor, Don
Mariano, and the donee, the Church, as represented by Fr. Damian. Before
the deed could be notarized, Don Mariano died. Is the donation valid? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The donation is void, Article 749 of the civil code provides that a
donation of an immovable must be made in the public instrument to
be valid. In this case, it is clear that the deed of donation never
became a public instrument because the donor died before it could
be notarized.
The deed of donation cannot be notarized after the death of the
donor since it is now impossible for him to acknowledge before a
notary public. The donation was never perfected. Thus ,the donation
is void for not complying with the formalities required by law.

IV.
Nante, a registered owner of a parcel of land in Quezon City, sold the
property to Monica under a deed of sale which reads as follows:
"That for and in consideration of the sum of P500,000.00, value to be paid
and delivered to me, and receipt of which shall be acknowledged by me to
the full satisfaction of Monica, referred to as Vendee, I hereby sell, transfer,
cede, convey, and assign, as by these presents, I do have sold, transferred,
ceded, conveyed and assigned a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 2468 in
favor of the Vendee."
After delivery of the initial payment of P100,000.00, Monica immediately took
possession of the property. Five (5) months after, Monica failed to pay the
remaining balance of the purchase price. Nante filed an action for the
recovery of possession of the property. Nante alleged that the agreement was
one to sell, which was not consummated as the full contract price was not
paid. Is the contention of Nante tenable? Why? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the contention of Nante that it is one to sell is untenable. There
is a perfected contract of sale in this case when Nante agreed to sell
and Monica agreed to buy the subject parcel of land at its agreed
price. Under article 1475 of the civil code, there is a perfected
contract of sale at the moment there is a meeting of the minds upon
the things which is the object of the contract and upon the price.

Ownership was transferred upon delivery or upon the taking of

possession by Monica, the buyer. The non-payment of the full price
affects the consummation of the contract of sale and not its
perfection.
The case oh Heirs of Atienza v. Espidol, (G.R. No.180665, August
11,2010),differentiated a contract of sale and a contract of sell. In a
contract of sale, the title to the property passes to the buyer upon
the delivery of the thing sold. in a contract of sell, on the other
hand, the ownership is, by agreement retained by the seller and is
not to pass to the vendee until full payment of the purchase price.
in the contract of sale, the buyers non-payment of the price is a
negative resolutory condition in the contract to sell, the buyers full
payment of the price is a positive suspensive condition to the
coming into effect of the agreement. In the first case, the seller has
lost and cannot recover the ownership of the property unless he
takes action to set aside the contract of sale.
In the second case. The title simply remains in the seller if the buyer
does not comply with the condition precedent of making payment at
the time specified in the contract.
The agreement in this case is not a contract to sell because nothing
in the fact shows that the parties agreed that ownership is retained
by Nante (seller) and is not to pass to Monica(buyer) until full
payment of the purchase price.

V.
What is the effect of preterition ? (1%)
(A) It annuls the devise and legacy
(B) It annuls the institution of heir
(C) It reduces the devise and legacy
(D) It partially annuls the institution of heir

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

(B) It annuls the intitution of heir

VI.
Miko and Dinah started to live together as husband and wife without the
benefit of marriage in 1984. Ten (10) years after, they separated. In 1996,
they decided to live together again, and in 1998, they got married.
On February 17, 2001, Dinah filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of her
marriage with Miko on the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36
of the Family Code. The court rendered the following decision:
"1. Declaring the marriage null and void;
2. Dissolving the regime of absolute community of property; and
3. Declaring that a decree of absolute nullity of marriage shall only be issued
after liquidation, partition and distribution of the parties properties under
Article 147 of the Family Code."
Dinah filed a motion for partial reconsideration questioning the portion of the
decision on the issuance of a decree of nullity of marriage only after the
liquidation, partition and distribution of properties under Article 147 of the
Code.
If you are the judge, how will you decide petitioners motion for partial
reconsideration? Why? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will grant the motion for partial reconsideration. Section 19(1) of
the rule and Declaration of absolute nullity of Null marriage and
annulment of violable Marriages, which require that the decree og
nullity of marriage be issued only after the liquidation, partition and
distribution of properties does not apply to declaration of nullity
base on Art. 36 of the family code. The said rule only applies if there
was a second marriage which is void because of non-compliance
with the requirements of Article 40 of the Family code.

In the case of Dino v. Dino (G.R. No.178044, January 19, 2011),the

court held that sec. 19(1) only applies to Family Code, Article 50 and
51,which are ,subsequently applicable only to marriage which are
declared void ab initio or annulled by final judgement under Article
40 and 45 of the family code. Since there is no previous marriage in
this case and the marriage was nullified under Article36 of the
Family Code, section (1) of the said rules does not apply.

VII.
Due to the continuous heavy rainfall, the major streets in Manila became
flooded. This compelled Cris to check-in at Square One Hotel. As soon as
Crisgot off from his Toyota Altis, the Hotels parking attendant got the key of
his car and gave him a valet parking customers claim stub. The attendant
parked his car at the basement of the hotel. Early in the morning, Cris was
informed by the hotel manager that his car was carnapped. (4%)
(A) What contract, if any, was perfected between Cris and the Hotel
when Cris surrendered the key of his car to the Hotels parking
attendant?
(B) What is the liability, if any, of the Hotel for the loss of Cris car?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A)
A contract of deposit was perfected between Cris and the
Hotel when Cris surrendered the key of his car to the hotels
attendant. In Triple-V Food Services v. Filipino merchants
Insurance Company,(G.R. No.160544,February 21, 2005), it was
ruled that when the a car is entrusted to a valet attendant
there is no contract of deposit. Article 1962 of civil code
provides that a deposit is constituted from the moment a
person receives a thing belonging to another, with the
obligation of safety keeping it and of returning the
same(Durban apartment v. Pioneer insurance,(G.R. No.179419,
march 30, 2011).
Furthermore, Article 1998 of civil code provides that the
deposit of effects made by travelers in hotel or inns shall be
regarded as necessary, and that the keepers of hotels and inns

are responsible for the effects deposited as depositaries

subject to their being notified of the effects being brought in
by the travelers and the taking by the travelers of such
precautions which the hotel or inn keeper or their substitutes
advised relative to the car and vigilance of such effects. Article
1999 of the civil code also provides for the liability of the hotel
keeper for vehicles introduced or placed in the annexes of the
hotel, which in this case is the basement of the hotel.
(B)
The Hotel was constituted as a depositary in this case.
Thus, it has the obligation to safety keep the car which is
expected by Cris to be returned to him. With the loss of the
car, the hotel is liable for the cost of the car as actual
damages.

VIII.
Tess leased her 1,500 sq. m. lot in Antipolo City to Ruth for a period of three
(3) years, from January 2010 to February 2013.
On March 19, 2011, Tess sent a letter to Ruth, part of which reads as follows:
"I am offering you to buy the property you are presently leasing at P5,000.00
per sq. m. or for a total of P7,500,000.00. You can pay the contract price by
installment for two (2) years without interest.
I will give you a period of one (1) year from receipt of this letter to decide
whether you will buy the property."
After the expiration of the lease contract, Tess sold the property to her niece
for a total consideration of P4 million.
Ruth filed a complaint for the annulment of the sale, reconveyance and
damages against Tess and her niece. Ruth alleged that the sale of the leased
property violated her right to buy under the principle of right of first refusal.
Is the allegation of Ruth tenable? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The allegation of Ruth is untenable. There was no right of refusal

offered to her, the wording of the letter can at most be considered a
more offer to sell or lease with an option to buy.
In Sanchez v. Rigos, (G.R. No.L-25494, June 14, 1972),the court held
that in order that a unilateral promisee to buy or to sell may be
binding upon the promissor, Article 1479 of the civil code requires
that said promise be supported by a consideration distinct from the
price. The promisor cannot be compelled to comply with the
promise, unless the existence of a consideration distinct from the
price is established.
In the present case, there was no valuable or independent
consideration, thus, it cannot be classified as a unilateral promise to
sell, but is only a mere offer to sell. Since there was no valuable or
independent consideration, it was not an option contract but a mere
option to buy, which may be withdrawn at any time.

IX.
Spouses Macario and Bonifacia Dakila entered into a contract to sell with
Honorio Cruz over a parcel of industrial land in Valenzuela, Bulacan for a price
of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P3,500,000.00). The spouses
would give a downpayment of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00)
upon the signing of the contract, while the balance would be paid for the next
three (3) consecutive months in the amount of One Million Pesos
(P1,000,000.00) per month. The spouses paid the first two (2) installments
but not the last installment. After one (1) year, the spouses offered to pay the
unpaid balance which Honorio refused to accept.
The spouses filed a complaint for specific performance against Honorio
invoking the application of the Maceda Law. If you are the judge, how will you
decide the case? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the complaint. The invocation of the Maceda Law by
the spouses is misplaced. Section 3 of RA 6552 (Maceda Law)
provides that it is applicable in all transaction or contract involving

the sale or financing of real estate on instalment payments,

including residential condominium apartments but including
industrial lot, commercial building and sales to tenants. Since the
subject of the case is an industrial land, Maceda Law is not
applicable.
X.
Dorotea leased portions of her 2,000 sq. m. lot to Monet, Kathy, Celia, and
Ruth for five (5) years. Two (2) years before the expiration of the lease
contract, Dorotea sold the property to PM Realty and Development
Corporation. The following month, Dorotea and PM Realty stopped accepting
rental payments from all the lessees because they wanted to terminate the
lease contracts.
Due to the refusal of Dorotea to accept rental payments, the lessees , Ruth,
et al., filed a complaint for consignation of the rentals before the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Manila without notifying Dorotea.
Is the consignation valid? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The consignation is not valid.
Article 1257 of the civil code provides in order that the consignation
of the thing due may release the obligor, it must first be announced
to the persons interested in the fulfilment of the obligation.
moreover, article 1258 of the same code provides that consignation
having been made, the interested parties shall also be notified
thereof in this case Dorotea, an interested party, was not notified of
the consignation. The consignation is therefore not valid for noncompliance with Article1257.

XI.
An easement that can be acquired by prescription: (1%)
(A) Right of way

(B) Watering of an animal

(C) Lateral and subjacent support
(D) Light and view

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

D) Light and view

Art. 668 of the NCC provides the period of prescription for
the acquisition of an easement of light and view.

XII.
J.C. Construction (J.C.) bought steel bars from Matibay Steel Industries (MSI)
which is owned by Buddy Batungbacal. J.C. failed to pay the purchased
materials worth P500,000.00 on due date. J.C. persuaded its client Amoroso
with whom it had receivables to pay its obligation to MSI. Amoroso agreed
and paid MSI the amount of P50,000.00. After two (2) other payments,
Amoroso stopped making further payments.
Buddy filed a complaint for collection of the balance of the obligation and
damages against J.C. J.C. denied any liability claiming that its obligation was
extinguished by reason of novation which took place when MSI accepted
partial payments from Amoroso on its behalf.

Was the obligation of J.C. Construction to MSI extinguished by novation? Why?

(4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No,the obligation of J.C. construction to MSI was not extinguished
by novation.
Under Article 1292 of the civil code , in order that an obligation may
be extinguished by another which substitute the same, it is

imperative that it be so declared in unequivocal terms, or old and

the new obligations be on every point incompatible with each
other.novation by substitution of debtor requires the consent of the
creditor as provided in Article 1293 of the civil code.
This requirement is not present in this case. In Magdalena Estate,
inc. v. Rodriguez,(G.R. No.L-18411,December 17,1966),it was ruled
that the mere fact that the creditor received payment from a third
person does not constitute novation and does not extinguish the
obligation of the original debtor. Since there was no novation, the
obligation of the original debtor is not extinguished. Thus, the
obligation of J.C. construction to MSI subsists.

XIII.
Esteban and Martha had four (4) children: Rolando, Jun, Mark, and Hector.
Rolando had a daughter, Edith, while Mark had a son, Philip. After the death
of Esteban and Martha, their three (3) parcels of land were adjudicated to Jun.
After the death of Jun, the properties passed to his surviving spouse Anita,
and son Cesar. When Anita died, her share went to her son Cesar. Ten (10)
years after, Cesar died intestate without any issue. Peachy, Anitas sister,
adjudicated to herself the properties as the only surviving heir of Anita and
Cesar. Edith and Philip would like to recover the properties claiming that they
should have been reserved by Peachy in their behalf and must now revert
back to them.
Is the contention of Edith and Philip valid? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No.
Their contention is not valid as the property is not subject to
reserva troncal. Under Article 891 of the civil code, the ascendant
who inherits from his descendant nay property which the latter may
have required by gratuitous title from another ascendant, or a
brother or sister, is obliged to reserve such property as he may have
acquired by operation of law for the benefit of relatives who are
within the third degree and who belong to the line from which said
property came. There is no reserva tromcal here because Anita is
not an descendant or a brother or sister of Jun. Jun cannot qualify as

a prepositus, because the property which he inherited from his

ascendant was not inherited by another ascendant by operation of
law.
In Mendoza v. Policarpio, (G.R. No.176422, march 20,2013), the
court ruled that the lineal character of the reservable property is
reckoned from the ascendant from whom the prepositus received
the property by gratuitous title. In this case, the ownership should
be reckoned only from Jun, as he is the ascendant from whom Cesar
inherited the properties, moreover, Article 891 of the civil code
provides that the person obliged to reserve the property should be
an ascendant. Peachy is not Cesars ascendant but a mere collateral
relative.

XIV.
A pedestrian, who was four (4) months pregnant, was hit by a bus driver
while crossing the street. Although the pedestrian survived, the fetus inside
her womb was aborted. Can the pedestrian recover damages on account of
the death of the fetus? (1%)
(A) Yes, because of Article 2206 of the Civil Code which allows the
surviving heirs to demand damages for mental anguish by reason of
the death of the deceased.
(B) Yes, for as long as the pedestrian can prove that she was not at
fault and the bus driver was the one negligent.
(C) No, because a fetus is not a natural person.
(D) No, if the fetus did not comply with the requirements under Article
41 of the Civil Code.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B) Yes, for as long as the pedestrian can prove that she was
not at fault and the bus driver the one negligent.
Note: [ Letter A may also be considered correct on the
account of Article 11, Section 12, of the 1987 Constitution

which provides that, the State xxx shall equally protect

the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception xxx. C and D may also be considered correct].

XV.
Mr. Bong owns several properties in Pasig City. He decided to build a
condominium named Flores de Manila in one of his lots. To fund the project,
he obtained a loan from the National Bank (NB) secured by a real estate
mortgage over the adjoining property which he also owned.
During construction, he built three (3) pumps on the mortgaged property to
supply water to the condominium. After one (1) year, the project was
completed and the condominium was turned over to the buyers. However, Mr.
Bong failed to pay his loan obligation to NB. Thus, NB foreclosed the
mortgaged property where the pumps were installed. During the sale on
public auction of the mortgaged property, Mr. Simon won in the bidding.
When Mr. Simon attempted to take possession of the property, the
condominium owners, who in the meantime constituted themselves into
Flores de Manila Inc. (FMI), claimed that they have earlier filed a case for the
declaration of the existence of an easement before the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Pasig City and prayed that the easement be annotated in the title of
the property foreclosed by NB. FMI further claimed that when Mr. Bong
installed the pumps in his adjoining property, a voluntary easement was
constituted in favor of FMI.
Will the action prosper? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the action will prosper. Article 624 of the civil code provides that
when an apparent sign of easement exists between two estates
established or maintained by the owner of both, shall be considered
as a title to the easement should the owner of two properties
alienate one of them, unless at the time the ownership between the
two estates is divided the contrary is provided in the deed of trasfer
or the apparent sign of easement is removed before the axecution of
the deed(Privatization and Management Office v. Legaspe Tower 300,
Inc.,(593 SCRA 382).In this case, neither any showing that the

apparent sign of the easement was removed before the sale on

public auction, nor that there was an agreement that the easement
will no longer continue; hence, the entitlement of FMI to the
easement subsists.

XVI.
A congregation for religious women, by way of commodatum, is using the real
property owned and registered in the name of Spouses Manuel as a retreat
house.
Maria, a helper of the congregation discovered a chest in the backyard. When
she opened the chest, it contained several pieces of jewelry and money. (4%)
(A) Can the chest containing the pieces of jewelry and money be
considered as hidden treasure?
(B) Who has the right to claim ownership of it?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A)
Yes ,the chest containing the pieces of jewelry and money
may be considered as hidden treasure as long as they are
hidden and unknown and the lawful ownership of its does not
appear as provided in Article 439 of the civil code.
(B)
(C)
Under Article 438 of the civil code, when the discovery of
hidden treasure is made on the property of another ,one-half
thereof shall be allowed to the finder provided the finder is not
trespasser. In this case, the owner of the land are spouses
Manuel. Spouses Manuel owns one-half of the hidden treasure
since ownership is not transferred to the barrower but is
retained by the lender in a contract of commodatum . The
order half shall belong to Maria as the finder.

XVII.
On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and was survived by his wife,

Leonora, and children, Danilo and Carlito. One of the properties he left was a
piece of land in Alabang where he built his residential house.
After his burial, Leonora and Marianos children extrajudicially settled his
estate. Thereafter, Leonora and Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to
partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking Article 159 of the Family
Code. Carlito alleged that since his minor child Lucas still resides in the
premises, the family home continues until that minor beneficiary becomes of
age.

Is the contention of Carlito tenable? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the contention of Catlito is not tenable. In this case of
Patricio v. Dario,(G.R. No.170829, November 20,2006), it was
provided that to be a beneficiary of a family home three
requisites must concur: (1) they must be among the
relationships enumerated in Article 154 of the family code;(2)
they live in the family home, and (3) they are dependent for
legal support upon the head of the family .In the said case, the
partition of a family home is allowed despite the objection on
the ground that a minor grandchild still resides in the
premises.
Although the first two requisites are present in this case, the
third is lacking because Lucas, the grandchild, is not
dependent for legal support upon his grandparents which the
head of the family who constituted the family home in this
case. Lucas still has parents who are legally obliged to support
him. Thus, he cannot be deemed as dependent for legal
support upon the head of the family, who is Mariano.

XVIII.

Spouses Magtanggol managed and operated a gasoline station on a 1,000

sq.m. lot which they leased from Francisco Bigla-awa. The contract was for a
period of three (3) years. When the contract expired, Francisco asked the
spouses to peacefully vacate the premises. The spouses ignored the demand
and continued with the operation of the gasoline station.
One month after, Francisco, with the aid of a group of armed men, caused the
closure of the gasoline station by constructing fences around it.
Was the act of Francisco and his men lawful? Why? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the act of Francisco and his men were not lawful.
Even when one has a right, such as the right to enjoy his
property and to exclude anyone else from the enjoyment of
such, a person cannot take the law unto his own hands and
must still file the proper action in court. Even though Francisco
had the right to fence his property as part of his right to enjoy
it, Spouses magtanggol are covered by Art.539 which provides
that every possessor has the right to be respected in his
possession despites the lapse of their lease. Although there is
no apparent force or intimidation employed ,fencing off the
property would prevent Spouses magtanggol from entering
and possessing the property. The proper recourse of Francisco
is not invoke the aid of a competent court and file an action
unlawful detainer.

XIX.
Who enjoys the Right of Retention? (1%)
(A) Depositary until full payment of what may be due him in deposit.
(B) Lessee if he advances the expenses for the repair of the leased
premises.
(C) Bailee if bailor owes him something.

(D) Builder in bad faith for the recovery of necessary and useful
expenses.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A)
Depositary until full payment of what may be due him in
deposit.

XX.
Mabuhay Elementary School organized a field trip for its Grade VI students in
Fort Santiago, Manila Zoo, and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of the
students had to sign a piece of paper that reads as follows:
"I allow my child (name of student), Grade Section, to join the schools field
trip on February 14, 2014.
I will not file any claim against the school, administrator or teacher in case
something happens to my child during the trip."
Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay Elementary School was bitten by a
snake while the group was touring Manila Zoo. The parents of Joey sued the
school for damages. The school, as a defense, presented the waiver signed
by Joeys parents.

Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the school? Why? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, there was no valid waiver of the right to sue the school. Article
6 of the civil code provides that right may be waiver, unless tha
waiver is contrary of law, public order, public policy, morals ,or good
customs, or prejudicial to a person with a right recognized by
Law.As a general rule, patrimonial rights may be waived as
opposed to right to personality and family rights which may not be
made the subject of waiver(Valenzuela hardwood & industrial

supply, Inc. v. court of appeals, (G.R. No. 102316, June 30,1997).

The second paragraph of the waiver prohibiting the parent to file
any claim against the school, administrator or teacher in case
something happens to the child during the is against public policy
because it removes liability fron said school, administrator, or
teacher, and thus, removing the responsibility imposed on them by
Article 218 of the family code.

XXI.
A delayed accession is: (1%)
(A) formation of an island
(B) avulsion
(C) alluvium
(D) change in the course of the riverbed

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(B)

Avulsion

Article 459 of the civil code.

XXII.
On March 27, 1980, Cornelio filed an application for land registration
involving a parcel of agricultural land that he had bought from Isaac identified
as Lot No. 2716 with an area of one (1) hectare. During the trial, Cornelio
claimed that he and his predecessors-in-interest had been in open,
continuous, uninterrupted, public and adverse possession and occupation of
the land for more than thirty (30) years. He likewise introduced in evidence a
certification dated February 12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to the
effect that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands of the public domain, including
the subject matter of the application, were declared alienable and disposable
agricultural land. (4%)

(A) If you are the judge, will you grant the application for land
registration of Cornelio?
(B) Can Cornelio acquire said agricultural land through acquisitive
prescription, whether ordinary or extraordinary?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A)
I will not grant the application for registration. Under the
law, specifically Section 48 (b) of public land act(CA No.141),as
amended by PD No.1073, section 14 (1) of the property
Registration degree (PD No. 1529), it is required that the
applicant, by himself or through his predecessors-in-interest,
has been in open, continuous ,exclusive and notorious
possession and occupation of alienable and disposable land of
the public domain under a bona fide of ownership since June
12, 1945,or earlier.
Interpreting Section 14 (1) of PD No.1529, the supreme Court
held that in merely requires the property sought to be
registered as already alienable and disposable at the time the
application for registration is filed and not during the entire
period of possession, or since june 12, 1945.(republei v.
naguit,
G.R. No.14-4057 [ Jan. 17,2005], Malabanan v.
Republic, G.R. No. 179987, Sept. 3, 2017 among others) In this
case, the land applied for by Cornelio was declared alienable
and disposable agricultural land only on June 14, 1980, or
almost three months from the date of the filing of his
application on March 27,1980. Hence his application for
registration cannot be granted.
(B)
Neither can Cornelio acquire the land through acquisitive
prescription, whether ordinary(possession for 10 years in good
faith or we just title).As a rule, properties of public dominion
cannot be acquired by prescription.
The exception is section 14 (2) of PD No. 1529 which allows a
qualified individual to apply for the registration of property
which has been acquired by prescription under existing laws.
Article 1113 of the civil code provides the foundation for the

application of section 14 (2) to the effect that only when land

of the public domain is patrimonial, and hence, private in
character, can said land be susceptible to acquisitive
prescription.
But in order that land of the public domain may become
patrimonial property, there must be an express declaration by
the state that such land is no longer needed for public service
or for the development of the national wealth to convert it as
such. In this case, there is no such official declaration, hence
the land cannot be subject of acquisition through prescription.

XXIII.
After undergoing sex reassignment in a foreign country, Jose, who is now
using the name of "Josie," married his partner Ador. Is the marriage valid?
(1%)
(A) Yes, the marriage is valid for as long as it is valid in the place where
it is celebrated following Article 17 of the Civil Code.
(B) Yes, the marriage is valid if all the essential and formal elements of
marriage under the Family Code are present.
(C) No, the marriage is not valid because one essential element of
marriage is absent.
(D) No, the marriage is not valid but is voidable because "Josie"
concealed her real identity.

SUGGESTED ANSWER;
(c) No, the marriage is not valid because one essential element
of marriage is absent.
Article 2 of the Civil Code.
XXIV.
Ted, married to Annie, went to Canada to work. Five (5) years later, Ted

became a naturalized Canadian citizen. He returned to the Philippines to

convince Annie to settle in Canada. Unfortunately, Ted discovered that Annie
and his friend Louie were having an affair. Deeply hurt, Ted returned to
Canada and filed a petition for divorce which was granted. In December 2013,
Ted decided to marry his childhood friend Corazon in the Philippines. In
preparation for the wedding, Ted went to the Local Civil Registry of Quezon
City where his marriage contract with Annie was registered. He asked the
Civil Register to annotate the decree of divorce on his marriage contract with
Annie. However, he was advised by the National Statistics Office (NSO) to file
a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of divorce in the Philippines.
Is it necessary for Ted to file a petition for judicial recognition of the decree of
divorce he obtained in Canada before he can contract a second marriage in
the Philippines? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No,its not necessary fot Ted to file a petition for judicial
recognition of the decree of divorce he obtained in Canada
before he can contract a second marriage in the Philippines.
Ted, who is already a foreigner being a naturalized Canadian
citizen, will be required to submit a certificate of legal capacity
to contract marriage issued by proper diplomatic or consular
official to obtain a marriage license.

XXV.
Mario executed his last will and testament where he acknowledges the child
being conceived by his live-in partner Josie as his own child; and that his
house and lot in Baguio City be given to his unborn conceived child. Are the
acknowledgment and the donation mortis causa valid? Why? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The acknowledgement of the unborn child is effective because
a will may still constitute a document which contains an
admission of illegitimate filiation. The donation of the
conceived child is also valid provided that the child is born

later on and that it comply with the formalities required of a

will (Article 278,Civil Code). A fetus has a presumptive
personality for all purposes favorable to it provided it be born
under the condition specified in Article 41.However, there has
to be compliance with the formal requisites for a valid last will
and testament.

XXVI.
Isaac leased the apartment of Dorotea for two (2) years. Six (6) months after,
Isaac subleased a portion of the apartment due to financial difficulty. Is the
sublease contract valid? (1%)
(A) Yes, it is valid for as long as all the elements of a valid sublease
contract are present.
(B) Yes, it is valid if there is no express prohibition for subleasing in the
lease contract.
(C) No, it is void if there is no written consent on the part of the lessor.
(D) No, it is void because of breach of the lease contract.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B) Yes, it is valid if there is no express prohibition for
subleasing in the lease contract.
Article 1650 of the Civil Code.

