POWER NOTES IN QUESTION NO.

CIVIL LAW Rey drafted and properly executed a notarial will.

Assume the following clauses in his will and the
following events. Discuss fully each situation and
the legal effects of the events on the testamentary
provisions.
ATTY. RONEY JONE P. GANDEZA
a. Rey’s will provides, “I leave my white Mitsubishi
UNIT 10 2ND FLOOR BBCCC BLDG. Montero with Plate No. AFB 346 to my friend, Abe.”
NO. 56 COOPERATIVE ST. COR. ASSUMPTION RD. At the time of Rey’s death, Abe has already died,
BAGUIO CITY leaving his son, Zandro.
________
Abe’s legacy is invalidated by Abe’s predecease. As a
LAW PROFESSOR result, the property devolves to Rey’s heirs in intestacy.
Zandro has no right to the property because a voluntary
COLLEGE OF LAW
heir who dies before the testator transmits nothing to
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS his heirs. (par. 1, Art. 856, Civil Code)
HARRISON ROAD, BAGUIO CITY
________ b. Rey’s will provides, “I leave to my friend, Abe, my
white Mitsubishi Montero with Plate No. AFB 346.”
Just prior to Rey’s death, Rey sold the Montero.
BAR REVIEWER
POWERHAUZ LAW REVIEW CENTER The sale of the property constitutes a revocation of the
(BAGUIO CITY) legacy. The law grants Rey the right to revoke because
of the ambulatory character of a will. Abe has no right to
UNIVERSITY OF BOHOL
question the sale because the right of an instituted heir,
(TAGBILARAN, BOHOL) legatee or devisee to the inheritance is merely inchoate.
BICOL COLLEGE (Art. 777, Civil Code)
(DARAGA, ALBAY)
QUESTION NO. 4
NORTHEASTERN COLLEGE
(SANTIAGO CITY, ISABELA) When he was still a bachelor, Abe made out a will
DON VICENTE ORESTES ROMUALDEZ naming his mother, Anne, as sole heir to an estate
EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION valued at P1 million. A few years later, Abe marries
Bea. If Abe dies while married to Bea and without
(TACLOBAN CITY)
changing his will, would Abe’s entire estate go to his
mother?
*******************************************************
No. Article 889 of the Civil Code provides that the
QUESTION NO. 1 legitime of legitimate parents or ascendants consists of
one-half of the hereditary estates of their children and
Abe received a handwritten letter from his mother
descendants. Pursuant to Article 893, if the testator
in which she expressed a desire to give her diamond
leaves no legitimate descendants, but leaves legitimate
ring to Abe’s wife. A short time later, Abe’s mother
ascendants, the surviving spouse shall have a right to
died without a will. Abe’s wife claims the ring. Will
one-fourth of the hereditary estate which shall be taken
she prevail?
from the free portion. Applying these provisions, Abe’s
No. Every will must convey clearly the intention of the mother is entitled to a legitime of P500,000, while Bea is
testator to dispose of his property after his death. (Art. entitled to a legitime of P250,000 which is to be taken
783, Civil Code) The letter of Abe’s mother is merely an from the free portion. The remainder of the hereditary
expression of an intention to make a gift mortis causa estate (Php250,000) constitutes the disposable portion
and, as the wishes of the donor had not been carried out which goes to Anne as Abe’s instituted heir.
during her lifetime, the letter would have no legal effect QUESTION NO. 5
upon the distribution of the estate.
Abe, Ben, and Carl are co-owners of a parcel of land.
The letter does not even have the effect of a valid Abe sells his share to Dave. A few months later, Ben
donation inter vivos because there is no showing that sells his share to Eric.
Abe’s wife had accepted the donation during the donor’s
lifetime; neither is there any showing that the donor a. Is Dave entitled to redeem Ben’s share?
when she was still alive came to know of such
Yes, because the right of legal redemption is not limited
acceptance. (Art. 748, Civil Code)
to the original co-owners. What matters is that Dave
QUESTION NO. 2 was already a co-owner when another co-owner (Ben)
sold his undivided share.
Abe agrees to paint Rey’s house within a month.
They agree that Abe will pay a penalty in the sum of b. Suppose Ben donates his share to Eric, may Carl
of Php10,000 in case of non-compliance. Before Abe and Dave redeem Ben’s share?
could start painting Rey’s house, he learns that
No. The right of legal redemption may be exercised only
Larry wanted his services to paint Larry’s house for
if the share of a co-owner is alienated to a third person
a higher amount. Abe now goes to Rey and tells him
by onerous title. (Art. 1620, Civil Code) Since Ben’s
that he will not be able to paint Rey’s house and
conveyance to Eric was not by onerous title but by
offers to pay the penalty of Php10,000. Is Abe
gratuitous title, Carl and Dave are not entitled to
allowed to pay the penalty?
redeem.
Yes, but only if Abe had expressly reserved such right.
c. Suppose Ben sells his share to Dave, may Carl
Article 1227 of the Civil Code expressly provides that
redeem?
the debtor cannot exempt himself from the
performance of the obligation by paying the penalty, No. The right of legal redemption may be exercised only
save in the case where this right has been expressly if the share of a co-owner is alienated to a third person
reserved for him. by onerous title. Such right of legal redemption is not
available here because the vendee is himself a co- the obligor before its revocation. A mere incidental
owner. The rationale behind the right of legal benefit or interest of a person is not sufficient. The
redemption among co-owners is