XXVII.
Fe, Esperanza, and Caridad inherited from their parents a 500 sq. m. lot
which they leased to Maria for three (3) years. One year after, Fe, claiming to
have the authority to represent her siblings Esperanza and Caridad, offered to
sell the leased property to Maria which the latter accepted. The sale was not
reduced into writing, but Maria started to make partial payments to Fe, which
the latter received and acknowledged. After giving the full payment, Maria

demanded for the execution of a deed of absolute sale which Esperanza and
Caridad refused to do. Worst, Maria learned that the siblings sold the same
property to Manuel. This compelled Maria to file a complaint for the
annulment of the sale with specific performance and damages.
If you are the judge, how will you decide the case? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will decide in favor of Maria but only as to the share of Fe,
and dismiss the compliant with to Esperanza and Caridad.The
property in question is co-owned by Fe, Esperanza and caridad,
since it has not yet been divided among them.
Article 493 of the civil code provides that each co-owner shall
have full ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits
pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate, assign or
mortgage it, provided that the effect of such alienation or
mortgage shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted
to him in the division upon the termination of the coownership. The sale by Fe to Maria would therefore be binding
on her 1/3 interest, but not on the 2/3 interest of Esperanza
and Caridad because their shares were not validly sold to
Maria in the absence of a written authority to Fe to sell their
respective portion to maria as required by Article 1874 of the
civil code. Fe can only sell whatever property right she has, i.e.
1/3 ideal portion or undivided interest in the 500 sq.m. lot.
The sale to Manuel is valid as to the 2/3 share of Esperanza
and Caridad.

XXVIII.
Spouses Esteban and Maria decided to raise their two (2) nieces, Faith and
Hope, both minors, as their own children after the parents of the minors died
in a vehicular accident.
Ten (10) years after, Esteban died. Maria later on married her boss Daniel, a
British national who had been living in the Philippines for two (2) years.

With the permission of Daniel, Maria filed a petition for the adoption of Faith
and Hope. She did not include Daniel as her co-petitioner because for Maria,
it was her former husband Esteban who raised the kids.
If you are the judge, how will you resolve the petition? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will deny the petition for adaption. According to RA 8552 or
the Domestic adoption Act of 1998, a husband and wife must
jointly adopt except in the following cases (1) if one spouse
seek to adopt the legitimate child of the other; 2)if one spouse
seek to adopt his/her own illegitimate child, provided that the
order spouse signified their consent thereto; or 3) if the
spouses are legally separated from each other;
In this case, since Daniel and Maria do not fall under any of the
exception enumerated above, they must jointly adopt as
required by law.

XXIX.
Timothy executed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Kristopher
setting up a business venture covering three (3) fastfood stores known as
"Hungry Toppings" that will be established at Mall Uno, Mall Dos, and Mall
Tres.
The pertinent provisions of the MOA provides:
1. Timothy shall be considered a partner with thirty percent (30%)
share in all of the stores to be set up by Kristopher;
2. The proceeds of the business, after deducting expenses, shall be
used to pay the principal amount of P500,000.00 and the interest
therein which is to be computed based on the bank rate, representing
the bank loan secured by Timothy;
3. The net profits, if any, after deducting the expenses and payments
of the principal and interest shall be divided as follows: seventy
percent (70%) for Kristopher and thirty percent (30%) for Timothy;
4. Kristopher shall have a free hand in running the business without

any interference from Timothy, his agents, representatives, or assigns ,

and should such interference happen, Kristopher has the right to buy
back the share of Timothy less the amounts already paid on the
principal and to dissolve the MOA; and
5. Kristopher shall submit his monthly sales report in connection with
the business to Timothy.
What is the contractual relationship between Timothy and Kristopher? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The contractual relationship between Timothy and Kristopher
is that of partnership. Article 1767 of the civil code provides
that under a contract of partnership, two or more person bind
themselves to contribute money, property or industry to a
common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits among
themselves.
Moreover, Article 1769 of the civil code state in part that
receipt by a person of a share of the profit of a business is
prima facie evidence that he is a partner in the business,
provided that the said profit were not received in payment for
dept, as wages, annuity, interest on a loan, or as consideration
for a sale. In this case the MOA between Timothy and
kristopher stipulated that they shall share in the profits of the
business 30-70. The contribution of the partner include a bank
loan obtained by Timothy and industry in the form managing
the properties by kristopher. Thus, the requisites for
establishing a contract of partnership are complied with.

XXX.
Joe Miguel, a well-known treasure hunter in Mindanao, executed a Special
Power of Attorney (SPA) appointing his nephew, John Paul, as his attorneyinfact. John Paul was given the power to deal with treasure-hunting activities
on Joe Miguels land and to file charges against those who may enter it
without the latters authority. Joe Miguel agreed to give John Paul forty
percent (40%) of the treasure that may be found on the land.

Thereafter, John Paul filed a case for damages and injunction against Lilo for
illegally entering Joe Miguels land. Subsequently, he hired the legal services
of Atty. Audrey agreeing to give the latter thirty percent (30%) of Joe Miguels
share in whatever treasure that may be found in the land.
Dissatified however with the strategies implemented by John Paul, Joe Miguel
unilaterally revoked the SPA granted to John Paul.
Is the revocation proper? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes the revocation is proper Article 1920 provides that the
principal may expressly or impliedly revoke the agency at will,
and compel the agent to return the document evidencing the
agency. Joe Miguel may however be held liable for damages if
he abused his right in revoking the agency.

2013 BAR EXAMS (MCQ)

I.
Armand died intestate. His full-blood brothers, Bobby and Conrad, and
half-blood brothers, Danny, Edward and Floro, all predeceased him. The
following are the surviving relatives:
1. Benny and Bonnie, legitimate children of Bobby;
2. Cesar, legitimate child of Conrad;
3. Dante, illegitimate child of Danny;
4. Ernie, adopted child of Edward; and
5. Felix, grandson of Floro.
The net value of Armand's estate is Pl,200,000.
I. (1) How much do Benny and Bonnie stand to inherit by right of
representation? (1%)
(A) P200,000
(B) P300,000
(C) P400,000
(D) P150,000
(E) None of the above.
Suggested Answer:
(E) None of the above. If all the brothers/sisters are disqualified to

inherit, the nephews/nieces inherit per capita, and not by right of

representation (Art 975, Civil Code)
I. (2) How much is Dante's share in the net estate? (1%)
(A) P150,000.
(B) P200,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P400,000.
(E) None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
E. None of the above. There is no showing that Danny is an illegitimate
half-blood brother of Armand. In the absence of proof to the contrary,
the law presumes that the relationship is legitimate. Thus, Dante, an
illegitimate child of Danny, is barred from inheriting from Armand
pursuant to the iron curtain rule which disqualifies an illegitimate
child from inheriting ab intestao from the legitimate children and
relatives of his father or mother, and vice versa (Art 992, Civil Code).
I. (3) How much is Ernie's share in the net estate . (1%)
(A) P 0.
(B) P400,000.
(C) P150,000.
(D) P200,000.
(E) None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(A) 0 or (E) None of the above. The legal relationship created by
adoption is strictly between the adopter and the adopted. It does not
extend to the relatives of either party (Sayson v. CA, G.R. Nos. 8922425, Jan 23, 1992). (Note: E. None of the above is another answer
because Ernie has no share at all in the net estate).
I. (4) How much is Felix's share in the net estate? (1%)
(A) P400,000.
(B) P150,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P0.
(E) None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(D). 0. Or (E) None of the above. In the collateral line,
representation is granted only to children of brother or sisters, Felix is a
grandson of a predeceased brother. (Note: E. None of the above: is
another answer because Felix has no share at all in the net estate)

II.
A, B, C and D are the solidary debtors of X for P40,000. X released D
from the payment of his share of PI 0,000. When the obligation became
due and demandable, C turned out to be insolvent.
Should the share of insolvent debtor C be divided only between the
two other remaining debtors, A and B? (1%)
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)

Yes. Remission of D's share carries with it total extinguishment

of his obligation to the benefit of the solidary debtors.
Yes. The Civil Code recognizes remission as a mode of
extinguishing an obligation. This clearly applies to D.
No. The rule is that gratuitous acts should be restrictively
construed, allowing only the least transmission of rights.
No, as the release of the share of one debtor would then
increase the burden of the other debtors without their consent.

Suggested Answer:
(D) No, as the release of the share of one debtor would then increase the
burden of the other debtors without their consent.
When one of the solidary debtors cannot, because of his insolvency,
reimburse his share to the debtor paying the obligation, such share
shall be borne by all his co-debtors, in proportion to the debt of each
(Art 1217, Civil Code). Additionally, D was released only from his share
of P10,000.00 not from the solidary tie that binds him to A, B and C.
III.
Amador obtained a loan of P300,000 from Basilio payable on March25,
2012. As security for the payment of his loan, Amador constituted a
mortgage on his residential house and lot in Basilio's favor.Cacho, a
good friend of Amador, guaranteed and obligated himself to pay
Basilio, in case Amador fails to pay his loan at maturity.
III. (1)

If Amador fails to pay Basilio his loan on March 25, 2012, can Basilio
compel Cacho to pay? (1%)

(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)

No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay because as guarantor, Cacho

can invoke the principle of excussion, i.e., all the assets of Basilio must
first be exhausted.
No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay because Basilio has not
exhausted the available remedies against Amador.
Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho to pay because the nature of Cacho's
undertaking indicates that he has bound himself solidarily with
Amador.
Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho who bound himself to unconditionally
pay in case Amador fails to pay; thus the benefit of excussion will not
apply.
Suggested Answer:

(B)

No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay because Basilio has not
exhausted the available remedies against Amador.
The guarantor cannot be compelled to pay the creditor unless the
latter has exhausted all the property of the debtor and has resorted to
all the legal remedies against the debtor (Art. 2058, Civil Code)
(Note: A is not the correct answer because it states that all the
assets ofBasilio (the creditor) must first be exhausted)

III. (2)

If Amador sells his residential house and lot to Diego, can Basilio
foreclose the real estate mortgage? (1%)

(A)

Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate mortgage because real estate
mortgage creates a real right that attaches to the property.
Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate mortgage. It is binding upon
Diego as the mortgage is embodied in a public instrument.
No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate mortgage. The sale confers
ownership on the buyer, Diego, who must therefore consent.
No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate mortgage. To deprive the
new owner of ownership and possession is unjust and inequitable.

(B)
(C)
(D)

Suggested Answer:
(B)

Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate mortgage. It is binding upon
Diego as the mortgage is embodied in a public instrument.
Since the mortgage is in a public instrument, there is constructive
notice to Diego, who is the buyer if the mortgaged property.
Alternative Answer:

(C)

No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate mortgage. The sale confers
ownership on the buyer, Diego, who must therefore consent.
The mortgage is not registered, thus, cannot be binding against
third persons (Art. 2125, Civil Code)

IV.
Cruz lent Jose his car until Jose finished his Bar exams. Soon after Cruz
delivered the car, Jose brought it to Mitsubishi Cubao for maintenance
check up and incurred costs of P8,000. Seeing the car's peeling and
faded paint, Jose also had the car repainted for P10,000. Answer the
two questions below based on these common facts.
IV. (1) After the bar exams, Cruz asked for the return of his car. Jose
said he would return it as soon as Cruz has reimbursed him for the car
maintenance and repainting costs of P 18,000. Is Jose's refusal
justified?
(A) No, Jose's refusal is not justified. In this kind of contract, Jose is
obliged to pay for all the expenses incurred for the preservation of the
thing loaned.
(B) Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. He is obliged to pay for all the
ordinary and extraordinary expenses, but subject to reimbursement
from Cruz.
(C) Yes, Jose's refusal is justified. The principle of unjust enrichment
warrants the reimbursement of Jose's expenses
(D) No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The expenses he incurred
are useful for the preservation of the thing loaned. It is Jose's
obligation to shoulder these useful expenses.
LEGAL BASIS:
No, Jose's refusal is not justified. The expenses he incurred are useful
for the preservation of the thing loaned. It is Jose's obligation to
shoulder these useful expenses.
In commodatum, the bailee is obliged to pay for the ordinary expenses
for the use and preservation of the thing loaned (Art 1941, Civil Code).
The bailee, Jose, has no right of retention on the ground that the bailor
owes him something, even if it may be by reason of expenses. He can
only retain it if he suffers damages by reason of a flaw or defect in the
thing loaned of which the bailor knows (Art 1951, Civil Code).

IV. (2) During the bar exam month, Jose lent the car to his girlfriend,
Jolie, who parked the car at the Mall of Asia's open parking lot, with the
ignition key inside the car. Car thieves broke into and took the car. Is
Jose liable to Cruz for the loss of the car due to Jolie's negligence?
(A) No, Jose is not liable to Cruz as the loss was not due to his fault or
negligence.
(B) No, Jose is not liable to Cruz. In the absence of any prohibition, Jose
could lend the car to Jolie. Since the loss was due to force majeure,
neither Jose nor Jolie is liable.
(C) Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose lent the car to Jolie
without Cruz's consent, Jose must bear the consequent loss of
the car.
(D) Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. The contract between them is personal
in nature. Jose can neither lend nor lease the car to a third person.
LEGAL BASIS:
Yes, Jose is liable to Cruz. Since Jose lent the car to Jolie without Cruz's
consent, Jose must bear the consequent loss of the car. The bailee is
liable for the loss of the thing, even if it should be through a fortuitous
event if he lends or leases the thing to a third person, who is not a
member of his household (Art 1942, Civil Code).

V
V. (l) Assuming that the just and equitable share of the industrial partner, P, in
the profit in 2006 amounted to P1 00,000, how much is the share of 0, a
limited partner, in the P800,000 net profit? (1%)
(A) P160,000.
(B) P175,000.
(C) P280,000.
(D) P200,000.
(E) None of the above.

V. (2) In 2007, how much is the share of 0, a limited partner, in the net loss of
P500,000? (1%)
(A) P 0.
(B) P1 00,000.
(C) P125,000.
(D) P200,000.
(E) None of the above.
V. (3) Can the partnership creditors hold L, 0 and Pliable after all the assets of
the partnership are exhausted? (1%)

(A) Yes. The stipulation exempting P from losses is valid only among the
partners. L is liable because the agreement limiting his liability to his capital
contribution is not valid insofar as the creditors are concerned. Having taken
part in the management of the partnership, 0 is liable as capitalist partner.

(B) No. P is not liable because there is a valid stipulation exempting him from
losses. Since the other partners allowed him to engage in an outside business
activity, the stipulation absolving P from liability is valid. For 0, it is basic that
a limited partner is liable only up to the extent of his capital contribution.

(C) Yes. The stipulations exempting P and L from losses are not binding upon
the creditors. 0 is likewise liable because the partnership was not formed in
accordance with the requirements of a limited partnership.

(D) No. The Civil Code allows the partners to stipulate that a partner shall not
be liable for losses. The registration of the Articles of Partnership embodying
such stipulations serves as constructive notice to the partnership creditors.

(E) None of the above is completely accurate.

Suggested Answer:
1. C
2. D
3. E
Art. 1848. A limited partner shall not become liable as a general
partner unless, in addition to the exercise of his rights and powers as a
limited partner, he takes part in the control of the business.
Art. 1797. The losses and profits shall be distributed in conformity with the
agreement. If only the share of each partner in the profits has been agreed
upon, the share of each in the losses shall be in the same proportion.
In the absence of stipulation, the share of each partner in the profits and
losses shall be in proportion to what he may have contributed, but the
industrial partner shall not be liable for the losses. As for the profits, the
industrial partner shall receive such share as may be just and equitable under
the circumstances. If besides his services he has contributed capital, he shall
also receive a share in the profits in proportion to his capital.

VI.

Gary is a tobacco trader and also a lending investor. He sold tobacco leaves
to Homer for delivery within a month, although the period for delivery was
not guaranteed. Despite Gary's efforts todeliver on time, transportation
problems and government red tape hindered his efforts and he could only
deliver after 30 days. Homer refused to accept the late delivery and to pay
on the ground that the agreed term had not been complied with. As lending
investor, Gary granted a Pl,000,000 loan to Isaac to be paid within two years
from execution of the contract. As security for the loan, Isaac promised to
deliver to Gary his Toyota Innova within seven (7) days, but Isaac failed to do
so. Gary was thus compelled to demand payment for the loan before the end
of the agreed two-year term.
VI. (l) Was Homer justified in refusing to accept the tobacco leaves? (1%)
(A) Yes. Homer was justified in refusing to accept the tobacco leaves. The
delivery was to be made within a month. Gary's promise of delivery on
a "best effort" basis made the delivery uncertain. The term, therefore,

was ambiguous
(B) No. Homer was not justified in refusing to accept the tobacco leaves.
He consented to the terms and conditions of the sale and must abide
by it. Obligations arising from contract have the force of law between
the contracting parties.
(C)Yes. Homer was justified in his refusal to accept the delivery. The
contract contemplates an obligation with a term. Since the delivery
was made after 30 days, contrary to the terms agreed upon, Gary
could not insist that Homer accept the tobacco leaves.
(D) No. Homer was not justified in refusing to accept the tobacco leaves.
There was no term in the contract but a mixed condition. The
fulfillment of the condition did not depend purely on Gary's will but on
other factors, e.g., the shipping company and the government. Homer
should comply with his obligation.

Suggested Answer
B. No. Homer was not justified in refusing to accept the tobacco
leaves. He consented to the terms and conditions of the sale and
must abide by it. Obligations arising from contract have the force of
law between the contracting parties.
VII
Lito was a commercial pilot who flew for Pacific-Micronesian Air. In
1998, he was the co-pilot of the airline's Flight MA916 that
mysteriously disappeared two hours after take-off from Agana, Guam,
presumably over the Pacific Ocean. No trace of the plane and its 105
passengers and crew was ever found despite diligent search; Lito
himself was never heard of again. Lito left behind his wife, Lita, and
their two children.
In 2008, Lita met and married Jaime. They now have a child of their
own.
While on a tour with her former high school classmates in a remote
province of China in 2010, Lita was surprised to see Lito or
somebody who looked exactly like him, but she was sure it was Lito
because of the extreme surprise that registered in his face when he

also saw her. Shocked, she immediately fled to her hotel and post
haste returned to the country the next day. Lita now comes to you
for legal advice. She asks you the following questions:
VII. (1)

If Lito is alive, what is the status of his marriage to Lita? (1%)

(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)

The marriage subsists because the marital bond has not

been terminated by death.
The marriage was terminated when Lita married Jaime.
The marriage subsists because Lita's marriage to Jaime is
void.
The marriage is terminated because Lito is presumed
dead after his plane has been missing for more than 4
years. (E) The marriage can be formally declared
terminated if Lito would not resurface.

Suggested Answer:
(C)

The marriage subsists because Lita's marriage to Jaime is void.

For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under Art

41 of the Family Code, the spouse present must institute a summary
proceeding as provided in the Family Code for the declaration of
presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
the reappearance of the absent spouse.
VII. (2)

If Lito is alive, what is the status of Lita's marriage to Jaime?

(1%)
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)

The marriage is valid because Lita's marriage to Lito was

terminated upon Lito's disappearance for more than
seven years.
The marriage is valid. After an absence of more than 10
years, Lito is already presumed dead for all purposes.
The marriage is void. Lito's mere absence, however
lengthy, is insufficient to authorize Lita to contract a
subsequent marriage.
The marriage is void. If Lito is indeed alive, his marriage
to Lita was never dissolved and they can resume their
marital relations at any time.

Suggested Answer:
Any answer is correct.

Under Art 390 of the Civil Code, after an absence of seven years, it
being unknown whether or not the absentee still lives, he shall be
presumed dead doe all purposes, except for those of succession. This
provision was not repealed by the present Family Code.
Applying this to the problem, (A) may be correct. (B) may also be
correct. (C) and (D) may also be correct under Art 41 of the Family
Code.
VIII.

Which of the following actions or defenses are meritorious: (1%)

(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)

An action for recovery of down payment paid under a rescinded

oral sale of real property.
A defense in an action for ejectment that the lessor verbally
promised to extend or renew the lease.
An action for payment of sum of money filed against one who
orally promised to answer another's debt in case the latter
defaults.
A defense in an action for damages that the debtor has
sufficient, but unliquidated assets to satisfy the credit acquired
when it becomes due.
None of the above.

Suggested Answer:
(A)

An action for recovery of down payment paid under a rescinded

oral sale of real property.

An oral sale of real property is an unenforceable contract under the

Statute of Frauds. Since, in the problem, the vendee paid down
payment, it takes it out of the ambit of Statute of Frauds. The
rescission here must be in the sense of resolution of the reciprocal
obligation arising from the contract of sale. If rescinded (resolved) by
the vendee on account of the vendors failure to deliver the thing sold,
the parties will go back to their status prior to the contract. If the
vendor refuses to return the down payment, then the vendee can file
an action to recover the down payment.
If, on the other hand, the vendor and the vendee mutually agree to
rescind i.e. cancel the contract, the vendee likewise can file an action
for the recovery of the down payment on the basis of solution indebiti.
Alternative Answer:

(E) None of the above.

(a)

The recovery of the down payments should be made in the same

action for rescission. Otherwise, it would be a ground for dismissal
under Rule 2, Sec 4 of Rules of Court.

(b)

Lease of a real property is covered by the Statute of Frauds.

Furthermore, it also consists of interest in real property. Hence, it must
be in writing. (Art 1403, Civil Code)

(c)

A contract of guaranty is a promise to answer for the debt of another

and hence, it is also covered by the Statute of Frauds. It must be in
writing before it can be enforced in a court action. (Art 1403, Civil
Code)

(d)

The fact that a debtor has unliquidated assets does not excuse him
from paying his debt.

(e)

In the technical meaning of rescission under Art 1191 of the Civil Code
will be adhered to, then there is no absolutely correct answer.
Hence, letter E is also a possible answer.

IX. Betty entrusted to her agent, Aida, several pieces of jewelry to

be sold on commission with the express obligation to turn over to
Betty the proceeds of the sale, or to return the jewelries if not sold
in a month's time. Instead of selling the jewelries, Aida pawned
them with theTambunting Pawnshop, and used the money for
herself. Aida failed to redeem the pawned jewelries and after a
month, Betty discovered what Aida had done. Betty brought
criminal charges which resulted in Aida's conviction for estafa.
Betty thereafter filed an action against Tambunting Pawnshop for
the recovery of the jewelries. Tambunting raised the defense of
ownership, additionally arguing that it is duly licensed to engage in
the pawnshop and lending business, and that it accepted the
mortgage of the jewelry in good faith and in the regular course of its
business.
If you were the judge, how will you decide the case? (1%)
(A)

I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is based on the Civil Code

provision that one who has lost any movable or has been
unlawfully deprived thereof may recover it from the person in
possession of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good faith is

(B)

(C)
(D)

inconsequential.
I will rule in favor of Betty. Tambunting's claim of good faith
pales into insignificance in light of the unlawful deprivation of
the jewelries. However, equity dictates that Tambunting must
be reimbursed for the pawn value of the jewelries.
I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Its good faith takes
precedence over the right of Betty to recover the jewelries.
I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Good faith is always
presumed. Tambunting's lawful acquisition in the ordinary
course of business coupled with good faith gives it legal right
over the jewelries.

Suggested Answer:
(A)

I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is based on the Civil Code

provision that one who has lost any movable or has been
unlawfully deprived thereof may recover it from the person in
possession of the same. Tam bunting's claim of good faith is
inconsequential.

Although possession of movable property acquired in good faith is

equivalent to a title, nevertheless, one who has lost any movable or
has been unlawfully deprived thereof may recover it from the person in
possession of the same. Betty has been deprived unlawfully of her
jewelries by the estafa committed by Aida. The pledge of the said
jewelries by Aida to Tambunting pawnshop is void because the pledgor
is not the owner (Art 2085 (2), Civil Code). Tambuntings claim of good
faith is inconsequential, because, aside from good faith, Tambunting
must prove also that it acquired the jewelries at a public sale in order
to be able to retain the jewelries until reimbursed byBetty the amount
of loan including interest (Art 559, Civil Code).
The only exception the law allows is when there is acquisition in
good faith of the possessor at a public sale, in which case, the owner
cannot obtain its return without reimbursing the price (Dizon v. Suntay,
47 SCRA 160, Sept 29, 1972).
X. Arlene owns a row of apartment houses in Kamuning, Quezon City.
She agreed to lease Apartment No. 1 to Janet for a period of 18
months at the rate of P10,000 per month. The lease was not
covered by any contract. Janet promptly gave Arlene two (2) months
deposit and 18 checks covering the rental payment for 18 months.
This show of good faith prompted Arlene to promise Janet that
should Arlene decide to sell the property, she would give Janet the
right of first refusal.

X. (1)

Not long after Janet moved in, she received news that her
application for a Master of Laws scholarship at King's College
in London had been approved. Since her acceptance of the
scholarship entailed a transfer of residence, Janet asked
Arlene to return the advance rental payments she made.
Arlene refused, prompting Janet to file an action to recover
the payments. Arlene filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that
the lease on which the action is based, is unenforceable.
If you were the judge, would you grant Arlene's motion? (1%)
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)

Yes, I will grant the motion because the lease contract

between Arlene and Janet was not in writing, hence, Janet
may not enforce any right arising from the same contract.
No, I will not grant the motion because to allow Arlene to
retain the advance payments would amount to unjust
enrichment.
Yes, I will grant the motion because the action for
recovery is premature; Janet should first secure a judicial
rescission of the contract of lease.
No. I will not grant the motion because the cause of
action does not seek to enforce any right under the
contract of lease.

Suggested Answer:
(D)

No. I will not grant the motion because the cause of action does
not seek to enforce any right under the contract of lease.

Janet is not asking for the continued use of the leased premises.
Moreover, the contract is aside the ambit of the Statute of Frauds as
the same has already been partially performed.
X. (2)

Assume that Janet decided not to accept the scholarship and

continued leasing Apartment No. 1. Midway throughthe lease
period, Arlene decided to sell Apartment No. 1 to Jun in breach
of her promise to Janet to grant her the right of first refusal.
Thus, Janet filed an action seeking the recognition of her right
of first refusal, the payment of damages for the violation of
this right, and the rescission of the sale between Arlene and
Jun.
Is Janet's action meritorious? (1%)

(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)

Yes, under the Civil Code, a promise to buy and sell a

determinate thing is reciprocally demandable.
No, the promise to buy and sell a determinate thing was
not supported by a consideration.
Yes, Janet's right of first refusal was clearly violated when
the property was not offered for sale to her before it was
sold to Jun.
No, a right of first refusal involves an interest over real
property that must be embodied in a written contract to
be enforceable.
None of the above.

Suggested Answer:
(D)

No, a right of first refusal involves an interest over real property

that must be embodied in a written contract to be enforceable.

The right of first refusal involves a transfer of interest in the real

property. As such, it is covered by the Statute ofFrauds under Art 1403
(2)(e) of the Civil Code. It must be in writing in order to be enforceable.

ESSAY QUESTIONS:

I.
You are a Family Court judge and before you is a Petition for the Declaration
of Nullity of Marriage (under Article 36 of the Family Code)filed by Maria
against Neil. Maria claims that Neil is psychologically incapacitated to comply
with the essential obligations of marriage because Neil is a drunkard, a
womanizer, a gambler, and a mama's boy- traits that she never knew or saw
when Neil was courting her. Although summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's
petition and never appeared in court.
To support her petition, Maria presented three witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie
Chan, and Ambrosia. Dr. Chan testified on the psychological report on Neil
that she prepared. Since Neil never acknowledged n9r responded to her
invitation for interviews, her report is solely based on her interviews with
Maria and the spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that Neil is
suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an ailment that she found to
be already present since Neil'searly adulthood and one that is grave and
incurable. Maria testified on the specific instances when she found Neil

drunk, with another woman, or squandering the family's resources in a

casino. Ambrosia, the spouses' current household help, corroborated Maria's
testimony.
On the basis of the evidence presented, will you grant the petition? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The petition should be denied.
The psychological incapacity under Art. 36 of the Family Code must
be characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical antecedence, and (c)
incurability. It is not enough to prove that the parties failed to meet
their responsibilities and duties as married persons; it is essential
that they must be shown to be incapable of doing so, due to some
physiological (not physical) illness (Republic v. CA and Molina, G.R.
No. 108763, Feb 13, 1997).
In this case, the pieces of evidence presented are not sufficient to
conclude that indeed Neil is suffering from psychological incapacity
[Narcissistic Personality Disorder] existing already before the
marriage, incurable and serious enough to prevent Neil from
performing his essential marital obligations. Dr. Chans report
containsmere conclusions. Being a drunkard, a womanizer, a
gambler and a mamas boy, merely shows Neils failure to perform
his marital obligations. In a number of cases, the Supreme Court did
not find the existence of psychological incapacity in cases where the
respondent showed habitual drunkenness (Republic v. Melgar, G.R.
No. 139676, 2006), blatant display of infidelity and irresponsibility
(Dedel v. CA, 2004) or being hooked to gambling and drugs
(Republic v. Tanyag-San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, 2007).
Alternative Answer:
Yes. The petition should be granted.
The personal medical or psychological examination of respondent is
not a requirement for declaration of psychological incapacity. It is
the totality of the evidence presented which shall determine the
existence of psychological incapacity (Marcos v. Marcos, G.R. No.
136490, Oct 19, 2000). Dr. Chans report corroborated by Marias
and Ambrosias testimonies, therefore, sufficiently prove Neils
psychological incapacity to assume his marital obligations.

II.
A collision occurred at an intersection involving a bicycle and a taxicab.
Both the bicycle rider (a businessman then doing his morning exercise)
and the taxi driver claimed that the other was at fault. Based on the
police report, the bicycle crossed the intersection first but the taxicab,
crossing at a fast clip from the bicycles left, could not brake in time
and hit the bicycles rear wheel, toppling it and throwing the bicycle
rider into the sidewalk 5 meters away.
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right knee, sustained when he fell
on his right side on the concrete side walk. He was hospitalized and
was subsequently operated on, rendering him immobile for 3 weeks
and requiring physical rehabilitation for another 3 months. In his
complaint for damages, the rider prayed for the award of P1,000,000
actual damages,P200,000 moral damages, P200,000 exemplary
damages, P1 00,000 nominal damages andP50,000 attorneys fees.
Assuming the police report to be correct and as the lawyer for the
bicycle rider, what evidence (documentary and testimonial) and legal
arguments will you present in court to justify the damages that your
client claims? (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will the base the claim of my client on quasi-delict under Art 2176
of the Civil Code of the Philippines. The requisites for a claim under
quasi-delict to prosper are as follows: (1) Act or omission, there
being fault or negligence; (2) Damage or injury; and (3) Causal
connection between the damage and the act or omission. The case
clearly involves quasi-delict where my client, the bicycle rider,
suffered injury as a result of the negligence of the over-speeding
taxi driver, without fault on my clients part.
To prove actual damages aside from the testimony of client, I will
present his hospital and medical bills. Receipts paid on the
rehabilitation will also be presented. [The sentence in red should be
replaced with the following sentence because he is a businessman
and not an employee. Furthermore, I will present income tax
returns, contracts and other documents to prove unrealized profits
as a result of this temporary injury.]
Present the police report showing the circumstance under which the
accident took place, taking into account the actions of the parties. I

will ask the officials who responded to the accident to testify as to

the conduct of the parties at the time of the accident in order to
determine whether defendant was guilty of gross negligence.
Finally, attorneys fees may be recovered when exemplary damages
are awarded (Art 2208, Civil Code).
I will also call the attending physician to testify as to the extent of
the injuries suffered by my client, and to corroborate the contents
of the medical documents. Based on Art. 2202, in quasi-delicts, the
defendant shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and
probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is
not necessary that the damages have been foreseen or could have
been foreseen by the defendant. Unlike actual damages, no proof of
pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate
liquidated or exemplary damages may be adjudicated. The
assessment is left to the discretion of the Court (Art. 2216, Civil
Code). There must be proof pecuniary estimation, however. Moral
damages can be recovered by my client under Articles 2219 and
2200. Moral damages may be recovered in case of a quasi-delict
causing physical injuries. Additionally, it must be proved that such
damages were the proximate result of the act complained of.
Medical certificates will be presented, along with the testimony
from my client and other eyewitness accounts, in order to support
the award for moral damages.
Exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted in
wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner.
While the amount of exemplary damages may not be proved, the
plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral or compensatory
damages. In support of this, I will present the police report showing
the circumstance under which the accident took place, taking into
account the actions of the parties. I will ask the officials who
responded to the accident to testify as to the conduct of the parties
at the time of the accident in order to determine whether defendant
was guilty of gross negligence. Finally, attorneys fees may be
recovered when exemplary damages are awarded (Art 2208, Civil
Code).

III.

Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square meter land. His friend,

Marcelo, who has long been interested in the property, succeeded in
persuading Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2, 2012, they agreed on the
purchase price of P600,000 and that Sergio would give Marcelo up to June30,
2012 within which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone usual between
them, said that they should seal their agreement through a case of Jack
Daniels Black and P5,000 pulutan money which he immediately handed to
Sergio and which the latter accepted. The friends then sat down and drank
the first bottle from the case of bourbon.
On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another buyer, Roberto, who was offering
P800,000 in ready cash for the land. When Roberto confirmed that he could
pay in cash as soon as Sergio could get the documentation ready, Sergio
decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo, hoping to just explain matters to his
friend. Marcelo, however, objected when the withdrawal was communicated
to him, taking the position that they have a firm and binding agreement that
Sergio cannot simply walk away from because he has an option to buy that is
duly supported by a duly accepted valuable consideration.
(A) Does Marcelo have a cause of action against Sergio? (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes. Marcelo has a cause of action against Sergio. Under Art. 1324, when
the offerer has allowed the offeree a certain period to accept, the offer
may be withdrawn at any time before acceptance by communicating such
withdrawal, except when the option is founded upon consideration, as
something paid or promised.
An accepted unilateral promise to buy or sell a determinate thing for
a price certain is binding upon him if the promise is supported by a
consideration distinct from the price (Art. 1479).
Consideration in an option contract may be anything of value,, unlike

in sale where it must be the price certain in money or its equivalent

(San Miguel Properties Inc. v. Spouses Huang, G.R. No. 137290, July
31, 2000).

Here, the case of Jack Daniels Black and the P5,000.00 pulutan
money was a consideration to seal their agreement, an agreement
that Marcelo is given until June 30, 2012 to buy the parcel of land.
There is also no showing that such consideration will be considered
part of the purchase price. Thus, Sergios unilateral withdrawal of
the offer violated the Option Contract between him and Marcelo.

(B) Can Sergio claim that whatever they might have agreed upon cannot be
enforced because any agreement relating to the sale of real property must be
supported by evidence in writing and they never reduced their agreement to
writing? (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. Sergios claim has no legal basis. The contract at issue in the
present case is the option contract, not the contract of sale for the
real property. Therefore, Art. 1403 does not apply. The Statute of
Frauds covers an agreement for the sale of real property or of an
interest therein. Such agreement is unenforceable by action, unless
the same, or some note or memorandum, thereof, be in writing, (Art.
1403 (e), Civil Code).

Here, Marcelo and Sergio merely entered into an Option Contract,

which refers to a unilateral promise to buy or sell, which need not be
in writing to be enforceable (Sanchez v. Rigos, G.R. No. L-25494,
June 14, 1972, citing Atkins, Kroll and Co. Inc. v. Cua Hian Tek and
Southwestern Sugar & Molasses Co. v. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co.).

IV.
Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a house that his friend
boboy occupied for a nominal rental and on the condition that boboy
would vacate the property on demand. With anselmoss knowledge,
Boboy introduced innovations consisting of additional bedroom,
covered veranda, and a concrete block fence, at his own expense.
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as his residence and thus
asked Boboy to vacate and turn it over to him. Boboy, despite and
extension, failed to vacate the property forcing anselmo to send to him
a written demand.
In his own written reply, Boboy signified that he was ready to leave but
Anselmo must first reimburse him the value of the improvements he
introduced on the property as he is a builder in good faith. Anselmo refused,
insisting that Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a mere lessee.
Boboy responded by removing the improvements and leaving the building in
its original state.
(A)

Resolve Boboy's claim that as a builder in good faith, he should

bereimbursed the value of the improvements he introduced.
(4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Boboys claim that he is a builder in good faith has no basis. A
builder in good faith is someone who occupies the property in
concept of an owner. The provisions on builder-planter-sower under
the Civil Code cover cases in which the builder, planter and sower
believe themselves to be owners of the land, or at least, to have a
claim of title thereto.
As Boboy is a lessee of the property, even if he was paying nominal
rental, Art. 1678, Civil Code, is applicable.
Under this provision, if the lessee makes, in good faith, useful
improvements which are suitable to the use for which the lease is
intended, without altering the form or substance of the property

leased, the lessor upon the termination of the lease, shall pay the
lessee one-half of the value of improvements at that time. Should
the lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may remove
the improvements, even though the principal thing may suffer
damage thereby.
(B)

Can Boboy be held liable for damages for removing the

improvements over Anselmo's objection? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Boboy cannot be held liable for damages.
The lessor, Anselmo, refused to reimburse one-half of the value of
the improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may remove the same,
even though the principal thing may suffer damage thereby. If in
removing the useful improvements Boboy caused more impairment
in the property leased than is necessary he will be liable for
damages (Art. 1678, Civil Code).
V.
Josefa executed a deed of donation covering a one-hectare rice land in favor
of her daughter, Jennifer. The deed specifically provides that:
"For and in consideration of her love and service Jennifer has shown and
given to me, I hereby freely, voluntarily and irrevocably donate to her my
one-hectare rice land covered by TCT No. 11550, located in San
Fernando, Pampanga. This donation shall take effect upon my death."
The deed also contained Jennifer's signed acceptance, and an attached
notarized declaration by Josefa and Jennifer that the land will remain in
Josefa's possession and cannot be alienated, encumbered, sold or disposed
of while Josefa is still alive.
Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a donation inter vivos or mortis causa
and explain the reasons supporting your advice. (8%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The donation is a donation inter vivos.
When the donor intends that the donation shall take effect during
the lifetime of the donor, though the property shall not be delivered

till after the donors death, this shall be a donation inter vivos (Art.
729, Civil Code).
The Civil Code prefers inter vivos transmissions. Moreover, mortis
causa donations should follow the formalities of a will (Art. 728,
Civil Code). Here there is no showing that such formalities were
followed. Thus, it is favorable to Jennifer that the deed is a donation
inter vivos.
Furthermore, what is most significant in determining the type of
donation is the absence of stipulation that the donor could revoke
the donation; on the contrary, the deeds expressly declare them to
be irrevocable, a quality absolutely incompatible with the idea of
conveyances mortis causa where revocability is the essence of the
act, to the extent that a testator cannot lawfully waive or restrict
his right of revocation.
The provisions of the deed of donation which state that the same
will only take effect upon the death of the donor and that there is a
prohibition to alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell thesame should
be harmonized with its express irrevocability (Austria-Magat v. CA,
G.R. No. 106755, Feb 1, 2002).
Alternative Answer:
The donation is donation mortis causa.
The deed clearly states that the donation shall take effect upon the
death of the donor, Josefa. The donor, moreover, retained ownership
of the subject property as it was declared that the property cannot
be alienated, encumbered, sold or disposed of while the donor is
still alive.
As the donation is in the nature of a mortis causa disposition, the
formalities of a will should have been complied with under Art. 728
of the Civil Code, otherwise, the donation is void and would produce
no effect (The National Treasure of the Philippines v. Vda. de
Meimban, G.R. No. L-61023, Aug 22, 1984).
VI.
Lito obtained a loan of P1,000,000 from Ferdie, payable within one year. To
secure payment, Lito executed a chattel mortgage on a Toyota Avanza and a
real estate mortgage on a 200-square meter piece of property.

(A)

Would it be legally significant - from the point of view of validity

and enforceability - if the loan and the mortgages were in
public or private instruments? (6%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
From the point of view of validity and enforceability, there would be
legal significance if the mortgage was in a public or private
instrument. As for the loan, there is no legal significance except of
interest were charged on the loan, in which case, the charging of
interest must be in writing.
A contract of loan is a real contract and is perfected upon delivery
of the object of the obligation (Art 1934, Civil Code). Thus, a
contract of loan is valid and enforceable even if it is neither in a
private nor in a public document.
As a rule, contracts shall be obligatory in whatever form they may
have been entered into provided all the essential requisites for their
validity are present. With regards to its enforceability, a contact of
loan is not among those enumerated under Art. 1403 (2) of the Civil
Code, which are covered by the Statute of Frauds.
It is important to note that under Art. 1358 of the Civil Code, all the
other contracts where the amount involvedexceeds Five Hundred
pesos (P500.00) must appear in writing, even in private one.
However, the requirement is not for validity of the contract, but only
for its greater efficacy.
With regard to the chattel mortgage, Art. 1508, the Chattel
Mortgage Law, requires an affidavit of good faith stating that the
chattel mortgage is supposed to stand as security of the loan; thus,
for the validity of the chattel mortgage, it must be in a public
document and recorded in the Chattel Mortgage Register in the
Register of Deeds. A real estate mortgage, under the provisions of
Art. 2125 of the Civil Code, requires that in order that a mortgage
may be validly constituted the document in which it appears be
recorded. If the instrument is not recorded, the mortgage is
nevertheless valid and binding between the parties. Hence, for
validity of both chattel and real estate mortgages, they must appear
in a public instrument. But the purpose of enforceability, it is
submitted that the form of the contract, whether in a public or
private document, would be immaterial (Mobil Oil v. Diocaresa, 29
SCRA 656, 1969).

Also, under Art 1358, acts and contracts which have for their object
the creation or transmission of real rights over immovable property
must be in a publicdocument for greater efficacy and a real estate
mortgage is a real right over immovable property.
(B)

Lito's failure to pay led to the extra-judicial foreclosure of the

mortgaged real property. Within a year from foreclosure, Lito
tendered a manager's check to Ferdie to redeem the property.
Ferdie refused to accept payment on the ground that he wanted
payment in cash: the check does not qualify as legal tender and
does not include the interest payment.
Is Ferdie's refusal justified? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A check, whether a managers check or an ordinary check is not
legal tender, and an offer of a check in payment of a debt is not a
valid tender of payment and may be refused receipt by the obligeor
creditors (Philippine Airlines v. CA and Amelia Tan, G.R. No. L-49188,
1990). Mere delivery of checks does not discharge the obligation
under a judgment. A check shall produce the effect of payment only
when they have been cashed or where through the fault of the
creditor they have been impaired (Art 1249, Civil Code).
However, it is not necessary that the right of redemption be
exercised by delivery of legal tender. A check may be used for the
exercise of right of redemption, the same being a right and not an
obligation. The tender of a check is sufficient to compel redemption
but is not in itself a payment that relieves the redemptioner from
his liability to pay the redemption price (Biana v. Gimenez, G.R. No.
132768, Sept 9, 2005, citing Fortunado v. CA).
Redemption within the period allowed by law is not a matter of
intent but a question of payment or valid tender of full redemption
prices within the said period. Whether redemption is being made
under Art. 3135 or under the General Banking Law, the mortgagor or
his assignee is required to tender payment to make said redemption
valid (Heirs of Quisumbing v. PNB and SLDC, G.R. No. 178242, Jan
20, 2009).
Moreover, Ferdies refusal was justified on the ground that the
amount tendered does not include interest. In order to effect the
redemption of the foreclosed property, the payment to the
purchaser must include the following sums: (a) the bid price; (b) the

interest on the bid price, computed at one per centum (1%) per
month; and (c) the assessments and taxes, if any, paid by the
purchaser with the same rate of interest (Sec 28, 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure). Unless there is an express stipulation to that effect, the
creditor cannot be compelled to receive partial payment of the
prestation (Art. 1248, Civil Code).

VII
In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot whose only access to the
national highway was a pathway crossing Branda's property. Andres and
others have been using this pathway (pathway A) since 1980.
In 2006, Branda fenced off his property, thereby blocking Andres' access to
the national highway. Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to
maintain his old access route to the highway (pathway A), but Branda
refused, claiming that there was another available pathway (pathway B) for
ingress and egress to the highway. Andres countered that pathway B has
defects, is circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to use.
To settle their dispute, Andres and Branda hired Damian, a geodetic and civil
engineer, to survey and examine the two pathways and the surrounding
areas, and to determine the shortest and the least prejudicial way through
the servient estates. After the survey, the engineer concluded that pathway
B is the longer route and will need improvements and repairs, but will not
significantly affect the use of Branda's roperty. On the other hand, pathway A
that had long been in place, is the shorter route but would significantly affect
the use of Branda's property.
In light of the engineer's findings and the circumstances of the case,
resolve the parties' right of way dispute. (6%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Andres is not entitled to the easement of right of way for path
A. Pathway B must be used.
The owner of dominant estate may validly obtain a compulsory
right of way only after he has established the existence of four
requisites:
a. dominant estate is surrounded by another immovables and is

without adequate outlet to a public highway.

b. After payment of proper indemnity
c. Isolation was due to the propritors own act
d. Least prejudicial to the servient estate
Howver, SC has consistently ruled that in case both criteria
cannot be complied with, the right of way shall be established
at the point least prejudicial to the servient estate. When
there is already an existing adequate outlet from the dominant
estate to the highway , even if the said outlet, for one reason
or another be inconvenient, the need to open up another
servitude is unjustified.

VIII.
Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the spouses Del a Cruz a500-square meter
land (Lot A) in Paranaque. The land now has a fair market value of Pl,200,000. CRC
likewise sold to the spouses Rodriguez, a 700-square meter land (Lot B) which is
adjacent to Lot A. Lot B has a present fair market value of P1,500,000.
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on Lot B, relying on there presentation
of the CRC sales agent that it is the property they purchased. Only upon the
completion of their house did the spouses Dela Cruz discover that they built on Lot
B owned by the spouses Rodriguez, not on lot A that they purchased. They spent
P1,000,000.00 for the house.
As their lawyer, advise the spouses Dela Cruz on their rights and obligations
under the given circumstances, and the recourses and options open to them
to protect their interests. (8%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Based on the fact as stated, the spouses De La Cruz as builders and
the spouses Rodriguez as land owners, are both in good faith. The
spouses Dela Cruz are builder in good faith because before
constructing the home they exercised due diligence by asking the
agent of CRC the location of the lot A, and they relied on the
information given by the agent who is presumed to know the
identity of the lot purchased by the Dela Cruz (Pleasantville v. CA,
253 SCRA 10, 1996). On the other hand, there is no showing that the
land owners, spouses Rodriguez acted on bad faith. The fascts do
not show that the building was done with their knowledge and

without opposition on their part (Art. 453, Civi Code. The good faith
is always presumed (Art. 527, Civil Code)

The owner of the land on which anything has been built, sown or
planted in good faith shall have the right:

1. To appropriate as his own the works after payment of the indemnity

provided for in Art. 546 and 548, or
2. To oblige the one who built to pay the price of the land

However, the builder cannot be oibliged to buy the land if its value is
considerable more than that of the building. In such case, he shall
pay reasonable rent of the owner of the land does not choose to
appropriate the building or tress after proper indemnity (Art 448,
Civil Code)

The house constructed by the spouses Dela Cruz is considered as a

useful expense, since it increased the value of the lot. As such,
should the spouses Rodriguez decides to appropriate the house, the
spouses Dela Cruz are entitled to the right of retentionpending
reimbursement of the expenses they incurred or the increase in
value which the thing may have acquired by reason of the
improvement (Art. 546, Civil Code). Thus, spouses Dela Cruz may
demand P1,000,000.00 as payment of the exoenses in value of the
land because of the house as useful improvement, as may be
determined by the court from the evidence presents during the trial
(Depra v Dumlao, 135 SCRA 475)

IX.

Rica petitioned for the annulment of her ten-year old marriage to Richard.
Richard hired Atty. Cruz to represent him in the proceedings. In payment for
Atty. Cruz's acceptance and legal fees, Richard conveyed to Atty. Cruz a

parcel of land in Taguig that he recently purchased with his lotto winnings.
The transfer documents were duly signed and Atty. Cruz immediately took
possession by fencing off the property's entire perimeter.
Desperately needing money to pay for his mounting legal fees and his other
needs and despite the transfer to Atty. Cruz, Richard offered the same parcel
of land for sale to the spouses Garcia. After inspection of the land, the
spouses considered it a good investment and purchased it from Richard.
Immediately after the sale, the spouses Garcia commenced the construction
of a three-story building over the land, but they were prevented from doing
this by Atty. Cruz who claimed he has a better right in light of the prior
conveyance in his favor.
Is Atty. Cruz's claim correct? (8%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. Atty. Cruz is not correct. At first glance, it may appear that Atty.
Cruz is the one who has the better right because he first took
possession of the property. However, a lawyer is prohibited under
Art 1491 of the Civil Code from acquiring the property and rights
which may be the object of any litigation in which they may take part
by virtue of their profession.

While the suit is for annulment of marriage and it may be urged that
the land itself is not the object of the litigation, the annulment of
marriage, if granted, will carry with it the liquidation of the absolute
community or conjugal partnership of the spouses as the case may
be (Art. 50 in relation to Art 43 of the Family Code). Richard
purchased the land with his lotto winnings during the pendency of
the suit for annulment and on the assumption that the parties are
governed by the regime of absolute community or conjugal
partnership, winnings from gambling or betting will form part
thereof.

Also, since the land is part of the absolute community or conjugal

partnership of Richard and Rica, it may not be sold or alienated

without the consent of the latter and any disposition or
encumbrance of the property of the community or the conjugal
property without the consent of the other spouse is void (Art 96 and
Art 124, Family Code).

X.
Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1 000-square meter property where
he grew up helping his father, Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has lived
on the property since the land was opened for settlement at about the time
of the Commonwealth government in 1935, but for some reason never
secured any title to the property other than a tax declaration in his name. He
has held the property throughthe years in the concept of an owner and his
stay was uncontested by others. He has also conscientiously and
continuously paid the realty taxes on the land.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel - as Michaels only son and heir -now wants
to secure and register title to the land in his own name. He consults you for
legal advice as he wants to perfect his title to the land and secure its
registration in his name.
(A)

What are the laws that you need to consider in advising Manuel
on how he can perfect his title and register the land in his
name? Explain the relevance of these laws to your projected
course of action. (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(Note: With all due respect, it is recommended that the examiner
accept and give full credit to any of the answers given in each of the
following paragraphs.)
I would advice Manuel to file an application for registration under
Sec 14 of Pres. Decree No. 1529, or the Property Registration
Decree (PRD), specifically Sec14 (1) which requires (a) that the land
applied for forms part of the alienable and disposable (A & D)
portion of the public domain, and (b) that the applicant has been in
open, continuous and notorious possession and occupation thereof
under bona fide claim ofownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.

However, it is only necessary that the land is already declared A & D

land at the time for application for registration is filed
(Malabanan v. Republic, G.R. No. 180067, June 30, 2009).
Manuel could also invoke Sec 14 (2) of the same Decree, which
allows registration through ordinary acquisitive prescription for
thirty years, provided, however, that the land is patrimonial in
character, i.e. already declared by the government (a) as A & D, and
(b) no longer needed for public use or public service (Malabanan,
supra).
Manuel could also file an application for confirmation of imperfect
or incomplete title through judicial legalization under Sec. 48 (b)
of CA no. 141, or the Public Land Act (PLA). But, as held in
Malabanan, there is no substantial difference between this provision
and Sec 14 (1) of the PRD. Both refer to agricultural lands already
classified as alienable and disposable at the time the application is
filed, and require possession and occupation since June 12, 1945.
The only difference is that under the PRD, there already exists a
title which is to be confirmed, whereas under the PLA, the
presumption is that land is still public land (Republic v.Aquino, G.R.
No. L-33983, January 27, 1983).
Manuel may also invoke vested rights acquired under Rep. Act.
No. 1942, dated June 2, 1957, which amended Sec. 48 (b) of the PLA
by providing for a prescriptive period of thirty years for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title. It must only be demonstrated that
possession and occupation commenced on January 24, 1947 and the
30-year period was completed prior to the effectivity of PD No. 1073
on January 25, 1977. PD No. 1073 now requires possession and
occupation since June 12, 1945 (Republic v. Espinosa, G.R. No.
171514, July 18, 2012).
Another alternative is for Manuel to secure title through
administrative proceedings under the homestead or free patent
provisions of the PLA. The title issued has the same efficacy and
validity as a title issued through judicial proceedings, but with the
limitations that the land cannot be sold or disposed of within five
years from the issuance of patent (Sec. 118, CA No. 141, as
amended).
(B)

What do you have to prove to secure Manuel's objectives and

what documentation are necessary? (4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Manuel has the burden to overcome the presumption of State

ownership by well-nigh incontrovertible evidence (Ong v.
Republic, G.R. No. 175746, March 12, 2008). Accordingly, he must
show that theland is already classified as A & D at the time the
application for registration is filed and that he has been in
possession and occupation thereof in the manner required by law
since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
Manuel may tack his possession to that of his predecessor-ininterest (Michael) by the testimony of disinterested and
knowledgeable eyewitnesses. Overt acts of possession may consist
in introducing valuable improvements like fencing the land,
constructing a residential house thereon, cultivating the land and
planting fruit bearing trees, declaring the land for taxation
purposes and paying realty taxes, all of which are corroborative
proof of possession.
To identify the land, he must submit the tracing cloth plan or a dulycertified blueprint or whiteprint copy thereof (Director of Lands v.
Reyes, G.R. No. L-27594, November 28, 1975; Director of Lands v.
CA and Iglesia ni Cristo, G.R. No. L-56613, March 14, 1988).
To show the classification of the land as A & D, the application must
be accompanied by (1) a CENRO or PENROcertification; and (2) a
certified true copy of the original classification approved by the
DENR Secretary (Republic v. Bantigue, G.R.No. 162322, March 14,
2012). A presidential or legislative act may also be considered.

2012 BAR EXAM (MCQ)

1. Which of the following is NOT included in the attributes of juridical
capacity?
a) Juridical capacity is inherent in every natural person, and therefore it

is not acquired.
b) Juridical capacity is lost only through death.
c) Juridical capacity is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations.
d) Juridical capacity cannot exist without capacity to act. (Art.
37, NCC)
2. Which of the following is NOT a restriction on ones capacity to act?
a) Minority
b) Marriage
c) Deaf-mute
d) Civil Interdiction
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
This question should be disregarded. (NOTE: There is no correct
answer among the choices given. All choices are restrictions on ones
capacity to act. While Marriage is the only one not mentioned in
Articles 38 and 39 of the NCC as a restriction on capacity to act, it
restricts the capacity of a married person in cases of adoption.)
3. This attribute or incident of a case determines whether it is a
conflict-of-laws case or one covered by domestic law.
a) Cause of action
b) Foreign element (Conflict of Laws; Definition)
c) Jurisdiction
d) Forum non conveniens
4. The capacity of an heir to succeed shall be governed by the:
a) national law of the decedents heirs
b) law of the country where the decedent was a resident at the
time of his death
c) national law of the person who died
Art. Capacity to succeed is governed by the law of the
nation of the decedent.
d) law of the country where the properties of the decedent are
located.
5. Atty. BUKO, a Filipino, executed a will while he was in Spain. The
attestation clause of the said will does not contain Bukos signature. It
is valid under Spanish law. At its probate in Manila, it is being opposed
on the ground that the attestation clause does not contain BUKOs

signature. Is the opposition correct? Choose the best answer..

a) Yes, because it is a fatal defect.
b) Yes, the will is not valid under Philippine law.
c) No, attestation clause is not an act of the testator.
d) No, the governing law is Spanish law.
Note: The facts do not state the Law observed by the
testator in executing his will. He could have observed
Spanish Law or Philippine Law (see comment of Tolentino
to Art. 815 NCC in 3Tolentino117, 1992). If he observed
Spanish Law, the opposition is not correct because the
will is valid under Spanish Law, hence choice (d) is the
correct answer. If he observed Philippine Law, the
opposition is still not correct because Philippine Law does
not require the testator to sign the Attestation Clause of
his will, said clause not being his act. In such case, choice
(c) is the correct answer).
6. Ramon, a Filipino, executed a will in Manila, where he left his house
and located in BP Homes Paraaque in favor of his Filipino son,
Ramgen. Ramons other children RJ and Ramona, both Turkish
nationals, are disputing the bequest to Ramgen. They plotted to kill
Ramgen. Ramon learned of the plot, so he tore his will in two pieces
out of anger. Which statement is most accurate?
a) The mere act of Ramon Sr. is immaterial because the will is
still readable.
b) The mere act of tearing the will amounts to revocation.
c) The tearing of the will may amount to revocation if
coupled with intent of revoking it.
Art. 830. No will shall be revoked except in the following
cases: xx (3) BY burning, tearing, cancelling, or
obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by
the testator himself, xxx.
d) The act of tearing the will is material.
7. Even if the applicable law is a foreign law, a count in the Philippines
may be constrained to apply Philippine law under any of the following

instances, except:
a) when the foreign law, judgment or contract is contrary to a
sound and important public policy of the forum;
b) when the property subject of the case is located
outside of the Philippines; Art 16 par 1
c) when the foreign law or judgment is penal in nature;
d) when the foreign law is procedural in nature.
8. If a will is executed by a testator who was born a Filipino citizen but
became naturalized Japanese citizen at the time of his death, what law
will govern its testamentary provisions if the will is executed in China
and the property being disposed is located in Indonesia?
a) Chinese law
b) Philippine law
c) Indonesia law
d) Japanese law Art 16 par 2
9. A Japanese national and a Filipino national entered into a contract
for services in Thailand. The services will be rendered in Singapore. In
case of breach, what law will govern?
a) Thailand law
b) Philippine law
c) Singapore law ( I research pa later)
d) Japanese law
10. Pedro (Filipino) and his wife Jane (American) executed a joint will in
Canada, where such joint will is valid. In case the joint will is probated
in Japan, what law will govern the formalities of the joint will?
a) American law
b) Philippine law
c) Canadian law
d) Japanese law
LEGAL BASIS:
Article 816. The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the
Philippines if made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the
place in which he resides, or according to the formalities observed in
his country, or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes.
11. A French national revokes his will in Japan where he is domiciled.
He then changed his domicile to the Philippines where he died. The
revocation of his will in Japan is valid under Japanese law but invalid
under Philippine law. The affected heir is a Malaysian national residing
in the Philippines. What law will apply?
a) Japanese law
b) Philippine law
c) French law
d) Malaysian law
LEGAL BASIS:

Article 829. A revocation done outside the Philippines, by a person who

does not have his domicile in this country, is valid when it is done
according to the law of the place where the will was made, or
according to the law of the place in which the testator had his domicile
at the time; and if the revocation takes place in this country, when it is
in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
12. In the absence of contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement,
property relations of Filipino spouses shall be governed by --a) Philippines laws
b) Law of the place where the spouses reside
c) Law of the place where the properties are situated
d) Law of the place where they were married.
LEGAL BASIS:
Art. 80. In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage
settlement, the property relations of the spouses shall be governed by
Philippine laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of the
marriage and their residence.
This rule shall not apply:
(1) Where both spouses are aliens;
(2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts affecting property
not situated in the Philippines and executed in the country where the
property is located; and
(3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the
Philippines but affecting property situated in a foreign country whose
laws require different formalities for its extrinsic validity.
13. A will of a Filipino executed in a foreign country - D) may be
probated in the Philippines provided it was executed in accordance
with the laws of the place where the will was executed. A will proved
and allowed in a foreign country in accordance with the laws of
that country may be allowed, filed and recorded in the proper
Regional Trial Court in the Philippines (Rule 77 Sec 1 RC) (Vda
de Perez v Tolete, 232 SCRA 722 - requisites for reprobate: (1)
due execution of the will in accordance with foreign law, (2)
the testator had his domicile in the foreign country and not in
the Philippines, (3) the will has been admitted to probate in
the foreign country, (4) the laws of the foreign country on
procedure and allowance of wills.)
14. Pedro (filipino) and Bill (american) entered into a contract in
Australia, whereby it was agreed that Pedro will build a commercial
building for Bill in the Philippines, and in payment for the construction,
Bill will transfer and convey his cattle ranch located in Japan in favor of
Pedro. In case Pedro performs his obligations, but Bill fails or refused to

pay, what law will govern? D) Japanese Law. Lex Situs (Art 16) - Real
and personal property is subject to the law of the country
where it is situated. (Application of Lex Situs: the capacity to
transfer or acquire property is governed by lex situs; the
formalities of a contract to convey property are governed by
Lex Situs)
15. In 1989, Charice (Filipina) and Justine (American), were married in
the Philippines. In 1990, they separated and Justine went to Las Vegas
where he obtained a divorce in the same year. He then married
another Filipina, Lea, in Canada on January 1, 1992. They had 2 sons
James and John (who were both born in 1992). In 1993, after failing to
hear from Justine, Charice married Bugoy (a Filipino), by whom she had
a daughter, Regine. In 2009, Regine married James (son of Justine with
Lea) in California, where such marriage is valid. What is the current
status of the marriage of Charice and Justine under Phillipine Laws?
Suggested answer: Dissolved. Art. 26(2), FC: Where a marriage
between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated
and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien
spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse
shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.
16. What is the status of the marriage between Charice and Bugoy
under Philippine laws?
a)
b)
c)
d)

Valid
Void
Voidable
Unenforceable

Suggested Answer:
d) Unenforceable
17. What is the status of the marriage between Charice and Bugoy
under Philippine laws?
a)
b)
c)
d)

Valid
Void
Voidable
Unenforceable

Suggested Answer:
a) Valid

18. What is the status of the marriage between Regine and James
under Philippine laws?
a)
b)
c)
d)

Valid
Void
Voidable
Unenforceable

Suggested Answer:
a) Valid

19. Ricky and Princess were sweethearts. Princess became pregnant. Knowing
that Ricky is preparing for the examinations, Marforth, a lawyer and cousin of
Princess, threatened Ricky with the filing of a complaint for immorality in the
Supreme Court, thus preventing him from taking examinations unless he
marries Princess. As a consequence of the threat, Ricky married Princess. Can
the marriage be annulled on the ground of intimidation under Article 45 of
the Family Code? Choose the best answer.
a) Yes, because without the threat, Ricky would not have married
Princess.
b) Yes, because the threat to enforce the claim of Princess vitiates the
consent of Ricky in contracting the marriage.
c) No, because the threat made by Marforth is just and legal.
d) No, because Marforth is not a party to the contract of marriage
between Princess and Ricky.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c) No, because the threat made by Marforth is just and legal. In De Leon v.
Court of Appeals, the Court held that in order that intimidation may vitiate
consent and render the contract invalid, the following requisites must concur:
(1) that the intimidation must be the determining cause of the contract, or
must have caused the consent to be given; (2) that the threatened act be
unjust or unlawful; (3) that the threat be real and serious, there being an
evident disproportion between the evil and the resistance which all men can
offer, leading to the choice of the contract as the lesser evil; and (4) that it

produces a reasonable and well-grounded fear from the fact that the person
from whom it comes has the necessary means or ability to inflict the
threatened injury.

20. Audrey, single, bought a parcel of land in Malolos City from Franco for P
1Million. A contract was executed between them which already vested upon
Audrey full ownership of the property, although payable in monthly
installments for a period of four (4) years. One (1) year after the execution of
the contract, Audrey got married to Arnel. They executed a marriage
settlement whereby they agreed that their properties shall be governed by
the regime of conjugal partnership of gains. Thereafter, subsequent
installments were paid from the conjugal partnership funds. Is the land
conjugal or paraphernal?
a) The land is conjugal because the installments were paid from the
conjugal partnership funds.
b) The land is paraphernal because ownership thereof was acquired
before the marriage.
c) The land is both conjugal and paraphernal funds of installments
were paid from both the personal funds of Audrey and the conjugal
partnership funds.
d) The land is paraphernal because it was Audrey who purchased the
same.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) The land is paraphernal because ownership thereof was acquired
before the marriage.
Article 135. All property brought by the wife to the marriage, as well as all
property she acquires during the marriage, in accordance with article 148, is
paraphernal.
Article 148. The following shall be the exclusive property of each spouse:
(1) That which is brought to the marriage as his or her own;

(2) That which each acquires, during the marriage, by lucrative title;
(3) That which is acquired by right of redemption or by exchange with
other property belonging to only one of the spouses;
(4) That which is purchased with exclusive money of the wife or of the
husband.

21. Ernesto donated a mobile phone worth P 32,000 to Hubert orally and
delivered the unit to Hubert who accepted. Which statement is most
accurate?
a) The donation is void and Ernesto may get mobile phone back.
b) The donation is void but Ernesto cannot get the mobile phone back.
c) The donation is voidable and may be anulled.
d) The donation is valid.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The donation is void and Ernesto may get mobile phone back.
Article 748. The donation of a movable may be made orally or in writing.
An oral donation requires the simultaneous delivery of the thing or of the
document representing the right donated.
If the value of the personal property donated exceeds five thousand
pesos, the donation and the acceptance shall be made in writing.
Otherwise, the donation shall be void.

22. Agay, a Filipino citizen and Topacio, an Australian citizen, got married in the
consular office of the Philippines in Australia. According to the laws of Australia, a
marriage solemnized by a consular official is valid, provided that such marriage is
celebrated in accordance with the laws of such consular official. Under Philippine
law, what is the status of the marriage of Agay and Topacio? Choose the best

answer.
a) Void, because the consular official only has authority to solemnize marriages
between Filipinos.
23. Separation of property between spouses during the marriage may take place
only:
c) Upon order of the court.
24. The husband may impugn the legitimacy of his child but not on the ground that:
a) the wife is suspected of infidelity.

25. A marriage is void if:

a) solemnized with a marriage license issued without complying with the
required 10-day posting.
b) solemnized by a minister whom the parties believe to have the authority.
c) between parties both 23 years of age but without parental advice.
d) none of the above
ANSWER: d) none of the above
(Articles 35, 36, 37, and 38, Family Code of the Philippines)

26. In legal separation, which is not correct?

a) The aggrieved spouse may file the action within five (5) years from the
time of the occurrence of the cause.
b) No trial shall be held without the 6-month cooling off period being
observed.
c) The spouses will be entitled to live separately upon the start of the trial.
d) The prosecuting attorney has to conduct his own investigation.
Answer: d) The prosecuting attorney has to conduct his own

investigation.
The Family Code of the Philippines under Article 48 thereof requires
the active participation of the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
assigned to it to appear on behalf of the state to take step to
prevent collusion between the parties and to take care that the
evidence is not fabricated or suppressed.

27. A husband by chance discovered hidden treasure on the paraphernal

property of his wife. Who owns the discovered treasure?
a) The half pertaining to the husband (finder) belongs to the conjugal
partnership.
b) The half pertaining to the wife (as owner) belongs to the conjugal
partnership.
c) One half shall belong to the husband as finder and the other half shall
belong to the wife as owner of the property.
d) a and b
answer: d) a and b .The half pertaining to the husband as finder belongs to
the conjugal partnership. The half pertaining to the wife as proprietor also
belongs to the conjugal partnership (See Art. 154). R.A 386 CIVIL CODE

28. Which of the following marriages is void for reasons of public

policy?
a) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half blood.
b) Between step-parents and step children.
c) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law.
d) b and c
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) ART. 38
29. The following constitute the different circumstances or case of
fraud which will serves as ground for the annulment of a marriage,
except?
a) Non-disclosure of the previous conviction by final judgment of
the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude.

b) Concealment of a sexually-transmissible disease, regardless of

its nature, existing at the time of the marriage.
c) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism,
homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of marriage.
d) Concealment by the wife or the husband of the fact of sexual
relations prior to the marriage.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (D) ART. 46
30. Which of the following is not a requisite for a valid donation propter
nuptias?
a) The donation must be made before the celebration of the
marriage.
b) The donation shall be automatically revoked in case of noncelebration of the marriage.
c) The donation must be made in consideration of the marriage.
d) The donation must be made in favor of one or both of the
future spouses.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (B) ART 82

31. Who are illegitimate children?

a) Children conceived or born outside a valid marriage.
b) Children born under a valid marriage, which was later declared void
because of the psychological incapacity of either or both of the
spouses.
c) Children conceived and born outside a valid marriage.
d) Children born under a valid marriage, but the parents later obtained a
legal separation.
Suggested Answer:
c) Children conceived and born outside a valid marriage.
32. An illegitimate child may use the surname of his father when his
filiation is established in any of the following instances, except:
a) Filiation has been recognized by the father through the record of
birth appearing in the civil register
b) Admission of filiation by the father in a public document.
c) Private handwritten instrument is made by the father
acknowledging his filiation.
d) Affidavit by the mother stating the name of his true father.
Suggested Answer:

d) Affidavit by the mother stating the name of his true father.

33. Under RA 8043, an adopter is required to be at least ____ years old
and ____ years older than the child to be adopted at the time of the
application unless the adopter is the parent by nature of the child.
a)
b)
c)
d)

30
27
50
18

and
and
and
and

15
16
10
15

Suggested Answer:
b) 27 and 16
34. Under RA 8043, a child qualified to be adopted is any person below
_____ years old.
a)
b)
c)
d)

18
21
15
16

Suggested Answer:
c) 15
35. Which of the following DOES NOT result in permanent termination
of parental authority?
a)
b)
c)
d)

Death of the parents.

Death of the child.
Emancipation of the child.
Conviction of the parents of a crime which carries with it the
penalty of civil interdiction.

Suggested Answer:
d) Conviction of the parents of a crime which carries with it the
penalty of civil interdiction.
36. The court, in an action filed for the purpose, may suspend parental
authority if the parent or the person exercising parental authority
commits any of the following acts, except:

a) Treats the child with excessive harshness or cruelty.

b) Gives the child corrupting orders, counsel or example.
c) Compels the child to take up a course in college against his/her
will.
d) Subjects the child or allows him to be subjected to acts of
lasciviousness.
Suggested Answer:
c) Compels the child to take up a course in college against
his/her will.
37. Which of the following statements is wrong?
a) The possessor in bad faith shall reimburse the fruits received and
those which the legitimate possessor could have received.
b) The possessor in bad faith has right of reimbursement for
necessary expenses and those for the production, gathering and
preservation of the fruits.
c) The possessor in bad faith is not entitled to a refund of
ornamental expenses.
d) The possessor in bad faith is entitled to a refund of useful
expenses.
Suggested Answer:
d) The possessor in bad faith is entitled to a refund of useful
expenses.

38. Which phrase most accurately completes the statement The expenses
incurred in improvements for the luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to
thew possessor in bad faith:
a) but he may remove the objects for which such expenses
have been incurred, provided that the thing suffers no injury
thereby, and that the lawful possessor does not prefer to
retain them.
b) and he may not remove the objects for which such expenses have
been incurred.
c) and he may not remove the objects for which such expenses have
been incurred, unless he pays the value they may have at the time he
entered into possession.

d) but he may remove the objects for which such expenses have been
incurred.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Legal Basis is Art. 447 (not sure)
Article 447. The owner of the land who makes thereon, personally or through
another, plantings, constructions or works with the materials of another, shall pay
their value; and, if he acted in bad faith, he shall also be obliged to the
reparation of damages. The owner of the materials shall have the right to
remove them only in case he can do so without injury to the work
constructed, or without the plantings, constructions or works being
destroyed. However, if the landowner acted in bad faith, the owner of the
materials may remove them in any event, with a right to be indemnified for
damages. (360a)
39. The following are the limitations on the right of ownership imposed by the owner
himself, except:
a) Will/Succession
b) Mortgage
c) Pledge
d) Lease
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. I have no legal basis bsta ky how can you limit owner if dead na? So
that is my answer. Paxnxahi. :)
40. A plenary action for the recovery of the possession of real estate, upon mere
allegation and proof of a better right thereto, and without allegation of proof of title.
This action can only be brought after the expiration of one (1) year. What action is
being referred to?
a) Accion publiciana
b) Accion reinvindicatoria
c) Accion interdictal
d) Quieting of Title
A. Accion publiciana is a plenary action for recovery of possession in an ordinary
civil proceeding, in order to determine the better and legal right to possess,
independently of title.
41. Action to recover real property based on ownership. Here, the object is the
recovery of the dominion over the property as owner. What action is being referred
to?
a) Accion publiciana
b) Accion reinvindicatoria
c) Accion interdictal

d) Quieting of Title
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Accion reivindicatoria or accion de reivindicacion is thus an action
whereby plaintiff alleges ownership over a parcel of land and seeks
recovery of its full possession.
42. A summary action to recover physical or material possession only and must be
brought within one (1) year from the time the cause of action arises. What action is
being referred to?
a) Accion publiciana
b) Accion reinvindicatoria
c) Accion interdictal
d) Quieting of Title
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Accion interdictal, or an ejectment proceeding which may be either that
for forcible entry (detentacion) or unlawful detainer (desahucio), which is
a summary action for recovery of physical possession where the
dispossession has not lasted for more than one year, and should be
brought in the proper inferior court.
43. The following things are property of public dominion, except:
a) ports and bridges constructed by the State.
b) vehicles and weapons of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
c) rivers.
d) lands reclaimed by the state from the sea.
No answer. Nearest is b) vehicles and weapons of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines but dli jpon because these are used for government services.
44. Which of the following statements is wrong?
a) patrimonial property of the state, when no longer intended
for public use or for public service, shall become property of
public dominion.
b) all property of the State, which is not of public dominion, is
patrimonial property.
c) The property of provinces, cities and municipalities is divided into
property for public use and patrimonial property.
d) Property is either of public dominion or of private ownership.

45. The following cannot ask for the reduction of inofficious donation, except:

C) compulsory heirs of the donor. Art. 752. The provisions of Article 750
notwithstanding, no person may give or receive, by way of donation,
more than he may give or receive by will.The donation shall be
inofficious in all that it may exceed this limitation.

46. Donation is perfected from the moment - C) the donor knows of the
donee's acceptance even if the latter has not received the copy of the
deed of donation.Art. 734. The donation is perfected from the
moment the donor knows of the acceptance by the donee.
47. The following are the elements of an obligations, except: D)
consideration. The elements of obligation are: active subject,
passive subject, prestation, and vinculum juris.
48. It is a conduct that may consist of giving, doing, or not doing
something.
C) Prestation
49. It is a juridical relations arising from lawful, voluntary and unilateral
acts based on the principle that no one should unjustly enrich himself
at the expense of another. A) quasi-contract.Art. 2142. Certain
lawful, voluntary and unilateral acts give rise to the juridical
relation of quasi-contract to the end that no one shall be
unjustly enriched or benefited at the expense of another.
50. The following are the elements of quasi-delict, except:
D) pre-existing contract.Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission
causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is
obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence,
if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the
parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the
provisions of this Chapter.
51. A debtor is liable for damages in case of delay if he is guilty of any
of the following, except:
B) mistake.Art. 1170. Those who in the performance of their
obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, and those
who in any manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for
damages.

52. This term refers to a delay on the part of both the debtor and
creditor in reciprocal obligations.
a) Mora accipiendi
b) Mora solvendi
c) Compensation morae
d) Solution indibiti
Legal basis: (Article 1169) Compensation morae is the default
on the part of both debtor/obligor and the creditor/obligee
which arises in reciprocal obligations.
53. The following are the requisites of mora solvendi, except:
a) Obligation pertains to the debtor and is determinate, due,
demandable, and liquidated.
b) Obligation was performed on its maturity date.
c) There is judicial or extrajudicial demand by the creditor.
d) Failure of the debtor to comply with such demand.
Legal basis: (Article 1169) Before the debtor or obligor can be
considered in delay, the following requirements must be shown
(a) the obligation is positive to give or do; (b) it is
demandable and liquidated; (c) the obligor delays for reasons
imputable to him; and there must be demand whether judicial
or extrajudicial.
54. It is an international evasion of the faithful performance of the
obligation.
a) Negligence
b) Fraud
c) Delay
d) Mistake
Legal Basis: (Article 1170) Fraud is the deliberate and
intentional evasion of the normal fulfilment of the obligation.
55. The following are the requisites of fortuitous event, except:
a) Cause is independent of the will of the debtor.
b) The event is unforeseeable/unavoidable.
c) Occurrence renders it absolutely impossible for the debtor to
fulfill his obligation in a normal manner; impossibility must
be absolute not partial, otherwise not force majeure.
d) Debtor contributed to the aggravation of the injury to the
creditor.
Legal basis: Article 1174
56. A debtor may still be held liable for loss or damages even if it was
caused by a fortuitous event in any of the following instances, except:
a) The debtor is guilty of dolo, malice or bad faith, has promised
the same thing to two or more persons who do not have the
same interest.

b) The debtor contributed to the loss.

c) The thing to be delivered is generic.
d) The creditor is guilty of fraud, negligence or delay or if he
contravened the tenor of the obligation.
Legal basis: Article 1262
57. Buko, Fermin and Toti bound themselves solidarily to pay Ayee the
amount of P 5,000.00. Suppose Buko paid the obligation, what is his
right as against his co-debtors?
a) Buko can ask for reimbursement from Fermin and Toti.
b) Buko can sue Fermin and Toti for damages.
c) Buko can sue for rescission.
d) Buko can claim a refund from Ayee.
Legal basis: Paragraph 2, Article 1217
58. Buko, Fermin and Toti bound themselves solidarily to pay Ayee the
sum of P 10,000.00. When the obligation became due and
demandable, Ayee sued Buko for the payment of the P 10,000.00. Buko
moved to dismiss on the ground that there was failure to implead
Fermin and Toti who are indispensable parties. Will the motion to
dismiss prosper? Why?
a) Yes, because Fermin and Toti should have been impleaded as
their obligation is solidary.
b) No, because the creditor may proceed against any one of the
solidary debtors or some or all of them simultaneously.
c) No, because a motion to dismiss is a prohibited pleading.
d) Yes, because Fermin and Toti should also pay their share of the
obligation.
Legal basis: Article 1216
59. Buko, Fermin and Toti are solidarily debtors of Ayee. Twelve (12) years
after the obligation became due and demandable, Buko paid Ayee and later
on asked for reimbursement of Fermins and Totis shares. Is Buko correct?
Why?
a) No, because the obligation has already prescribed.
b) Yes, because the obligation is solidary.
c) No, because in solidary obligation any one of the solidary debtors
can pay the entire debt.
d) Yes, because Fermin and Toti will be unduly enriched at the expense
of Buko.

Legal Basis: Art 1218, New Civil Code

60. Buko, Fermin and Toti are solidary debtors under a loan obligation
of P 300,000.00 which has fallen due. The creditor has, however, condoned
Fermins entire share in the debt. Since Toti has become insolvent, the
creditor makes a demand on Buko to pay the debt. How much, if any, may
Buko be compelled to pay?
a) P 200.000.00
b) P 300,000.00
c) P 100,000.00
d) P 150,000.00
Legal Basis: Art 1215 par. 1, New Civil Code

61. Dina bought a car from Jai and delivered a check in payment of the same.
Has Dina paid the obligation? Why?
a) No, not yet. The delivery of promissory notes payable to
order, or bills of exchange or other mercantile documents shall
produce the effect of payment only when they have been
cashed, or when through the fault of the creditor they have
been impaired.
b) Yes, because a check is a valid legal tender of payment.
c) It depends. If the check is a managers check or cashiers check it
will produce the effect of payment. If its an ordinary check, no
payment.
d) Yes, because a check is as good as cash.
Legal Basis: Art 1249 par. 2, New Civil Code

62. The following are the requisites of legal compensation, except:

a) That each of the obligors is bound principally and that he be the

same time a principal creditor of the other.
b) That both debts consist in a sum of money, or if the things due are
consumable, they be the same kind, and also of the same quality if the
latter has been stated.
c) That the two (2) debts are not yet due.
d) That they be liquidated and demandable.
Legal Basis: Art 1279, New Civil Code

63. Which of the following statements is correct?

a) All contracts are perfected by mere consent.
b) All contracts are perfected by delivery of the object.
c) All contracts are required to be in writing.
d) All contracts are required to have a valid consideration.
Legal Basis: Art 1318, New Civil Code

64. It is a principle which holds that parties are bound not only by what has
been expressly provided for in the contract but also to the natural
consequences that flow out of such agreement.
a) Obligatory force of contracts
b) Mutuality of contracts
c) Autonomy of contracts
d) Relativity of contracts
Legal Basis: Art 1308, New Civil Code
65. It is a principle which holds that contracts must be binding to both parties
and its validity and effectivity can never be left to the will of one of the

parties.
a) Obligatory force of contracts
b) Mutuality of contracts
c) Autonomy of contracts
d) Relativity of contracts
Legal Basis: Art 1308, New Civil Code

66. It refers to the rule that a contract is binding not only between
parties but extends to the heirs, successors in interest, and assignees of the
parties, provided that the contract involved transmissible rights by their
nature, or by stipulation or by law.
a) Obligatory force of contracts
b) Mutuality of contracts
c) Autonomy of contracts
d) Relativity of contracts

67. It is rule which holds that the freedom of the parties to contract includes
the freedom to stipulate, provided the stipulations are not contrary to law,
morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
a) Obligatory force of contracts
b) Mutuality of contracts
c) Autonomy of contracts
d) Relativity of contracts

68. The following are the ways by which innominate contracts are

regulated, except:
a) By the stipulation of the parties.
b) By the general principles of quasi-contracts and delicts
c) By the rules governing the most analogous nominate contracts.
d) By the customs of the place.
Basis: Innominate contracts have been elevated to a codal provision in the
New Civil Code by providing under Article 1307 that such contracts shall be
regulated by the stipulations of the parties, by the general provisions or
principles of obligations and contracts, by the rules governing the most
analogous nominate contracts, and by the customs of the people. The
rationale of this article was stated in the 1903 case of Perez vs. Pomar (2 Phil.
682).
Source: RESEARCH and SERVICES REALTY, INC., petitioner, vs. COURT OF
APPEALS and MANUEL S. FONACIER, JR., respondents., G.R. No. 124074
January 27, 1997

69. An offer becomes ineffective on any of the following grounds, except:

a) Death, civil interdiction, insanity/insolvency of either party before
acceptance is conveyed.
b) Acceptance of the offer by the offeree.
c) Qualified/conditional acceptance of the offer, which becomes
counter-offer.
d) Subject matter becomes illegal/impossible before acceptance is
communicated.

70. Which of the following statements is correct?

a) Offers in interrelated contracts are perfected upon consent.
b) Offers in interrelated contracts require a single acceptance.

c) Business advertisements are definite offers that require specific

acceptance.
d) Advertisements for Bidders are only invitations to make proposals
and the advertiser is not bound to accept the highest/lowest bidder,
unless it appears otherwise.
Basis: ART. 1326. Advertisements for bidders are simply invitations to make
proposals, and the advertiser is not bound to accept the highest or lowest
bidder, unless the contrary appears.

71. The following are solemn contracts (Contracts which must appear in
writing), except:
a) Donations of real
exceeds P 5,000.00.

estate

or

of

movables

if

the

value

b) Stipulation to pay interest in loans.

c) Sale of land through an agent (authority must be in writing).
d) Construction contract of a building.

72. The following are rescissible contracts, except:

a) Entered into by guardian whenever ward suffers damage more than
of value of property.
b) Agreed upon in representation of absentees, if absentee suffers
lesion by more than of value of property.
c) Contracts where fraud is committed on creditor (accion pauliana).
d) Contracts entered into by minors.

73. The following are the requisites before a contract entered into in
fraud of creditors may be rescinded, except:
d) The object of the contract must be legally in the possession of a 3rd

person in good faith.

(The action to rescind contracts in fraud of creditors is known as accion
pauliana. For this action to prosper, the following requisites must be
present: (1) the plaintiff asking for rescission has a credit prior to the
alienation, although demandable later; (2) the debtor has made a
subsequent contract conveying a patrimonial benefit to a third person;
(3) the creditor has no other legal remedy to satisfy his claim; (4) the
act being impugned is fraudulent; (5) the third person who received
the property conveyed, if it is by onerous title, has been an accomplice
in the fraud. Siguan vs. Lim G.R. No. 134685. November 19, 1999)
74. The following are the characteristics of a voidable contract, except:
d) Can be assailed only by either party.
(Art. 1390. The following contracts are voidable or annullable, even
though there may have been no damage to the contracting parties:
(1) Those where one of the parties is incapable of giving consent to a
contract;
(2) Those where the consent is vitiated by mistake, violence,
intimidation, undue influence or fraud.)
75. The following are void contracts, except:
d) Pacto de retro
Pactum commisorium - Art. 2088. The creditor cannot appropriate the
things given by way of pledge or mortgage, or dispose of them. Any
stipulation to the contrary is null and void
Pact de non alienando - Art. 2130. A stipulation forbidding the owner
from alienating the immovable mortgaged shall be void.
Pactum leonine - Art. 1799. A stipulation which excludes one or more
partners from any share in the profits or losses is void.
Pacto de retro - Art. 1601. Conventional redemption shall take place
when the vendor reserves the right to repurchase the thing sold, with
the obligation to comply with the provisions of Article 1616 and other
stipulations which may have been agreed upon.
76. The borrower in a contract of loan or mutuum must pay interest to
the lender.
a) If there is an agreement in writing to the effect.
Art. 1956. No interest shall be due unless it has been expressly
stipulated in writing.

77. The liability of the school, its administrators and teachers, or the
individual, entity or institution engaged in child care over the minor
child or damage caused by the acts or omissions of the unemancipated
minor while under their supervision, instruction or custody shall be:
b) Principal and solidary
Art. 218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or the individual,
entity or institution engaged in child are shall have special parental
authority and responsibility over the minor child while under their
supervision, instruction or custody.
Authority and responsibility shall apply to all authorized activities
whether inside or outside the premises of the school, entity or
institution.
Art. 219. Those given the authority and responsibility under the
preceding Article shall be principally and solidarily liable for damages
caused by the acts or omissions of the unemancipated minor. The
parents, judicial guardians or the persons exercising substitute
parental authority over said minor shall be subsidiarily liable.
The respective liabilities of those referred to in the preceding
paragraph shall not apply if it is proved that they exercised the proper
diligence required under the particular circumstances.
78. The creditor has the right to the fruits of the thing from the time:
b) the obligation to deliver the things arises.
Art. 1164. The creditor has a right to the fruits of the thing from the
time the obligation to deliver it arises. However, he shall acquire no
real right over it until the same has been delivered to him.
79. If one of the parties to the contract is without juridical capacity, the
contract is:
c) void
Art. 37. Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of legal
relations, is inherent in every natural person and is lost only through
death. Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts with legal effect,
is acquired and may be lost.
80. When both parties to the contract are minors, the contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable

81. When the consent of one of the parties was vitiated, the contract
is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
82. An obligation which is based on equity and natural law is known as:
a) pure
b) quasi-contract
c) civil
d) natural
83. Consent was given by one in representation of another but without
authority. The contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
84. Michael Fermin, without the authority of Pascual Lacas, owner of a
car, sold the same car in the name of Mr. Lacas to Atty. Buko. The
contract between Atty. Buko and Mr. Lacas is --a) void because of the absence of consent from the owner, Mr.
Lacas.
b) valid because all of the essential requisites of a contract are
present.
c) unenforceable because Michael Fermin had no authority but
he sold the car in the name of Mr. Lacas, the owner.
d) rescissible because the contract caused lesion to Atty. Buko.
85. Which of the following contracts is void?
a) An oral sale of a parcel of land.
b) A sale of land by an agent in a public instrument where his
authority from the principal is oral.
c) A donation of a wrist watch worth P 4,500.00.
d) A relatively simulated contract.
86. Which of the following expresses a correct principle of law? Choose
the best answer.
a) Failure to disclose facts when there is a duty to reveal them,
does not constitute fraud.
b) Violence or intimidation does not render a contract annullable
if employed not by a contracting party but by a third person.
c) A threat to enforce ones claim through competent authority, if
the claim is legal or just, does not vitiate consent.
d) Absolute simulation of a contract always results in a void
contract.
SUGGESTED ANSWERS:
80. d (art 1408 par.3)
81. a (art 1390 par.2)

82.
83.
84.
85.
86.

d (art 1423)
d (art 1408 par.1)
c (art 1408 par.1)
b (art 1409)
d (art 1346)

87.Aligada orally offered to sell his two-hectare rice land to Balane

for P 10Million. The offer was orally accepted. By agreement, the land
was to be delivered (through execution of a notarized Deed of Sale)
and the price was to be paid exactly one-month from their oral
agreement. Which statement is most accurate?\
a) If Aligada refuses to deliver the land on the agreed date
despite payment by Balane, the latter may not successfully sue
Aligada because the contract is oral.
b) If Aligada refused to deliver the land, Balane may successfully
sue for fulfillment of the obligation even if he has not tendered
payment of the purchase price.
c) The contract between the parties is rescissible.
d) The contract between the parties is subject to
ratification by the parties.
LEGAL BASIS
CHAPTER 8 Unenforceable Contracts (n)
NCC Article 1403. The following contracts are unenforceable, unless
they are ratified:
XXX
(2) Those that do not comply with the Statute of Frauds as set forth in
this number. In the following cases an agreement hereafter made
shall be unenforceable by action, unless the same, or some note
or memorandum, thereof, be in writing, and subscribed by the party
charged, or by his agent; evidence, therefore, of the agreement cannot
be received without the writing, or a secondary evidence of its
contents:
XXX
(e) An agreement for the leasing for a longer period than
one year, or for the sale of real propertyor of an interest
therein;
Article 1406.When a contract is enforceable under the Statute of
Frauds, and a public document is necessary for its registration in the
Registry of Deeds, the parties may avail themselves of the right under
Article 1357.
CHAPTER 3 Form of Contracts

Article 1357.If the law requires a document or other special

form, as in the acts and contracts enumerated in the following article,
the contracting parties may compel each other to observe that
form, once the contract has been perfected. This right may be
exercised simultaneously with the action upon the contract. (1279a)
88. Which of the following statements is wrong?
a) Creditors are protected in cases of contracts intended to
defraud them.
b) Contracts take effect only between the parties, their assign
and heirs, except in case where the rights and obligations arising
from the contract are not transmissible by their nature, or by
stipulation or by provision of law.
c) If a contract should contain some stipulation in favor of a third
person, he may demand its fulfillment provided he
communicated his acceptance to the obligor before its
revocation.
d) In contracts creating real rights, third persons who
come into possession of the object of the contract are not
bound thereby.
LEGAL BASIS
NCC Article 1312. In contracts creating real rights, third
persons who come into possession of the object of the contract are
bound thereby, subject to the provisions of the Mortgage Law and
the Land Registration Laws. (n)

89. Which phrase most accurately completes the statement Any third
person who induces another to violate his contract:
a) shall be liable for damages only if he is a party to the same
contract.
b) shall be liable for damages to the other contracting
party.
c) shall not be liable for damages to the other contracting party.
d) shall not be liable for damages if the parties are in pari delicto.
LEGAL BASIS

NCC Article 1314. Any third person who induces another to violate
his contract shall be liable for damages to the other contracting
party. (n)

90. The requisites of succession are as follows, except:

a) Death of decedent

b) Transmissible estate
c) Existence and capacity of successor, designated by decedent
or law
d) Payment of Taxes
LEGAL BASIS
a) Death of decedent
NCC Article 774. Succession is a mode of acquisition by
virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the
extent of the value of the inheritance, of a person are
transmitted through his death to another or others either by
his will or by operation of law. (n)
b) Transmissible estate

NCC Article 776. The inheritance (Right to inherit as explained

below.) includes all the property, rights and obligations of a
person which are not extinguished by his death. (659)

c) Existence and capacity of successor, designated by decedent or law

NCC Article 842. One who has no compulsory heirs may dispose by will
of all his estate or any part of it in favor of any person having
capacity to succeed.

One who has compulsory heirs may dispose of his estate

provided he does not contravene the provisions of this Code
with regard to the legitime of said heirs. (763a)

91. The characteristics of succession are as follows, except:

a) It is a legal contract.
b) Only property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value
of the inheritance are transmitted.
c) The transmission takes place only at the time of death.
d) The transmission takes place either by will or by operation of
law.
LEGAL BASIS
NCC Article 774. Succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue
of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value
of the inheritance, of a person are transmitted through his death to
another or others either by his will or by operation of law. (n)
See Paras on Succession 2008 Ed. pg. 3
(2) Important Elements of the Definition
a.) mode of acquisition (or ownership)

b.) transfer ofproperty rights and obligations to the extent

of the value of the inheritance of a person (called grantor or
transferor, decedent, testator, or intestate)
c.) transmission thru death (not during life)
d.) transmission to another (called grantee, or transferee, heir,
legatee, or devissee)
e.) d.)by will or by operation of law (testamentary or legal
succession)
92. The following rights are extinguished by death, except:
a) Legal support
b) Parental authority
c) Right to inherit
d) Agency
LEGAL BASIS

NCC Article 776. The inheritance (Right to inherit as explained

below.) includes all the property, rights and obligations of a person which
are not extinguished by his death. (659)

See Paras on Succession 2008 Ed. pg. 4

1) Inheritance Distinguished From Succession
Inheritance is the property or right acquired (Right to
Inherit); succession is the manner by virtue of which the
property or right is acquired.
93. The attestation clause contains the following, except:
a) the number of pages used;
b) that the testator signed or caused another to sign the will and
every page thereof in the presence of the instrumental
witnesses;
c) notary public;
d) the instrumental witnesses witnessed and signed the will and
all the pages thereof in the presence of the testator and one
another.
LEAGAL BASIS

NCC Article 805. Every will, other than a holographic will, must be
subscribed at the end thereof by the testator himself or by the testator's
name written by some other person in his presence, and by his express
direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in
the presence of the testator and of one another.
The testator or the person requested by him to write his name and the
instrumental witnesses of the will, shall also sign, as aforesaid, each and every
page thereof, except the last, on the left margin, and all the pages shall be

numbered correlatively in letters placed on the upper part of each page.

The attestation shall state (a)the number of pages used upon which the will is
written, and the fact that (b)the testator signed the will and every page
thereof, or caused some other person to write his name, under his express
direction, in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, and that (c) the
latter witnessed and signed the will and all the pages thereof in the
presence of the testator and of one another.

If the attestation clause is in a language not known to the

witnesses, it shall be interpreted to them. (n)
94. The following are the formalities required in the execution of
holographic will, except:
a) Entirely written;
b) Dated;
c) Signed by testator himself
d) Notarized by a notary public.
ANSWER: D
Art. 805. Every will, other than a holographic will, must be subscribed
at the end thereof by the testator himself or by the testator's name
written by some other person in his presence, and by his express
direction, and attested and subscribed by three or more credible
witnesses in the presence of the testator and of one another.
95. The following are the grounds for disallowance of wills, except:
a) The formalities required by law have not been complied with.
b) The testator was insane or mentally incapable of making will.
c) The will was executed through force or under duress, or influence of
fear or threats.
d) The will contains an attestation clause.
ANSWER: D
96. It is the omission in the testators will of one, some or all of the
compulsory heirs in direct line, whether living at the time of execution
of the will or born after the death of the testator. What principle is
being referred to?
a) reserva troncal
b) preterition
c) fideicommissary
d) disposicion captatoria
ANSWER: B
Art. 854. The preterition or omission of one, some, or all of the
compulsory heirs in the direct line, whether living at the time of the
execution of the will or born after the death of the testator, shall annul
the institution of heir; but the devises and legacies shall be valid
insofar as they are not inofficious.

97. Any disposition made upon the condition that the heir shall make
some provision in his will in favor of the testator or of any other person
shall be void. Here, both the condition and the disposition are void.
What principle is being referred to?
a) reserva troncal
b) preterition
c) fideicommissary
d) disposicion captatoria
ANSWER: D
Art. 875. Any disposition made upon the condition that the heir shall
make some provision in his will in favor of the testator or of any other
person shall be void.
98. Which phrase most accurately completes the statement If at the
time the contract of sale is perfected, the thing which is the object of
the contract has been entirely lost:
a) the buyer bears the risk of loss.
b) the contract shall be without any effect.
c) the seller bears the risk of loss.
d) the buyer may withdraw from the contract.
ANSWER: B
Art. 1493. If at the time the contract of sale is perfected, the thing
which is the object of the contract has been entirely lost, the contract
shall be without any effect.
99. A contract granting a privilege to a person, for which he has paid a
consideration, which gives him the right to buy certain merchandise or
specified property, from another person, at anytime within the agreed
period, at a fixed price. What contract is being referred to?
a) Option Contract
b) Contract to Sell
c) Contract of Sale
d) Lease
ANSWER: A
100. Which of the following contracts of sale is void?
a) Sale of EGMs car by KRP, EGMs agent, whose authority is not
reduced into writing.
b) Sale of EGMs piece of land by KRP, EGMs agent, whose authority is
not reduced into writing.
c) Sale of EGMs car by KRP, a person stranger to EGM, without EGMs
consent or authority.
d) Sale of EGMs piece of land by KRP, a person stranger to EGM,
without EGMs consent or authority.
ANSWER: B
Art. 1874. When a sale of a piece of land or any interest therein is

through an agent, the authority of the latter shall be in writing;

otherwise, the sale shall be void.
I.
a) Roberto was in Nikko Hotel when he bumped into a friend who was
then on her way to a wedding reception being held in said hotel.
Roberto alleged that he was then invited by his friend to join her at
the wedding reception and carried the basket full of fruits which she
was bringing to the affair. At the reception, the wedding coordinator
of the hotel noticed him and asked him, allegedly in a loud voice, to
leave as he was not in the guest list. He retorted that he had been
invited to the affair by his friend, who however denied doing so.
Deeply embarrassed by the incident, Roberto then sued the hotel
for damages under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code. Will
Robertos action prosper? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
No. Robertos action will not prosper. From the facts given in the
problem, the wedding coordinator did not abuse her right when she
asked him to leave the wedding reception because he was not in the
guest list. Hotel Nikko could not be held liable for damages as its
liability springs from the liability of its employee (Nikko Hotel Manila
Garden v. Reyes, G.R. No. 154259, Feb 28, 2005).
b) Ricky donated P 1 Million to the unborn child of his pregnant
girlfriend, which she accepted. After six (6) months of pregnancy,
the fetus was born and baptized as Angela. However, Angela died
20 hours after birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million. Is Ricky
entitled to recover? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the P1,000,000.00. The NCC
considers afetus a person for purposes favorable to it provided it is
born later in accordance with the provision of the NCC. While the
donation is favorable to the fetus, the donation did not take effect
because the fetus was not born in accordance with the NCC.
To be considered born, the fetus that had an intrauterine life of less
than seven (7) months should live for 24 hours from its complete
delivery from the mothers womb. Since Angela had an intrauterine life
of less than seven (7) months but did not live for 24 hours, she was not

considered born and, therefore, did not become a person. Not being a
person, she has no juridical capacity to be a donee, hence, the
donation to her did not take effect. The donation not being effective,
the amount donated may be recovered. To retain it will be unjust
enrichment.
II.
a) Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue while Fortune Tobacco Corporation is an entity engaged in
the manufacture of different brands of cigarettes, among which are
"Champion," "Hope," and "More" cigarettes.
Fortune filed a complaint against Vinzons-Chato to recover damages
for the alleged violation of its constitutional rights arising from
Vinzons-Chatos issuance of Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 37934 (which re-classified Fortune cigarettes as locally manufactured
with foreign brands and thereby imposed higher taxes), which the
Supreme Court later declared invalid.
Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that she cannot be
held liable for damages for acts she performed while in the
discharge of her duties as BIR Commissioner. Is she correct?
Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is not liable for acts
performed in the discharge of his duties. The exceptions are when he
acted with malice, bad faith, or gross negligence in the performance of
his duty, or when his act is in violation of a Constitutional guaranteed
right and liberties of a person under Art. 32 of the NCC.
The public officer is not automatically considered to have violated
the rights or liberties of a person simply because the rule the public
officer issued was declared invalid by the court. The complainant must
still allege and prove the particular injury or prejudice he has suffered
from the violation of his constitutional right by the issuance of the
invalidated rule.
The problem does not state any fact from which any malice, bad
faith or gross negligence on the part of Vinzons-Chato may be inferred,
or the particular injury or prejudice the complainant may have suffered
as a result of the violation of his constitutional right. Hence, shecannot
be held liable.
The facts presented are similar to facts of the case of Vinzons-Chato

v. Fortune, G.R. No. 141309, Dec 23, 2008.

b) The petitioner filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage
based allegedly on the psychological incapacity of the respondent,
but the psychologist was not able to personally examine the
respondent and the psychological report was based only on the
narration of petitioner. Should the annulment be granted? Explain.
(5%)
Suggested Answer:
The annulment cannot be guaranteed solely on the basis of the
psychological report. For the report to prove the psychological
incapacity of the respondent, it is required that the psychologist should
personally examine the respondent and the psychological report
should be based on the psychologists independent assessment of the
facts as to whether or not the respondent is psychologically
incapacitated.
Since, the psychologist did not personally examine the respondent,
and his report is based solely on the story of the petitioner who has an
interest in the outcome of the petition, the marriage cannot be
annulled on the ground of respondents psychological incapacity ifthe
said report is the only evidence of respondents psychological
incapacity.
III.
a) Maria, wife of Pedro, withdrew P 5 Million from their conjugal funds.
With this money, she constructed a building on a lot which she
inherited from her father. Is the building conjugal or paraphernal?
Reasons. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
It depends. If the value of the building is more than the value of the
land, the building is conjugal and the land becomes conjugal property
under Art. 120 of the Family Code. This is a case of reverse accession,
where the building is considered as the principal and the land, the
accessory. If, on the other hand, the value of the land is more than the
value of the building, then the ordinary rule of accession applies where
the land is the principal and the building, the accessory. In such case,
the land remains paraphernal property and the building becomes
paraphernal property.
b) Cipriano and Lady Miros married each other. Lady Miros then left for

the US and there, she obtained American citizenship. Cipriano later

learned all about this including the fact that Lady Miros has divorced
him in America and that she had remarried there. He then filed a
petition for authority to remarry, invoking Par. 2, Art. 26 of the
Family Code. Is Cipriano capacitated to re-marry by virtue of the
divorce decree obtained by his Filipino spouse who was later
naturalized as an American citizen? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes, he is capacitated to remarry. While the second paragraph of Art
26 of the Family Code is applicable
only to a Filipino who married a foreigner at the time of marriage, the
Supreme Court ruled in the case of Republic v. Orbecido, G.R. No.
154380, 5 Oct, 2005, that the said provision equally applies to a
Filipino who married another Filipino at the time of the marriage, but
who was already a foreigner when the divorce was obtained.
IV.
a) After they got married, Nikki discovered that Christian was having
an affair with another woman. But Nikki decided to give it a try and
lived with him for two (2) years. After two (2) years, Nikki filed an
action for legal separation on the ground of Christians sexual
infidelity. Will the action prosper? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Although the action for legal separation has not yet prescribed, the
prescriptive period being 5 years, if Chriatians affair with another
woman was ended when Nikki decided to live with him again, Nikkis
action will not prosper on account of condonation. However, if such
affair is still continuing, Nikkis action would prosper because the
action will surely be within five (5) years from the commission of the
latest act of sexual infidelity. Every act of sexual liaison is a ground for
legal separation.
b) Honorato filed a petition to adopt his minor illegitimate child
Stephanie, alleging that Stephanies mother is Gemma Astorga
Garcia; that Stephanie has been using her mothers middle name
and surname; and that he is now a widower and qualified to be her
adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanies middle name be
changed from "Astorga" to "Garcia," which is her mothers surname
and that her surname "Garcia" be changed to "Catindig," which is
his surname. This the trial court denied. Was the trial court correct
in denying Hororatos request for Stephanies use of her mothers

surname as her middle name? Explain. (5%)

Suggested Answer:
No, the trial court was not correct. There is no law prohibiting an
illegitimate child adopted by his natural father to use as middle name
his mothers surname. The law is silent as to what middle name an
adoptee may use. In case of In re:Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga
Garcia, G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that
the adopted child may use the surname of the natural mother as his
middle name because there is no prohibition in the law against it.
Moreover, it will also be for the benefit of the adopted child who shall
preserve his lineage on his mothers side and reinforce his right to
inherit from his mother and her family. Lastly, it will make the adopted
child conform with the time-honored Filipino tradition of carrying the
mothers surname as the persons middle name.
V.
a) Spouses Primo and Monina Lim, childless, were entrusted with the
custody of two (2) minor children, the parents of whom were
unknown. Eager of having children of their own, the spouses made
it appear that they were the childrens parents by naming them
Michelle P. Lim and Michael Jude Lim. Subsequently, Monina married
Angel Olario after Primos death.
She decided to adopt the children by availing the amnesty given
under R.A. 8552 to those individuals who simulated the birth of a
child. She filed separate petitions for the adoption of Michelle, then
25 years old and Michael, 18. Both Michelle and Michael gave
consent to the adoption.
The trial court dismissed the petition and ruled that Monina should
have filed the petition jointly with her new husband. Monina, in a
Motion for Reconsideration argues that mere consent of her
husband would suffice and that joint adoption is not needed, for the
adoptees are already emancipated.
Is the trial court correct in dismissing the petitions for adoption?
Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes, the trial court was correct. At the time the petitions for
adoptions were filed, petitioner had already remarried. Under the law,
husband and wife shall adopt jointly, except in the cases enumerated

in the law. The adoption cases of Michelle and James do not fall in any
of the exceptions provided in the law where a spouse is permitted to
adopt alone. Hence, Monina should adopt jointly with her husband
Angel (Adoption of Michelle P. Lim, G.R. Nos. 168992-93, May 21,
2009).
b) Jambrich, an Austrian, fell in-love and lived together with Descallar
and bought their houses and lots at Agro-Macro Subdivision. In the
Contracts to Sell, Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as the
buyers. When the Deed of Absolute Sale was presented for
registration before the Register of Deeds, it was refused because
Jambrich was an alien and could not acquire alienable lands of the
public domain. After Jambrich and Descallar separated, Jambrich
purchased an engine and some accessories for his boat from
Borromeo. To pay for his debt, he sold his rights and interests in the
Agro-Macro properties to Borromeo.
Borromeo discovered that titles to the three (3) lots have been
transfereed in the name of Descallar. Who is the rightful owner of
the properties? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
It depends. On the assumption that the Family Code is the
applicable law, the ownership of the properties depends on whether or
not, Jambrich and Descallar are capacitated to marry each other during
their cohabitation, and whether or not both have contributed funds for
the acquisition of the properties.
If both of them are capacitated to marry each other, Art 147- coownership will apply to their property relations and the properties in
question are owned by them in equal shares even though all the funds
used in acquiring the properties came only from the salaries or wages,
or the income of Jambrich from his business or profession. In such
case, while Jambrich is disqualified to own any part of the properties,
his subsequent transfer of all his interest therein to Borromeo, a
Filipino, was valid as it removed the disqualification. In such case, the
properties are owned by Borromeo and Descallar in equal shares.
If, on the other hand, Jambrich and Descallar were not capacitated
to marryeach other Art. 148-co-ownership governs their property
relations. Under this regime, Jambrich and Descallar are co-owners of
the properties but only if both of them contributed in their acquisition.
If all the funds used in acquiring the properties in question came from
Jambrich, the entire property is his even though he is disqualified from
owning it. His subsequent transfer to Borromeo, however, is valid as it
removed the disqualification. In such case, all the properties are owned

by Borromeo. If, on the other hand Descallar contributed to their

acquisition, the properties are co-owned by Descallar and Borromeo in
proportion to the respective contributions of the Descallar and
Jambrich.
Note: The facts of the problem are not exactly the same as in the
case of Borromeo v. Descallar, G.R. NO. 159310, Feb 24, 2009, hence,
the difference in the resulting answer.
VI.
a) Siga-an granted a loan to Villanueva in the amount of P 540, 000.00.
Such agreement was not reduced to writing. Siga-an demanded
interest which was paid by Villanueva in cash and checks. The total
amount Villanueva paid accumulated to P 1, 200, 000.00. Upon
advice of her lawyer, Villanueva demanded for the return of the
excess amount of P 660, 000.00 which was ignored by Siga-an.
1. Is the payment of interest valid? Explain. (3%)
Suggested Answer:
No, Art. 1956, Civil Code, provides that no interest shall be due
unless it has been expressly stipulated in writing.
2. Is solution indebiti applicable? Explain. (2%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes, Solutio Indebiti is applicable because Villanueva Overpaid by
P600,000.00 representing interest payment which is not due. He can,
therefore, demand its return.
b) Eulalia was engaged in the business of buying and selling large
cattle. In order to secure the financial capital, sheadvanced for her
employees (biyaheros). She required them to surrender TCT of their
properties and to execute the corresponding Deeds of Sale in her
favor. Domeng Bandong was not required to post any security but
when Eulalia discovered that he incurred shortage in cattle
procurement operation, he was required to execute a Deed of Sale
over a parcel of land in favor of Eulalia. She sold the property to her
grandneice Jocelyn who thereafter instituted an action for ejectment
against the Spouses Bandong.
To assert their right, Spouses Bandong filed an action for annulment
of sale against Eulalia and Jocelyn alleging that there was no sale

intended but only equitable mortgage for the purpose of securing

the shortage incurred by Domeng in the amount of P 70, 000.00
while employed as "biyahero" by Eulalia. Was the Deed of Sale
between Domeng and Eulalia a contract of sale or an equitable
mortgage? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
The contract between Domeng Bandong and Eulalia was an
equitable mortgage rather than a contract of sale. The purported deed
of sale was actually intended to merely secure the payment of the
shortage incurred by Domeng in the conduct of the cattle-buying
operations. Under Art 1602, Civil Code,the contract shall be presumed
to be an equitable mortgage when it may be fairly inferred that the
real intention of the parties is simply to secure the payment of a debt
or the performance of any other obligation. The present transaction
was clearly intended to just secure the shortage incurred by Eulalia
because Bandung remained in possession of the property inspite of the
execution of the sale.
VII.
a) Natividads holographic will, which had only one (1) substantial
provision, as first written, named Rosa as her sole heir. However,
when Gregorio presented it for probate, it already contained an
alteration, naming Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole heir, but
without authentication by Natividads signature. Rosa opposes the
probate alleging such lack of proper authentication. She claims that
the unaltered form of the will should be given effect. Whose claim
should be granted? Explain. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
It depends. If the cancellation of Rosas name in the will was done
by the testator himself, Rosas claimed that the holographic will in its
original tenorshould be given effect must be denied. The said
cancellation has revoked the entire will as nothing remains of the will
after the name of Rosa was cancelled. Such cancellation is valid
revocation of the will and does not require authentication by the full
signature of the testator to be effective.
However, if the cancellation of Rosas name was not done by the
testator himself, such cancellation shall not be effective and the will in
its original tenor shall remain valid. The effectively of the holographic
will cannot be left to the mercy of unscrupulous third parties.

The writing of Gregorios name as sole heir was ineffective, even

though written by the testator himself, because such is an alteration
that requires authentication by the full signature of the testator to be
valid and effective. Not having an authenticated, the designation of
Gregorio as an heir was ineffective, (Kalaw v. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207,
Sept 28, 1984).
b) John Sagun and Maria Carla Camua, British citizens at birth,
acquired Philippine citizenship by naturalization after their marriage.
During their marriage, the couple acquired substantial landholdings
in London and in Makati. Maria begot three (3) children, Jorge,
Luisito, and Joshur. In one of their trips to London, the couple
executed a joint will appointing each other as their heirs and
providing that upon the death of the survivor between them, the
entire estate would go to Jorge and Luisito only but the two (2) could
not dispose of nor divide the London estate as long as they live.
John and Maria died tragically in the London subway terrorist attack
in 2005. Jorge and Luisito filed a petition for probate of their
parents will before a Makati Regional TrialCourt. Joshur vehemently
objected because he was preterited.
1. Should the will be admitted to probate? Explain. (2%)
Suggested Answer:
No, the will should not be admitted to probate. Since the couples
are both Filipino citizens, Art 818 and 819 of the NCC shall apply. Said
articles prohibits the execution of joint wills and make them void, even
though authorized of the country where they were executed.
2. Are the testamentary dispositions valid? Explain. (2%)
Suggested Answer:
Since the joint will is void, all the testamentary disposition written
therein are also void. However, if the will is valid, the institutions of the
heirs shall be annulled because Joshur was preterited. He was
preterited because he will receive nothing from the will, will receive
nothing in testacy, and the facts do not show that he received anything
as an advance on his inheritance. He was totally excluded from the
inheritance of his parents.
3. Is the testamentary prohibition against the division of the London
estate valid? Explain. (1%)
Suggested Answer:

Assuming the will of John and Maria was valid, the testamentary
prohibition on the division of the London estate shall be valid but only
for 20 years. Under Arts 1083 and 494 of the NCC, a testamentary
disposition of the testator cannot forbid the partition of all or part of
the estate for a period longer than twenty (20) years.
VIII.
a) Ricky and Arlene are married. They begot Franco during their
marriage. Franco had an illicit relationship with Audrey and out of
which, they begot Arnel. Frnaco predeceased Ricky, Arlene and
Arnel. Before Ricky died, he executed a will which when submitted
to probate was opposed by Arnel on the ground that he should be
given the share of his father, Franco. Is the opposition of Arnel
correct? Why? (5%)
Suggested Answer:
No, his opposition is not correct. Arnel cannot inherit from Ricky in
the representation of his father Franco. In representation, the
representative must not only be a legal heir of the person he is
representing, he must also be a legal heir of the decedent he seeks to
inherit from.
While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he is not a legal heir of Ricky
because underArt 992 of the NCC, an illegitimate child has no right to
inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his
father or mother. Arnel is disqualified to inherit from Ricky because
Arnel is an illegitimate child of Franco and Ricky is a legitimate relative
of Franco.
b) How can RJP distribute his estate by will, if his heirs are JCP, his wife;
HBR and RVC, his parents; and an illegitimate child, SGO?
Suggested Answer:
A testator may dispose of by will the free portion of his estate. Since
the legitime of JCP is 1/8 of the estate, SGO is of the estate and that
of HBR and RVC is of the hereditary estate under Art 889 of the NCC,
the remaining 1/8 of the estate is the free portion which the testator
may dispose of by will.
IX.
a) Does the right to request for the issuance of a writ of possession
over a foreclosed real property prescribe in five (5) years? (5%)

Suggested Answer:
Yes, it prescribes in five (5) years. If the real property mortgaged is
judicially foreclosed, the action for judicial foreclosure should be filed
within a period of ten (10) years. The request for issuance of a writ of
possession should be filed upon motion of the winning bidder within
five (5) years after the judgment of foreclosure. The writ of possession
is an order commanding the sheriff to place a person named therein in
possession of real property (BPI v. Icot. G.R. No. 168081, Oct 12, 2009).
b) A petition for declaration of nullity of a void marriage can only be
filed by either the husband or the wife? Do you agree? Explain your
answer. (5%)
Suggested Answer:
Yes, I agree. Under the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, a
direct action for declaration of nullity may only be filed by any of the
spouses.
Alternative Answer:
2011 BAR EXAM (MCQ)
(1)When does a declaration of absence of a missing person take effect?
(A) Immediately from the issuance of the declaration of absence.
(B) 3 months after the publication of the declaration of absence.
(C) 6 months after the publication of the declaration of
absence. (Art. 386, NCC)
(D) 15 days from the issuance of the declaration of absence.
(2) The authority that school administrators exercise over school
children under their supervision, instruction, or custody is called
(A) legal parental authority.
(B) substitute parental authority.
(C) ordinary parental authority.
(D) special parental authority. (Art. 218, FC)
(3) Can future inheritance be the subject of a contract of sale?
(A) No, since it will put the predecessor at the risk of harm from a
tempted buyer, contrary to public policy.
(B) Yes, since the death of the decedent is certain to occur.
(C) No, since the seller owns no inheritance while his
predecessor lives. (Art. 1347, NCC)

(D) Yes, but on the condition that the amount of the inheritance can
only be ascertained after the obligations of the estate have been paid.
(4) Upon the proposal of a third person, a new debtor substituted the
original debtor without the latters consent. The creditor accepted the
substitution. Later, however, the new debtor became insolvent and
defaulted in his obligation. What is the effect of the new debtors
default upon the original debtor?
(A) The original debtor is freed of liability since novation took
place and this relieved him of his obligation. (Art. 1293, NCC)
(B) The original debtor shall pay or perform the obligation with
recourse to the new debtor.
(C) The original debtor remains liable since he gave no consent to the
substitution.
(D) The original debtor shall pay or perform 50% of the obligation to
avoid unjust enrichment on his part.
(5) Lennie bought a business class ticket from Alta Airlines. As she
checked in, the manager downgraded her to economy on the ground
that a Congressman had to be accommodated in the business class.
Lennie suffered the discomfort and embarrassment of the downgrade.
She sued the airlines for quasi-delict but Alta Airlines countered that,
since her travel was governed by a contract between them, no quasidelict could arise. Is the airline correct?
(A) No, the breach of contract may in fact be tortious as when
it is tainted as in this case with arbitrariness, gross bad faith,
and malice. (Art. 2201 , NCC)
(B) No, denying Lennie the comfort and amenities of the business class
as provided in the ticket is a tortious act.
(C) Yes, since the facts show a breach of contract, not a quasi-delict.
(D) Yes, since quasi-delict presupposes the absence of a pre-existing
contractual relation between the parties.
(6) Which of the following is an indispensable requirement in an action
for "quieting of title" involving real property? The plaintiff must
(A) be in actual possession of the property.
(B) be the registered owner of the property.
(C) have legal or equitable title to the property.
Art. 477. The plaintiff must have legal or equitable title
to, or interest in the real property which is the subjectmatter of the action. He need not be in possession of

said property.
(D) be the beneficial owner of the property.
(7) X and Y were to marry in 3 months. Meantime, to express his
affection, X donated a house and lot to Y, which donation X wrote in a
letter to Y. Y wrote back, accepting the donation and took possession of
the property. Before the wedding, however, Y suddenly died of heart
attack. Can Ys heirs get the property?
(A) No, since the marriage did not take place.
(B) Yes, since all the requisites of a donation of an immovable are
present.
(C) No, since the donation and its acceptance are not in a public
instrument.
Art. 749. In order that the donation of an immovable may
be valid, it must be made in a public instrument,
specifying therein the property donated and the value of
the charges which the done must satisfy.
(D) Yes, since X freely donated the property to Y who became its
owner.
(8) Rene and Lily got married after a brief courtship. After one month,
Lily discovered that while Rene presented himself as a macho man he
was actually gay. He would not go to bed with her. He kept obscene
magazines of nude men and always sought the company of handsome
boys. What legal remedy does Lily have?
(A) She can file an action for annulment of marriage on ground of
fraud.
Art. 45 of the Family Code. A marriage, maybe annulled
for any of the following causes, existing at the time of
the marriage: (3) That the consent of either party was
obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full
knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely
cohabited with other as husband and wife.
Art. 46 further provides that any of the following
circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to in
number 3 of the preceding Article: Concealment of drug
addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or

lesbianism existing at the time of marriage.

(B) She can seek a declaration of nullity of the marriage based on
Renes psychological incapacity.
(C) She can go abroad and file for divorce in a country that can
grant it.
(D) She has none since she had the opportunity to examine the
goods and freely entered into the marriage.
(9) Lucio executed a simple deed of donation of P50 million on time
deposit with a bank in favor of A, B, C, D, and E, without indicating the
share of each donee. All the donees accepted the donation in writing.
A, one of the donees, died. Will B, C, D, and E get As share in the
money?
(A) Yes, accretion will automatically apply to the joint-donees in
equal shares.
(B) Yes, since the donors intention is to give the whole of P50
million to the jointdonees in equal shares.
(C) No, A"s share will revert to the donor because accretion
applies only if the joint-donees are spouses.
(D) No, As share goes to his heirs since the donation did not
provide for reversion to donor.
Art. 753. When a donation is made to several persons
jointly, it is understood to be in equal shares, and there
shall be no right of accretion among them, unless the
donor has otherwise provided.
Art. 757. Reversion may be validly established in favor of
only the donor for any case and circumstances, but not in
favor of other persons unless they are all living at the
time of donation.
Any reversion stipulated by the donor in favor of a third
person in violation of what is provided in the preceding
paragraph shall be void, but shall not nullify the
donation.
(10) Raul, Ester, and Rufus inherited a 10-hectare land from their
father. Before the land could be partitioned, however, Raul sold his

hereditary right to Raffy, a stranger to the family, for P5 million. Do

Ester and Rufus have a remedy for keeping the land within their
family?
(A) Yes, they may be subrogated to Raffys right by reimbursing
to him within the required time what he paid Raul.
Art. 1088. Should any of the heirs sell his hereditary
rights before partition, any or all of the co-heirs may be
subrogated to the rights of the purchaser by reimbursing
him for the price of the sale, provided they do so within
the period on one month from the time they were notified
in writing of the sale by the vendor.
(B) Yes, they may be subrogated to Raffys right provided they
buy him out before he registers the sale.
(C) No, they can be subrogated to Raffys right only with his
conformity.
(D) No, since there was no impediment to Raul selling his
inheritance to a stranger.

(11) When one exercises a right recognized by law, knowing that he thereby
causes an injustice to another, the latter is entitled to recover damages. This
is known as the principle of
(A) res ipsa loquitur.
(B) damnum absque injuria.
(C) vicarious liability.
(D) abuse of rights. Art 19 and 21 New Civil Coe RA 386
(12) Which of the following is NOT a basis for rendering a disinheritance
defective or imperfect?
(A) Its cause comes from the guilt of a spouse in a legal separation
case, the innocent-spouse having died. Art 63 par 4 Family Code
(B) The truth of its cause is denied and not sufficiently proved by

evidence.
(C) Its cause is not authorized by the law.
(D) Its cause is not specified.
(13) Manuel came to Manila and married Marianne. Unknown to Marianne,
Manuel had been previously convicted in Palawan of theft and served time for
it. After Marianne learned of his previous conviction, she stopped living with
him. Can Marianne seek the annulment of the marriage based on Manuels
nondisclosure of his previous crime?
(A) No, since the assumption is that marriage forgives all past wrongs.
(B) Yes, since the non-disclosure of that crime is the equivalent
of fraud, which is a ground for annulment. Art 46 par 1 Family
Code
(C) No, in case of doubt, the law must be construed to preserve the
institution of marriage.
(D) No, since Manuel already served the penalty for his crime.
(14) Arthur and Helen, both Filipinos, got married and had 2 children. Arthur
later worked in Rome where he acquired Italian citizenship. He got a divorce
from Helen in Rome but, on returning to the Philippines, he realized his
mistake, asked forgiveness of his wife, and resumed living with her. They had
2 more children. What is the status of their 4 children?
(A) The children born before the divorce are legitimate but
those born after it are not since Arthur got the divorce when
he had ceased to be a Filipino. Art 54 Family Code
(B) The divorce rendered illegitimate the children born before it since
the marriage that begot them had been nullified.
(C) The children born before and after the divorce are all legitimate
since Philippine law does not recognize divorce.
(D) All the children are legitimate since they were born of the same
father and mother.
(15) Who can make a donation?

(A) All persons who can enter into contracts and dispose of
their property. Art 735 NCC
(B) All persons who are of legal age and suffer from no civil
interdiction.
(C) All persons who can make a last will and testament.
(D) All persons, whether natural or artificial, who own property.

(16) The liability of the partners, including industrial partners for

partnership contracts entered into in its name and for its account,
when all partnership assets have been exhausted is
(A) Pro-rata.
(B) Joint.
(C) Solidary.
(D) Voluntary.
LEGAL BASIS:
ARTICLE 1816. All partners, including industrial ones, shall be liable pro
rata with all their property and after all the partnership assets have
been exhausted, for the contracts which may be entered into in the
name and for the account of the partnership, under its signature and
by a person authorized to act for the partnership. However, any
partner may enter into a separate obligation to perform a partnership
contract.
(17) When can a missing person who left someone to administer his
property be declared an absentee by the court? When he has been
missing for
(A) 2 years from the receipt of the last news about him.
(B) 7 years from the receipt of the last news about him.
(C) 10 years from the receipt of the last news about him.
(D) 5 years from the receipt of the last news about him.
LEGAL BASIS:
Article 384. Two years having elapsed without any news about the
absentee or since the receipt of the last news, and five years in
case the absentee has left a person in charge of the administration of
his property, his absence may be declared.
(18) Which of the following claims against the debtor enjoys preference
over the others with respect to his specific immovable property and

real rights?
(A) Unpaid price of real property sold, upon the immovable property.
(B) Mortgage credits recorded in the registry of property, upon the
mortgaged real estate.
(C) Taxes due, upon the land or building.
(D) Expenses for the preservation and improvement of property, when
the law authorizes reimbursement, upon the preserved or improved
immovable.
LEGAL BASIS:
Article 2242. With reference to specific immovable property and real
rights of the debtor, the following claims, mortgages and liens
shall be preferred, and shall constitute an encumbrance on the
immovable or real right:
(1) Taxes due upon the land or building;
(2) For the unpaid price of real property sold, upon the
immovable sold;
(3) Claims of laborers, masons, mechanics and other workmen,
as well as of architects, engineers and contractors,
engaged in the construction, reconstruction or repair of
buildings, canals or other works, upon said buildings, canals or
other works;
(4) Claims of furnishers of materials used in the construction,
reconstruction, or repair of buildings, canals or other
works, upon said buildings, canals or other works;
(5) Mortgage credits recorded in the Registry of Property, upon
the real estate mortgaged;
(6) Expenses for the preservation or improvement of real
property when the law authorizes reimbursement, upon the
immovable preserved or improved;
(7) Credits annotated in the Registry of Property, in virtue of a
judicial order, by attachments or executions, upon the
property affected, and only as to later credits;
(8) Claims of co-heirs for warranty in the partition of an
immovable among them, upon the real property thus divided;
(9) Claims of donors or real property for pecuniary charges or
other conditions imposed upon the donee, upon the
immovable donated;
(10) Credits of insurers, upon the property insured, for the
insurance premium for two years.
(19) When bilateral contracts are vitiated with vices of consent, they
are rendered
(A) rescissible.
(B) void.
(C) unenforceable.
(D) voidable.

LEGAL BASIS:
Article 1390. The following contracts are voidable or annullable, even
though there may have been no damage to the contracting parties:
(1) Those where one of the parties is incapable of giving consent to a
contract;
(2) Those where the consent is vitiated by mistake, violence,
intimidation, undue influence or fraud.
These contracts are binding, unless they are annulled by a proper
action in court. They are susceptible of ratification.
(20) An agent, authorized by a special power of attorney to sell a land
belonging to the principal succeeded in selling the same to a buyer
according to the instructions given the agent. The agent executed the
deed of absolute sale on behalf of his principal two days after the
principal died, an event that neither the agent nor the buyer knew at
the time of the sale. What is the standing of the sale?
(A) Voidable.
(B) Valid.
(C) Void.
(D) Unenforceable.
LEGAL BASIS:
Article 1874. When a sale of a piece of land or any interest therein is
through an agent, the authority of the latter shall be in writing;
otherwise, the sale shall be void.
Article 1878. Special powers of attorney are necessary in the following
cases:
(1) To make such payments as are not usually considered as acts
of administration;
(2) To effect novations which put an end to obligations already in
existence at the time the agency was constituted;
(3) To compromise, to submit questions to arbitration, to
renounce the right to appeal from a judgment, to waive
objections to the venue of an action or to abandon a prescription
already acquired;
(4) To waive any obligation gratuitously;
(5) To enter into any contract by which the ownership of an
immovable is transmitted or acquired either gratuitously or
for a valuable consideration;
(6) To make gifts, except customary ones for charity or those
made to employees in the business managed by the
agent;
(7) To loan or borrow money, unless the latter act be urgent and
indispensable for the preservation of the things which
are under administration;
(8) To lease any real property to another person for more than
one year;

(9) To bind the principal to render some service without

compensation;
(10) To bind the principal in a contract of partnership;
(11) To obligate the principal as a guarantor or surety;
(12) To create or convey real rights over immovable property;
(13) To accept or repudiate an inheritance;
(14) To ratify or recognize obligations contracted before the
agency;
(15) Any other act of strict dominion.

21. Spouses A and B leased a piece of land belonging to B's parents for 25
years. The spouses built their house on it worth P300,000. Subsequently in a
case that C filed against A and B, the court found the latter liable to C for
P200,000. When the sheriff was attaching their house for the satisfaction of
the judgement, A and B claimed that it was exempt from execution, being a
family home. Is the claim correct? C) No, since the land does not belong to A
and B, it cannot qualify as a family home. ARTICLE 152. The family home,
constituted jointly by the husband and the wife or by an unmarried
head of a family, is the dwelling house where they and their family
reside, and the land on which it is situated. (GUIDELINES: (1) It is
deemed constituted from time of actual occupation as a family
residence; (2) It must be owned by person constituting it; (3) It must
be permanent; (4) Rule applies to valid and voidable and even to
common-law marriages under Arts.147 and 148; (5) It continues
despite death of one or more spouses or unmarried head of family
for 10 years or as long as there is a minor beneficiary (Art.159); (6)
Can only constitute one family home)

22. Solomon sold his coconut plantation to Aragon, Inc for P100 million,
payable in installments of 10M per month with 6% interest per annum.
Solomon married Lorna after 5 months and they chose conjugal
partnership of gains to govern their relations. When they married,
Aragon had an unpaid balance of P50M plus interest in Solomon's
favor. To whom will Aragon 's monthly payments go after the marriage?
D) The principal shall go to Solomon but the interest to the conjugal
partnership. ARTICLE 106. Under the regime of conjugal
partnership of gains, the husband and wife place in a common
fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income from their

separate properties and those acquired by either or both

spouses through their efforts or by chance, and, upon
dissolution of the marriage or of the partnership, the net gains
or benefits obtained by either or both spouses shall be divided
equally between them, unless otherwise agreed in the
marriage settlements.
23. X and Y, although not suffering from any impediment, cohabited as
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. Following the birth
of their child, the couple got married. A year after, however, the court
annulled the marriage and issued a decree of annulment. What is the
present status of the child? A) legitimated. ARTICLE 178.
Legitimation shall take place by a subsequent valid marriage
between parents. The annulment of a voidable marriage shall
not affect the legitimation. (Note: TO BE CAPABLE OF
LEGITIMATION: (1) The child must have been conceived and
born outside of wedlock; and (2) General rule: The parents, at
the time of the child's conception, were not disqualified by any
impediment to marry each other (Art. 177). Exception: RA 9858
- Children born to parents who were so disqualified only
because either or both of them were below eighteen (18)
years of age at the time of childs conception may be
legitimated.)
24. When A and B married, they chose conjugal partnership of gains to
govern their property relations. After 3 years, B succeeded in getting
her marriage to A annulled on ground of the latter's psychological
incapacity. What liquidation procedure will they follow in disposing of
their assets? C) The liquidation of a co-ownership applies since the
annulment brought their property relation under the chapter on
property regimes without marriage.ARTICLE 147. When a man and
a woman who are capacitated to marry each other, live
exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the
benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, their wages and
salaries shall be owned by them in equal shares and the
property acquired by both of them through their work or
industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership.
25. X and Y agreed verbally before their marriage (a) on the paternity
of the illegitimate child of Y and (b) on the economic regime that will
govern X and Y's property relations. Is the verbal agreement valid? A)
No, because a marriage settlement to be valid should be in writing.
ARTICLE 77. The marriage settlements and any modification
thereof shall be in writing, signed by the parties and executed
before the celebration of the marriage. They shall not
prejudice third persons unless they are registered in the local

civil registry where the marriage contract is recorded as well

as in the proper registries of properties.
26. Spouses X and Y have a minor daughter, Z, who needs support for hereducation.
Both X and Y, who are financially distressed, could not give theneeded support to Z.
As it happens, Zs other relatives are financially capable ofgiving that support. From
whom may Z first rightfully demand support? From her
a. grandfather.
b. brother.
c. uncle.
d. first cousin.
Suggested Answer:
grandfather.
27. Fidel, a Filipino with fair complexion, married Gloria. Before the marriage,Gloria
confessed to Fidel that she was two-month pregnant with the child of ablack African
who had left the country for good. When the child was born, Fidelcould not accept it
being too black in complexion. What is the status of the child?
a. Illegitimate, because Gloria confessed that the child is not Fidels.
b. Illegitimate, because by the color of its skin, the child could not possibly bethat of
Fidel.
c. Legitimate, because the child was born within a valid marriage.
d. Legitimate, because Fidel agreed to treat the child as his own after Gloria toldhim
who the father was.
Suggested Answer:
c.Legitimate, because the child was born within a valid marriage.
28. The husbands acts of forcibly ejecting his wife without just cause from
theconjugal dwelling and refusing to take her back constitutes
a. desertion.
b. recrimination.
c. constructive abandonment.
d. de facto separation.
Suggested Answer:
c. constructive abandonment.
29. In his will, the testator designated X as a legatee to receive P2 million for
thepurpose of buying an ambulance that the residents of his Barangay can
use.What kind of institution is this?
a. a fideicomissary institution.

b. a modal institution.
c. a conditional institution.
d. a collective institution.
Suggested Answer:
b. a modal institution.
30. X insured himself for P5 million, designating Y, his wife, as his sole beneficiary.
The designation was irrevocable. A few years later, X had their marriage annulled in
court on the ground that Y had an existing prior marriage. X subsequently died, Is Y
entitled to the insurance benefits?
a. Yes, since the insurance was not dependent on the marriage.
b.Yes, since her designation as beneficiary was irrevocable.
c. No, Xs designation of Y is revoked by operation of law upon the annulment of
their marriage based on Ys fault.
d. Yes, since without judicial revocation, Xs designation of Y remains valid and
binding.
Suggested Answer:
c. No, Xs designation of Y is revoked by operation of law upon the annulment of
their marriage based on Ys fault.

31. May a spouse freely donate communal or conjugal property without

the
consent of the other?
A. Absolutely not, since the spouses co-own such property.
B. Yes, for properties that the family may spare, regardless of value.
C. Yes, provided the donation is moderate and intended for charity or
family
rejoicing.
D. Yes, in a donation mortis causa that the donor may still revoke in his
lifetime.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Yes, provided the donation is moderate and intended for
charity or family
rejoicing. Article 98 of the Family Code provides Neither spouse
may donate any community property without the consent of the other.
However, either spouse may, without the consent of the other, make
moderate donations from the community property for charity or on
occasions of family rejoicing or family distress.

32. The decedent died intestate leaving an estate of P10 million. He

left the
following heirs: a) Marlon, a legitimate child and b) Cecilia, the legal
spouse.
Divide the estate.
A. Marlon gets 1/4 and Cecilia gets 3/4.
B. Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia 1/3.
C. Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia gets 1/2.
D. Marlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia 1/4.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia gets 1/2. Article 996 of the Civil
Code provides If a widow or widower and legitimate children or
descendants are left, the surviving spouse has in the succession the
same share as that of each of the children.
33. Contracts take effect only between the parties or their assigns and
heirs,
except where the rights and obligations arising from the contract are
not
transmissible by their nature, by stipulation, or by provision of law. In
the latter
case, the assigns or the heirs are not bound by the contracts. This is
known as
the principle of
A. Relativity of contracts.
B. Freedom to stipulate.
C. Mutuality of contracts.
D. Obligatory force of contracts.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Relativity of contracts. Article 1311 of the Civil Code provides
that contracts take effect only between the parties, their assigns and
heirs, except in case where the rights and obligations arising from the
contract are not transmissible by their nature, or by stipulation or by
provision of law. The heir is not liable beyond the value of the property
he received from the decedent.
If a contract should contain some stipulation in favor of a third person, he
may demand its fulfillment provided he communicated his acceptance to the
obligor before its revocation. A mere incidental benefit or interest of a person

is not sufficient. The contracting parties must have clearly and deliberately
conferred a favor upon a third person.

34. A buyer ordered 5,000 apples from the seller at P20 per apple. The
seller
delivered 6,000 apples. What are the rights and obligations of the
buyer?
A. He can accept all 6,000 apples and pay the seller at P20 per apple.
B. He can accept all 6,000 apples and pay a lesser price for the 1,000
excess
apples.
C. He can keep the 6,000 apples without paying for the 1,000 excess
since the
seller delivered them anyway.
D. He can cancel the whole transaction since the seller violated the
terms of their
agreement.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. He can accept all 6,000 apples and pay the seller at P20 per
apple. Article 1522 of the Civil Code provides Where the seller delivers
to the buyer a quantity of goods less than he contracted to sell, the buyer
may reject them, but if the buyer accepts or retains the goods so delivered,
knowing that the seller is not going to perform the contract in full, he must
pay for them at the contract rate. If, however, the buyer has used or disposed
of the goods delivered before he knows that the seller is not going to perform
his contract in full, the buyer shall not be liable for more than the fair value to
him of the goods so received.
Where the seller delivers to the buyer a quantity of goods larger
than he contracted to sell, the buyer may accept the goods included
in the contract and reject the rest. If the buyer accepts the whole of
the goods so delivered he must pay for them at the contract rate.
Where the seller delivers to the buyer the goods he contracted to sell mixed
with goods of a different description not included in the contract, the buyer
may accept the goods which are in accordance with the contract and reject
the rest.
In the preceding two paragraphs, if the subject matter is indivisible, the buyer
may reject the whole of the goods.

The provisions of this article are subject to any usage of trade, special
agreement, or course of dealing between the parties.

35. Lino entered into a contract to sell with Ramon, undertaking to

convey to the
latter one of the five lots he owns, without specifying which lot it was,
for the price
of P1 million. Later, the parties could not agree which of five lots he
owned Lino
undertook to sell to Ramon. What is the standing of the contract?
A. Unenforceable.
B. Voidable.
C. Rescissible.
D. Void.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. Void. Article 1409 of the Civil Code provides The following
contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning:
(1) Those whose cause, object or purpose is contrary to law, morals,
good customs, public order or public policy;
(2) Those which are absolutely simulated or fictitious;
(3) Those whose cause or object did not exist at the time of the
transaction;
(4) Those whose object is outside the commerce of men;
(5) Those which contemplate an impossible service;
(6) Those where the intention of the parties relative to the
principal object of the contract cannot be ascertained;
(7) Those expressly prohibited or declared void by law.

36) Knowing that the car had a hidden crack in the engine, X sold it to Y without
informing the latter about it. In any event, the deed of sale expressly stipulated that

X was not liable for hidden defects. Does Y have the right to demand from X a
reimbursement of what he spent to repair the engine plus damages?
(B) Yes, since the defect was not hidden; X knew of it but he acted in bad faith in not
disclosing the fact to Y.
(37) Acme Cannery produced sardines in cans known as "Sards." Mylene bought a
can of Sards from a store, ate it, and suffered from poisoning caused by a noxious
substance found in the sardines. Mylene filed a case for damages against Acme.
Which of the following defenses will hold?
(A) The expiry date of the "Sards" was clearly printed on its can, still the store sold
and Mylene bought it.
(38) Fernando executed a will, prohibiting his wife Marina from remarrying after his
death, at the pain of the legacy of P100 Million in her favor becoming a nullity. But a
year after Fernandos death, Marina was so overwhelmed with love that she married
another man. Is she entitled to the legacy, the amount of which is well within the
capacity of the disposable free portion of Fernandos estate?
(D) No, since such prohibition is authorized by law and is not repressive; she could
remarry but must give up the money.
(39) X, the owner, constituted a 10-year usufruct on his land as well as on the
building standing on it in Ys favor. After flood totally destroyed the building 5 years
later, X told Y that an act of God terminated the usufruct and that he should vacate
the land. Is X, the owner of the land, correct?
(B) No, since Y still has the right to use the land and the materials left on it.
(40) In gratitude, the grooms parents made a donation of a property in writing to
the brides parents shortly before their childrens wedding. The donation was
accepted. What is the nature of the donation?
(A) It is an ordinary donation since it was not given to the bride or groom.

(41) X and Y, both Filipinos, were married and resided in Spain although they
intend to return to the Philippines at some future time. They have not
executed any marriage settlements. What law governs their property
relations?
(A) They may choose between Spanish law and Philippine law.
(B) Philippine law since they are both Filipinos.
(C) No regime of property relations will apply to them.
(D) Spanish law since they live in Spain.

Answer: (B) Philippine law since they are both Filipinos.

Articles 74 up to 148, from Title IV of the Family Code, are the
governing laws on the property relations between husband and wife.
In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement,
the property relations of the spouses are governed by Philippine
laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of the marriage and
their residence. (Art. 80.)

(42) Birth determines personality. Death extinguishes it. Under what

circumstances may the personality of a deceased person continue to exist?
(A) In case of re-appearance of a missing person presumed dead.
(B) In protecting the works of a deceased under intellectual property laws.
(C) In case of declaration of presumptive death of a missing spouse.
(D) In the settlement of the estate of a deceased person.
ANSWER: (D) In the settlement of the estate of a deceased person.
Art. 42. Civil personality is extinguished by death.
The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the deceased
is determined by law, by contract and by will. (32a) ARTICLE 42 CIVIL
CODE

(43) Six tenants sued X, the landowner, for willfully denying them water for
their farms, which water happened to flow from land under Xs control, his
intention being to force them to leave his properties. Is X liable for his act and
why?
(A) No, because the tenants must be content with waiting for rainfall for their
farms.
(B) No, since X owns both the land and the water.
(C) Yes, because the tenants farms have the natural right of access to water
wherever it is located.

(D) Yes, since X willfully caused injury to his tenants contrary to morals, good
customs or public policy.
Answer: (D) Yes, since X willfully caused injury to his tenants
contrary to morals, good customs or public policy.
CIVIL CODE Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights
and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone
his due, and observe honesty and good faith.

(44) Illegitimate brothers and sisters, whether of full or half-blood, are bound
to support each other, EXCEPT when
(A) the brother or sister who needs support lives in another place.
(B) such brothers and sisters are not recognized by their father.
(C) the brother or sister in need stops schooling without valid reason.
(D) the need for support of a brother or sister, already of age, is due to the
latter's fault.
Answer: (D) the need for support of a brother or sister, already of
age, is due to the latter's fault.
Even brothers and sisters not
legitimately related, whether full or half blood, are likewise bound to
support each other to the full extent of those set forth under Article
194, except only when the need for support of the brother or sister
who is of age is due to a cause imputable to the claimants fault or
negligence (Article 196, Id.). FAMILY CODE

(45) Virgilio owned a bare and simple swimming pool in his garden. MB, a 7year old child, surreptitiously entered the garden and merrily romped around
the ledges of the pool. He accidentally tripped, fell into the pool, and
drowned. MBs parents sued Virgilio for damages arising from their childs
death, premised on the principle of "attractive nuisance". Is Virgilio liable for
the death of MB?
(A) No, the child was 7 years old and knew the dangers that the pool offered.
(B) Yes, being an attractive nuisance, Virgilio had the duty to prevent children

from coming near it.

(C) No, since the pool was bare and had no enticing or alluring gadgets,
floats, or devices in it that would attract a 7-year old child.
(D) Yes, since Virgilio did not cover the swimming pool while not in use to
prevent children from falling into it.

ANSWER: (C) No, since the pool was bare and had no enticing or
alluring gadgets, floats, or devices in it that would attract a 7-year
old child.
One who maintains on his estate or premises an attractive nuisance
without exercising due case to prevent children from playing
therewith or resorting thereto, is liable to a child of tender years
who is injured thereby, even if the child is technically a trespasser in
the premises. (Jarco Marketing Corp. v. CA, 117 SCAD 818, 321 SCRA
375 (1991), Paras, p. 741)

(46) The term of a 5-year lease contract between X the lessor and Y the
lessee, where rents were paid from month to month, came to an end. Still, Y
continued using the property with Xs consent. In such a case, it is
understood that they impliedly renewed the lease
(A) from month to month under the same conditions as to the rest.
(B) under the same terms and conditions as before.
(C) under the same terms except the rent which they or the court must
fix.
(D) for only a year, with the rent raised by 10% pursuant to the rental
control law.

LEGAL PROVISION : ART 1670

(47) Rex, a philanthropist, donated a valuable lot to the municipality on the

condition that it will build a public school on such lot within 2 years from its
acceptance of the donation. The municipality properly accepted the donation
but did not yet build the public school after 2 years. Can Rex revoke the
donation?
(A) Yes, since the donation is subject to a resolutory condition which
was not fulfilled.
(B) No, but Rex is entitled to recover the value of the land from the
municipality.
(C) No, the transfer of ownership has been completed.
(D) Yes, the donation is not deemed made until the suspensive
condition has been fulfilled.

LEGAL PROVISION: ART 764

(48) Illegitimate children, those not recognized by their biological fathers,

shall use the surname of their
(A) biological father subject to no condition.
(B) mother or biological father, at the mothers discretion.
(C) mother.
(D) biological father unless he judicially opposes it.

LEGAL PROVISION:

(49) Asiong borrowed P1 million from a bank, secured by a mortgage on his

land. Without his consent, his friend Boyong paid the whole loan. Since
Asiong benefited from the payment, can Boyong compel the bank to
subrogate him in its right as mortgagee of Asiong's land?
(A) No, but the bank can foreclose and pay Boyong back.

(B) No, since Boyong paid for Asiongs loan without his approval.
(C) Yes, since a change of creditor took place by novation with the
banks consent.
(D) Yes, since it is but right that Boyong be able to get back his money
and, if not, to foreclose the mortgage in the manner of the bank

LEGAL PROVISION:

ART 1237

(50) Congress passed a law imposing taxes on income earned out of a

particular activity that was not previously taxed. The law, however, taxed
incomes already earned within the fiscal year when the law took effect. Is the
law valid?
(A) No, because laws are intended to be prospective, not retroactive.
(B) No, the law is arbitrary in that it taxes income that has already
been spent.
(C) Yes, since tax laws are the lifeblood of the nation.

(D) Yes, tax laws are an exception; they can be given retroactive
effect.
51. Rudolf borrowed P1 million from Rodrigo and Fernando who acted as solidary
creditors. When the loan matured, Rodrigo wrote a letter to Rudolf, demanding
payment of the loan directly to him. Before Rudolf could comply, Fernando went to
see him personally to collect and he paid him. Did Rudolf make a valid payment?
a. No, since Rudolf should have split the payment between Rodrigo and Fernando.
b. No, since Rodrigo, the other solidary creditor, already made a prior demand for
payment from Rudolf.
c.. Yes, since the payment covers the whole obligation.
d. Yes, since Fernando was a solidary creditor, payment to him extinguished the
obligation.
Suggested Answer:
b. No, since Rodrigo, the other solidary creditor, already made a prior demand for
payment from Rudolf.
52. What happens to the property regimes that were subsisting under the NewCivil
Code when the Family Code took effect?

A. The original property regimes are immutable and remain effective.

B. Those enjoying specific regimes under the New Civil Code may adopt theregime
of
absolute community of property under the Family Code.
C. Those that married under the New Civil Code but did not choose any of
itsregimes shall now be governed by the regime of absolute community of property.
D. They are superseded by the Family Code which has retroactive effect.
Suggested Answer:
A. The original property regimes are immutable and remain effective.
53. The testator executed a will following the formalities required by the law
onsuccession without designating any heir. The only testamentary disposition inthe
will is the recognition of the testator's illegitimate child with a popular actress.Is the
will valid?
A.
B.
C.
D.

Yes, since in recognizing his illegitimate child, the testator has made him hisheir.
No, because the non-designation of heirs defeats the purpose of a will.
No, the will comes to life only when the proper heirs are instituted.
Yes, the recognition of an illegitimate heir is an ample reason for a will.

Suggested Answer:
D. Yes, the recognition of an illegitimate heir is an ample reason for a will.
54. A left B, his wife, in the Philippines to work in Egypt but died in that
countryafter a years continuous stay. Two months after As death, B gave birth to
achild, claiming it is As child. Who can assail the legitimacy of the child?
A.
B.
C.
D.

As other heirs apart from B.

The State which has interest in the welfare of overseas contract workers.
Any one who is outraged by Bs claim.
No one since A died.

Suggested Answer:
A. As other heirs apart from B.
55. QR and TS who had a marriage license requested a newly appointed Judgein
Manila to marry them on the beach of Boracay. Since the Judge maintainedBoracay
as his residence, he agreed. The sponsors were all public officials.What is the status
of the marriage.
A. Valid, since the improper venue is merely an irregularity; all the elements of
avalid marriage are present.
B. Void, because the couple did not get local permit for a beach wedding.
C. Voidable, because the Judge acted beyond his territorial jurisdiction and
isadministratively liable for the same.

D. Void, because the Judge did not solemnize the marriage within the premisesof
his court.
Suggested Answer:
A. Valid, since the improper venue is merely an irregularity; all the elements of a
valid marriage are present.

56) X and Y, Filipinos, got married in Los Angeles, USA, using a marriage license
issued by the Philippine consul in Los Angeles, acting as Civil Registrar. X and Y did
not know that they were first cousins because their mothers, who were sisters, were
separated when they were quite young. Since X did not want to continue with the
relation when he heard of it, he left Y, came to the Philippines and married Z. Can X
be held liable for bigamy?
(A) No since Xs marriage to Y is void ab initio or did not exist.
(B) No since X acted in good faith, conscious that public policy did not
approve of marriage between first cousins.
(C) Yes since he married Z without first securing a judicial
declaration of nullity of his marriage to Y.
(D) Yes since his first marriage to Y in Los Angeles is valid.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Art. 40. The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for
purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring
such previous marriage void. (n).
(57) Allan bought Billys property through Carlos, an agent empowered with a
special power of attorney (SPA) to sell the same. When Allan was ready to pay as
scheduled, Billy called, directing Allan to pay directly to him. On learning of this,
Carlos, Billy's agent, told Allan to pay through him as his SPA provided and to
protect his commission. Faced with two claimants, Allan consigned the payment in
court. Billy protested, contending that the consignation is ineffective since no
tender of payment was made to him. Is he correct?
(A) No, since consignation without tender of payment is
allowed in the face of the conflicting claims on the plaintiff.
(B) Yes, as owner of the property sold, Billy can demand payment
directly to himself.
(C) Yes, since Allan made no announcement of the tender.

(D) Yes, a tender of payment is required for a valid consignation.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Article 1256. If the creditor to whom tender of payment has been made refuses
without just cause to accept it, the debtor shall be released from responsibility by
the consignation of the thing or sum due.
Consignation alone shall produce the same effect in the following cases:
(1) When the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear at the
place of payment;
(2) When he is incapacitated to receive the payment at the time it is
due;
(3) When, without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt;
(4) When two or more persons claim the same right to collect;
(5) When the title of the obligation has been lost. (1176a)
(58) X sold Y 100 sacks of rice that Y was to pick up from Xs rice mill on a particular
date. Y did not, however, appear on the agreed date to take delivery of the rice.
After one week, X automatically rescinded the sale without notarial notice to Y. Is
the rescission valid?
(A) Yes, automatic rescission is allowed since, having the
character of movables and consumables, rice can easily
deteriorate.
(B) No, the buyer is entitled to a customary 30-day extension of his
obligation to take delivery of the goods.
(C) No, since there was no express agreement regarding automatic
rescission.
(D) No, the seller should first determine that Y was not justified in
failing to appear.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Article 1593. With respect to movable property, the rescission of the sale
shall of right take place in the interest of the vendor, if the vendee, upon
the expiration of the period fixed for the delivery of the thing, should not
have appeared to receive it, or, having appeared, he should not have
tendered the price at the same time, unless a longer period has been
stipulated for its payment. (1505)
(59) The wife filed a case of legal separation against her husband on the ground of
sexual infidelity without previously exerting earnest efforts to come to a
compromise with him. The judge dismissed the case for having been filed without
complying with a condition precedent. Is the dismissal proper?
(A) No, efforts at a compromise will only deepen the wifes anguish.

(B) No, since legal separation like validity of marriage is not

subject to compromise agreement for purposes of filing.
(C) Yes, to avoid a family feud that is hurtful to everyone.
(D) Yes, since the dispute could have been settled with the parties
agreeing to legal separation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Art. 60. No decree of legal separation shall be based upon a stipulation of
facts or a confession of judgment.
In any case, the Court shall order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
assigned to it to take steps to prevent collusion between the parties and
to take care that the evidence is not fabricated or suppressed. (101a)
(60) An Australian living in the Philippines acquired shares of stock worth P10 million
in food manufacturing companies. He died in Manila, leaving a legal wife and a child
in Australia and a live-in partner with whom he had two children in Manila. He also
left a will, done according to Philippine laws, leaving all his properties to his live-in
partner and their children. What law will govern the validity of the disposition in the
will?
(A) Australia law since his legal wife and legitimate child are
Australians and domiciled in Australia.
(B) Australian law since the intrinsic validity of the provisions
of a will is governed by the decedents national law.
(C) Philippine law since the decedent died in Manila and he executed
his will according to such law.
(D) Philippine law since the decedents properties are in the
Philippines.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Article 16. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law
of the country where it is stipulated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to
the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to
the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the
national law of the person whose succession is under consideration,
whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country
wherein said property may be found. (10a)

61. X bought a land from Y, paying him cash. Since they were friends,
they did not execute any document of sale. After 7 years, the heirs of X
asked Y to execute a deed of absolute sale to formalize the verbal sale
to their father. Unwilling to do so, X's heirs filed an action for specific
performance against Y. Will the action prosper? A) No, after more than

6 years, the action to enforce the verbal agreement has already

elapsed.Art. 1145. The following actions must be commenced
within six years:(1) Upon an oral contract;(2) Upon a quasicontract.
62. A court declared Ricardo, an old bachelor, an absentee and
appointing Cicero administrator of his property. After a year, it was
discovered that Ricardo had died abroad. What is the effect of the fact
of his death on the administration of his property? B) the
administration shall be given by the court having jurisdiction over the
intestate proceedings to a new administrator whom it will appoint. Art
389. The administration shall cease in any of the following
cases: (2) when death of the absentee is proved and his
testate or intestate heirs appear.
63. Baldo, a rejected suitor, intimidated Judy into marrying him. While
she wanted to question the validity of their marriage two years after
the intimidation ceased, judy decided in the meantime to freely cohabit
with Baldo. After more than 5 years following their wedding, Judy wants
to file a case for annulment of marriage against Baldo on ground of
lack of consent. Will her action prosper? B) No, since the marriage was
merely voidable and Judy ratified it by freely cohabiting with Baldo
after the force and intimidation had ceased.ARTICLE 45. A marriage
may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at
the time of the marriage:(4) That the consent of either party
was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless
the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter
freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
64. Is the wife who leaves her husband without a just cause entitled to
support? C) No, because in leaving the conjugal home without just
cause, she forfeits her right to support. ARTICLE 100. The
separation in fact between husband and wife shall not affect
the regime of absolute community except that: (1) The spouse
who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live therein,
without just cause, shall not have the right to be supported;
(Note: Goitia v Campos Rueda [1961]Court cannot compel the
woman to go back to the husband. The duty of the husband to
support the wife is also not terminated because she left the
house, when it is the husbands fault she left in the first place
65. In the order of intestate succession where the decedent in
legitimate, who is the last intestate heirs of heir who will inherit if all
heirs in the higher level are disqualified or unable to inherit? C) state.
Art. 1011. In default of persons entitled to succeed in
accordance with the provisions of the preceding Sections, the

State shall inherit the whole estate.

(66) Roy and Carlos both undertook a contract to deliver to Sam in Manila a
boat docked in Subic. Before they could deliver it, however, the boat sank in a
storm. The contract provides that fortuitous event shall not exempt Roy and
Carlos from their obligation. Owing to the loss of the motor boat, such
obligation is deemed converted into one of indemnity for damages. Is the
liability of Roy and Carlos joint or solidary?
(A) Neither solidary nor joint since they cannot waive the defense of
fortuitous event to which they are entitled.
(B) Solidary or joint upon the discretion of Sam.
(C) Solidary since Roy and Carlos failed to perform their obligation to
deliver the motor boat.
(D) Joint since the conversion of their liability to one of indemnity for
damages made it joint.
Legal basis: Article 1224

(67) Joanne married James, a person with no known relatives. Through James'
hard work, he and his wife Joane prospered. When James died, his estate
alone amounted to P100 million. If, in his will, James designates Joanne as his
only heir, what will be the free portion of his estate.
(A) Joanne gets all; estate has no free portion left.
(B) Joanne gets 1/2; the other half is free portion.
(C) Joanne gets 1/3; the remaining 2/3 is free portion.
(D) Joanne gets 1/4; the remaining 3/4 is free portion.
Legal basis: Article 900

(68) A warranty inherent in a contract of sale, whether or not mentioned in it,

is known as the
(A) warranty on quality.
(B) warranty against hidden defects.
(C) warranty against eviction.
(D) warranty in merchantability.
Legal basis: Paragraph 1 Article 1547

(69) The doctrine of stare decisis prescribes adherence to precedents in order

to promote the stability of the law. But the doctrine can be abandoned
(A) When adherence to it would result in the Governments loss of its
case.
(B) When the application of the doctrine would cause great prejudice to
a foreign national.
(C) When necessary to promote the passage of a new law.
(D) When the precedent has ceased to be beneficial and useful.
Legal basis: Article 8

(70) Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been sweethearts for 5 years. While working
in a European country where the execution of joint wills are allowed, the two
of them executed a joint holographic will where they named each other as
sole heir of the other in case either of them dies. Unfortunately, Ric died a
year later. Can Josie have the joint will successfully probated in the
Philippines?
(A) Yes, in the highest interest of comity of nations and to honor the
wishes of the deceased.
(B) No, since Philippine law prohibits the execution of joint wills and
such law is binding on Ric and Josie even abroad.
(C) Yes, since they executed their joint will out of mutual love and care,

values that the generally accepted principles of international law

accepts.
(D) Yes, since it is valid in the country where it was executed, applying
the principle of "lex loci celebrationis."
Legal bases: Article 818 and Article 819

(71) ML inherited from his father P5 million in legitime but he waived it in a

public instrument in favor of his sister QY who accepted the waiver in writing.
But as it happened, ML borrowed P6 million from PF before the waiver. PF
objected to the waiver and filed an action for its rescission on the ground that
he had the right to MLs P5 million legitime as partial settlement of what ML
owed him since ML has proved to be insolvent. Does PF, as creditor, have the
right to rescind the waiver?
(A) No, because the waiver in favor of his sister QY amounts to a
donation and she already accepted it.
(B) Yes, because the waiver is prejudicial to the interest of a
third person whose interest is recognized by law.
(C) No, PF must wait for ML to become solvent and, thereafter, sue him
for the unpaid loan.
(D) Yes, because a legitime cannot be waived in favor of a specific heir;
it must be divided among all the other heirs.
Legal Basis: Art 1052, New Civil Code
(72) While engaged to be married, Arnold and Josephine agreed in a public
instrument to adopt out the economic regime of absolute community of
property. Arnold acknowledged in the same instrument that Josephines
daughter Mary, is his illegitimate child. But Josephine died before the
marriage could take place. Does the marriage settlement have any
significance?
(A) None, since the instrument containing the marriage settlement is
essentially void for containing an unrelated matter.

(B) Yes, insofar as

illegitimate child.

Arnold

acknowledged

Mary

as

his

(C) None, since the marriage did not take place.

(D) Yes, if they acquired properties while living together as husband
and wife.
Legal Basis: Art 175, Family Code; Art 172 (2) Family Code

(73) Joseph, a 17-year old Filipino, married Jenny, a 21-year old American in
Illinois, USA, where the marriage was valid. Their parents gave full consent to
the marriage of their children. After three years, Joseph filed a petition in the
USA to promptly divorce Jenny and this was granted. When Joseph turned 25
years, he returned to the Philippines and married Leonora. What is the status
of this second marriage?
(A) Void, because he did not cause the judicial issuance of
declaration of the nullity of his first marriage to Jenny before
marrying Leonora.
(B) Valid, because Joseph's marriage to Jenny is void, he being only 17
years of age when he married her.
(C) Valid, because his marriage to Leonora has all the elements of a
valid marriage.
(D) Void, because Joseph is still considered married to Jenny since the
Philippines does not recognize divorce.
Legal Basis: Art 40, Family Code

(74) T died intestate, leaving an estate of P9,000,000. He left as heirs three

legitimate children, namely, A, B, and C. A has two children, D and E. Before
he died, A irrevocably repudiated his inheritance from T in a public instrument
filed with the court. How much, if any, will D and E, as As children, get from
Ts estate?
(A) Each of D and E will get P1,500,000 by right of representation since
their father repudiated his inheritance.

(B) Each of D and E will get P2,225,000 because they will inherit from
the estate equally with B and C.
(C) D and E will get none because of the repudiation; "B" and
"C" will get As share by right of accretion.
(D) Each of D and E will get P2,000,000 because the law gives them
some advantage due to the demise of "A".
Legal Basis: Art 1018, New Civil Code

(75) No decree of legal separation can be issued

(A) unless the childrens welfare is attended to first.
(B) without prior efforts at reconciliation shown to be futile.
(C) unless the court first directs mediation of the parties.
(D) without prior investigation conducted by a public prosecutor.

Legal Basis: Art 59, Family Code

(76) X, who was abroad, phoned his brother, Y, authorizing him to sell Xs
parcel of land in Pasay. X sent the title to Y by courier service. Acting for his
brother, Y executed a notarized deed of absolute sale of the land to Z after
receiving payment. What is the status of the sale?
(A) Valid, since a notarized deed of absolute sale covered the
transaction and full payment was made.
(B) Void, since X should have authorized agent Y in writing to sell the
land.
(C) Valid, since Y was truly his brother Xs agent and entrusted with the
title needed to effect the sale.
(D) Valid, since the buyer could file an action to compel X to execute a
deed of sale.
Basis: When a piece of land or any interest therein is through an agent, the
authority of the latter shall be in writing, otherwise the sale shall be void.

Source: Alcantara vs. Nido, G.R. No. 165133, April 19, 2010 and other
numerous cases.

(77) In a true pacto de retro sale, the title and ownership of the property sold
are immediately vested in the vendee a retro subject only to the resolutory
condition of repurchase by the vendor a retro within the stipulated period.
This is known as
(A) equitable mortgage.
(B) conventional redemption.
(C) legal redemption.
(D) equity of redemption.

(78) A natural obligation under the New Civil Code of the Philippines is one
which
(A) the obligor has a moral obligation to do, otherwise entitling the
obligee to damages.
(B) refers to an obligation in writing to do or not to do.
(C) the obligee may enforce through the court if violated by the obligor.
(D) cannot be judicially enforced but authorizes the obligee to retain
the obligors payment or performance.

(79) The husband assumed sole administration of the familys mango

plantation since his wife worked abroad. Subsequently, without his wifes
knowledge, the husband entered into an antichretic transaction with a
company, giving it possession and management of the plantation with power
to harvest and sell the fruits and to apply the proceeds to the payment of a
loan he got. What is the standing of the contract?
(A) It is void in the absence of the wifes consent.

(B) It is void absent an authorization from the court.

(C) The transaction is void and can neither be ratified by the wife nor
authorized by the court.
(D) It is considered a continuing offer by the parties, perfected only
upon the wifes acceptance or the courts authorization.
Basis: Article 124 of the Family Code

(80) When the donor gives donations without reserving sufficient funds for
his support or for the support of his dependents, his donations are
(A) Rescissible, since it results in economic lesion of more than 25% of
the value of his properties.
(B) Voidable, since his consent to the donation is vitiated by mindless
kindness.
(C) Void, since it amounts to wanton expenditure beyond his means.
(D) Reducible to the extent that the donations impaired the support
due to himself and his dependents.

81. Anne owed Bessy P1 million due on October 1, 2011 but failed to
pay her on due date. Bessy sent a demand letter to Anne giving her 5
days from receipt within which to pay. Two days after receipt of the
letter, Anne personally offered to pay Bessy in manager's check but
the latter refused to accept the same. The 5 days lapsed. May Annes
obligation be considered extinguished?
B. No, since tender of payment even in cash, if refused, will not
discharge the obligation without proper consignation in court.
Art. 1256. If the creditor to whom tender of payment has been made
refuses without just cause to accept it, the debtor shall be released
from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due.
Consignation alone shall produce the same effect in the following
cases:
(1) When the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear at

the place of payment;

(2) When he is incapacitated to receive the payment at the time it is
due;
(3) When, without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt;
(4) When two or more persons claim the same right to collect;
(5) When the title of the obligation has been lost.
82. The residents of a subdivision have been using an open strip of
land as passage to the highway for over 30 years. The owner of that
land decided, however, to close it in preparation for building his house
on it. The residents protested, claiming that they became owners of
the land through acquisitive prescription, having been in possession of
the same in the concept of owners, publicly, peacefully, and
continuously for more than 30 years. Is this claim correct?
A. No, the residents have not been in continuous possession of the land
since they merely passed through it in going to the highway.
PD 1529 Section 14. Who may apply. The following persons may file in
the proper Court of First Instance an application for registration of title
to land, whether personally or through their duly authorized
representatives:
(1) Those who by themselves or through their predecessors-in-interest
have been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and
occupation of alienable and disposable lands of the public domain
under a bona fide claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
83. The owner of a thing cannot use it in a way that will injure the right
of a third person. Thus, every building or land is subject to the
easement which prohibits its proprietor or possessor from committing
nuisance like noise, jarring, offensive odor, and smoke. This principle is
known as
B. Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas.
Art. 431. The owner of a thing cannot make use thereof in such manner
as to injure the rights of a third person.
84. Janice and Jennifer are sisters. Janice sued Jennifer and Laura,
Jennifers business partner for recovery of property with damages. The
complaint did not allege that Janice exerted earnest efforts to come to
a compromise with the defendants and that such efforts failed. The
judge dismissed the complaint outright for failure to comply with a
condition precedent. Is the dismissal in order?
A. No, since Laura is a stranger to the sisters, Janice has no moral
obligation to settle with her.

Art. 151. No suit between members of the same family shall prosper
unless it should appear from the verified complaint or petition that
earnest efforts toward a compromise have been made, but that the
same have failed. If it is shown that no such efforts were in fact made,
the same case must be dismissed.
This rules shall not apply to cases which may not be the subject of
compromise under the Civil Code.
85. X borrowed money from a bank, secured by a mortgage on the land
of Y, his close friend. When the loan matured, Y offered to pay the bank
but it refused since Y was not the borrower. Is the banks action
correct?
C. No, since Y, the owner of the collateral, has an interest in the
payment of the obligation.
Art. 1236. The creditor is not bound to accept payment or performance
by a third person who has no interest in the fulfillment of the
obligation, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary.
86) B. Equity of redemption.
JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE UNDER RULE 68, RULES OF COURT
1. The mortgagee should file a petition for judicial foreclosure in the
court, which has jurisdiction over the area where the property is
situated.
2. The court will conduct a trial. If, after trial, the court finds merit in the
petition, it will render judgment ordering the mortgagor/debtor to pay
the obligation within a period not less than 90 nor more than 120 days
from the finality of judgment.
3. Within this 90 to 120 day period, the mortgagor has the chance to pay
the obligation to prevent his property from being sold. This is called the
EQUITY OF REDEMPTION PERIOD.
4. If mortgagor fails to pay within the 90-120 days given to him by the
court, the property shall be sold to the highest bidder at public auction
to satisfy the judgment.
5. There will be a judicial confirmation of the sale. After the confirmation
of the sale, the purchaser shall be entitled to the possession of the
property, and all the rights of the mortgagor with respect to the
property are severed or terminated. The equity of redemption period
actually extends until the sale is confirmed. Even after the lapse of the
90 to 120 day period, the mortgagor can still redeem the property, so
long as there has been no confirmation of the sale yet. Therefore, the
equity of redemption can be considered as the right of the mortgagor

to redeem the property BEFORE the confirmation of the sale.

87) A. At the moment the parties take and declare each other
as husband and wife before officiating officer.
Article 107. The rules provided in Articles 88 and 89 shall also apply to
conjugal partnership of gains.
Article 88. The absolute community of property between spouses shall
commence at the precise moment that the marriage is celebrated. Any
stipulation, express or implied, for the commencement of the
community regime at any other time shall be void.
88) B. Her parents.
Article 14. In case either or both of the contracting parties, not having
been emancipated by a previous marriage, are between the ages of
eighteen and twenty-one, they shall, in addition to the requirements of
the preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar, the consent to
their marriage of their father, mother, surviving parent or guardian, or
persons having legal charge of them, in the order mentioned. Such
consent shall be manifested in writing by the interested party, who
personally appears before the proper local civil registrar, or in the form
of an affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses and attested
before any official authorized by law to administer oaths. The personal
manifestation shall be recorded in both applications for marriage
license, and the affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached
to said applications (Family Code of the Philippines).
89) D. No, since his parents were not qualified to marry each
other when he was conceived.
Republic Act No. 9858 Legitimation of Children Born to Minor Parents
amended Article 177 of the Family Code as of December 20, 2009. The
article (Article 177) now reads:
Children conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents who, at the
time of conception of the former, were not disqualified by any
impediment to marry each other, or were so disqualified only because
either or both of them were below eighteen (18) years of age, may be
legitimated.
90) C. Voidable.
Article 1390. The following contracts are voidable or annullable, even
though there may have been no damage to the contracting parties:

(1) Those where one of the parties is incapable of giving consent to a

contract;
(2) Those where the consent is vitiated by mistake, violence,
intimidation, undue influence or fraud.
These contracts are binding, unless they are annulled by a proper
action in court. They are susceptible of ratification. (n)

(91) Can common-law spouses donate properties of substantial value to one

another?
(A) No, they are only allowed to give moderate gifts to each other
during family rejoicing.
(B) No, they cannot give anything of value to each other to prevent
placing their legitimate relatives at a disadvantage.
(C) Yes, unlike the case of legally married spouses, such donations are
not prohibited.
(D) Yes, as long as they leave sufficient property for themselves and for
their dependents.
LEGAL BASIS
FC Art. 87 provides that every dontation or grant of gratuitous
advantage, direct or indirect, between the spouses during the marriage shall
be void, except moderate gifts which the spouses may give each
other on the occasion of any family rejoicing. The prohibition shall also
apply to persons living together as husband and wife without a valid
marriage.

(92) X owed Y P1.5 million. In his will, X gave Y legacy of P1 million but the
will provided that this legacy is to be set off against the P1.5 million X owed Y.
After the set off, X still owed Y P500,000. Can Y still collect this amount?
(A) Yes, because the designation of Y as legatee created a new and

separate juridical relationship between them, that of testator-legatee.

(B) It depends upon the discretion of the probate court if a claim is filed
in the testate proceedings.
(C) No, because the intention of the testator in giving the legacy is to
abrogate his entire obligation to Y.
(D) No, because X had no instruction in his will to deliver more than the
legacy of P1 million to Y.
LEGAL BASIS
PAR. 1 ONLY
NCC Article 935. The legacy of a credit against a third person or of the
remission or release of a debt of the legatee shall be effective only as regards
that part of the credit or debt existing at the time of the death of the
testator.
In the first case, the estate shall comply with the legacy by assigning to the legatee
all rights of action it may have against the debtor. In the second case, by giving the
legatee an acquittance, should he request one.
In both cases, the legacy shall comprise all interests on the credit or debt which
may be due the testator at the time of his death. (870a)

For better understanding here is an excerpt from the book of Paras on

Succession 2008 edition page 57 in relation to Article 935 on page 419.
Examples:
Legacy of a credit
T is the creditor of D to the amount of P1,000,000. T made a will
in 2003 giving this credit to X. If by 2006, at Ts death D has paid
already P 600,000 to T, how much will X get?
Ans: Only the remaining P400, 000, which still exists at Ts death.
[NOTE: If upn the other hand, D borrowed P600,000 more instead
of paying, how much will X get, P 1,600, 000 which represents the total
credit, or only P 1,000,000 which represents the credit originally
existing at the time the will was made?
ANS: Only the original P 1,000,000, since the extra P600,000 will
be after-acquired property. It is clear that Art. 935 cannot apply
because said article contemplates a credit that is reduced, not
increased. ]
[NOTE: It is understood, of course, that the legacy includes all
interestso the credit or debt which may be due the testator at the time
of his death.]

(93) Josie owned a lot worth P5 million prior to her marriage to Rey.
Subsequently, their conjugal partnership spent P3 million for the construction
of a house on the lot. The construction resulted in an increase in the value of
the house and lot to P9 million. Who owns the house and the lot?
(A) Josie and the conjugal partnership of gains will own both on a 50-50
basis.
(B) Josie will own both since the value of the house and the increase in
the propertys value is less than her lots value; but she is to reimburse
conjugal partnership expenses.
(C) Josie still owns the lot, it being her exclusive property, but the
house belongs to the conjugal partnership.
(D) The house and lot shall both belong to the conjugal partnership,
with Josie entitled to reimbursement for the value of the lot.
LEGAL BASIS
NCC Art. 120. The ownership of improvements, whether for utility or
adornment, made on the separate property of the spouses at of the spouses
at the expense of the partnership or through the acts or efforts of either or
both spouses shall pertain to the conjugal partnership, or to the original
owner-spouse, subject to the following rules:
When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal partnership
and any resulting increase in value are more than the value of the property at
the time of the improvement, the entire property of one of the spouses shall
belong to the conjugal partnership, subject to reimbursement of the value of
the property of the owner-spouse at the time of improvement; otherwise, said
property shall be retained in ownership by the owner-spouse, likewise subject
to reimbursement of the cost of the improvement.
In either case, the ownership of the entire property shall be vested
upon the reimbursement, which shall be made at the time of the liquidation
of the conjugal partnership. (158a)

For better understanding here is an excerpt from the book of:

----- Sta. Maria on Persons and family relations 2010 Ed. page 525
If the property of the owner-spouse is worth more than the
improvement, the entire improvement shall belong to the ownerspouse subject to the reimbursement at the time of liquidation in favor
of the conjugal partnership.

COMPUTATION (applying the case at bar)

The building is worth
the land is worth
the total is

The value of house and lot as a result

of the improvement is
that the plus value is
The cost of the building
plust the plus value of
the total value of the
improvement is

P 3,000,000 and
P 5,000,000
P 8,000,000
P 9,000,000 so
P 1,000,000 ( P 9M 8M )
P 3,000,000
p 1,000,000
P 4,000,000 ( P 3M+1M )

But since the cost of the Land is P 5,000,000, which is still more than the value of
the improvement, which is P 4,000,000, it would still be a case of ordinary
accession.
-----Paras on Property 2008 Ed. page 215

SECTION 2 Right of Accession with Respect to Immovable Property

NCC Article 445. Whatever is built, planted or sown on the land of
another and the improvements or repairs made thereon, belong to the owner
of the land, subject to the provisions of the following articles. (358)
One exception to the General Rule Enunciated in Art. 445 Whereby the Owner
of the Land is also the Owner of Whatever Is Built, Planted, or Sown Thereon
Under Art. 120 of the Family Code:..Codal

Important notes
1. It is important to Note which is Bigger or Greater---a. the value of the property just before the improvement was made; or
b. Its value after the improvement including the cost.
2. Rules
If (a) is greater, the whole thing belongs to the owner-spouse,
without the prejudice to reimbursement of the conjugal partnership.

If (b) is greater, the whole thing belongs to the conjugal

partnership but the owner-spouse must be reimbursed.
3. If on the lot of the husband worth P 1,000,000, a 5-Million peso (P5,0000,000)
house is constructed, the house and lot will belong to the conjugal
partnership, but it will reimburse the husband P 1,000,000. The ownership
will be vested in the conjugal partnership at the time of reimbursement and
this reimbursement will be made when the conjugal partnership is liquidated.
4. In No. 3 if the house costs less than P 1,000,000, the husband will be the
owner of the house and lot, but must reimburse the conjugal partnership the
cost of the house.

(94) An action for reconveyance of a registered piece of land may be brought

against the owner appearing on the title based on a claim that the latter
merely holds such title in trust for the plaintiff. The action prescribes,
however, within 10 years from the registration of the deed or the date of the
issuance of the certificate of title of the property as long as the trust had not
been repudiated. What is the exception to this 10-year prescriptive period?
(A) When the plaintiff had no notice of the deed or the issuance of the
certificate of title.
(B) When the title holder concealed the matter from the plaintiff.
(C) When fortuitous circumstances prevented the plaintiff from filing
the case sooner.
(D) When the plaintiff is in possession of the property.

LEGAL BASIS
The Court agrees with the CAs disquisition that an action for
reconveyance can indeed be barred by prescription. In a long line of cases
decided by this Court, we ruled that an action for reconveyance based on
implied or constructive trust must perforce prescribe in ten (10) years from
the issuance of the Torrens title over the property.

However, there is an exception to this rule. In the case of Heirs of

Pomposa Saludares v. Court of Appeals, the Court reiterating the ruling
in Millena v. Court of Appeals, held that there is but one instance when
prescription cannot be invoked in an action for reconveyance, that
is, when the plaintiff is in possession of the land to be reconveyed. In
Heirs of Pomposa Saludares, this Court explained that the Court in a series of
cases, has permitted the filing of an action for reconveyance despite the
lapse of more than ten (10) years from the issuance of title to the land and
declared that said action, when based on fraud, is imprescriptible as long as
the land has not passed to an innocent buyer for value. But in all those cases,
the common factual backdrop was that the registered owners were never in
possession of the disputed property. The exception was based on the theory
that registration proceedings could not be used as a shield for fraud or for
enriching a person at the expense of another. (ESTRELLA TIONGCO YARED
VS. JOSE B. TIONGCO G.R. No. 161360 October 19, 2011)

(95) Conrad and Linda, both 20 years old, applied for a marriage license,
making it appear that they were over 25. They married without their parents
knowledge before an unsuspecting judge. After the couple has been in
cohabitation for 6 years, Lindas parents filed an action to annul the marriage
on ground of lack of parental consent. Will the case prosper?
(A) No, since only the couple can question the validity of their marriage
after they became 21 of age; their cohabitation also convalidated the
marriage.
(B) No, since Lindas parents made no allegations that earnest efforts
have been made to come to a compromise with Conrad and Linda and
which efforts failed.
(C) Yes, since the marriage is voidable, the couple being below 21
years of age when they married.
(D) Yes, since Lindas parents never gave their consent to the
marriage.

LEGAL BASIS
FC Art. 47. The action for annulment of marriage must be filed
by the following persons and within the periods indicated therein:
1) For causes mentioned in Numer 1 of Article 45, by the party
whose parent or guardian did not give his or her consent, within five

years after attaining the age of twenty-one; or by the parent or

guardian or person having legal charge of the minor, at any time
before such party reaced the age of twenty-one;
FC Art. 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following
causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
1.) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to have the marriage
annulled was eighteen years of age or over but below twenty-one,
and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the
parents, guardian or person having substitute parental authority
over the party, in that order unless after attaining the age of
twenty-one, such party freely cohabited with the other and both
lived together as husband and wife;
For better understanding please refer to the book of Sta. Maria on
Persons and family relations 2010 Ed. page 310. Refer to the Table on
page 311. I did not copy all, just the related part.
GROUND
1. No
Parental
Consent

PARTY TO
FILE THE SUIT

PRESCRIPTION
PERIOD

a. Parent
or
Guardian having
Legal Charge of
no-consent
party.

Any time before

no-consent party
reaches age of
Twenty-one

b. No-Consent Party

Within Five Years

after attaining
Twenty-on

(96) Pepito executed a will that he and 3 attesting witnesses signed

following the formalities of law, except that the Notary Public failed to
come. Two days later, the Notary Public notarized the will in his law
office where all signatories to the will acknowledged that the testator
signed the will in the presence of the witnesses and that the latter
themselves signed the will in the presence of the testator and of one
another. Was the will validly notarized?
(A) No, since it was not notarized on the occasion when the signatories
affixed their signatures on the will.
(B) Yes, since the Notary Public has to be present only when the
signatories acknowledged the acts required of them in relation to the
will.
(C) Yes, but the defect in the mere notarization of the will is not fatal to

its execution.
(D) No, since the notary public did not require the signatories to sign
their respective attestations again.
ANSWER: B
(97) Venecio and Ester lived as common-law spouses since both have
been married to other persons from whom they had been separated in
fact for several years. Hardworking and bright, each earned incomes
from their respective professions and enterprises. What is the nature of
their incomes?
(A) Conjugal since they earned the same while living as husband and
wife.
(B) Separate since their property relations with their legal spouses are
still subsisting.
(C) Co-ownership since they agreed to work for their mutual benefit.
(D) Communal since they earned the same as common-law spouses.
ANSWER: B
(98) What is the prescriptive period for filing an action for revocation of
a donation based on acts of ingratitude of the donee?
(A) 5 years from the perfection of the donation.
(B) 1 year from the perfection of the donation.
(C) 4 years from the perfection of the donation.
(D) Such action does not prescribe.
ANSWER: B
(99) Before Karen married Karl, she inherited P5 million from her
deceased mother which amount she brought into the marriage. She
later used part of the money to buy a new Mercedes Benz in her name,
which Karen and her husband used as a family car. Is the car a
conjugal or Karens exclusive property?
(A) It is conjugal property since the spouses use it as a family car.
(B) It is Karens exclusive property since it is in her name.
(C) It is conjugal property having been bought during the marriage.
(D) It is Karens exclusive property since she bought it with her own
money.
ANSWER: D
(100) Because of Xs gross negligence, Y suffered injuries that resulted
in the abortion of the foetus she carried. Y sued X for, among other
damages, P1 million for the death of a family member. Is Y entitled to
indemnity for the death of the foetus she carried?
(A) Yes, since the foetus is already regarded as a child from conception,
though unborn.
(B) No, since Xs would not have known that the accident would result
in Ys abortion.

(C) No, since birth determines personality, the accident did not result
in the death of a person.
(D) Yes, since the mother believed in her heart that she lost a child.
ANSWER: C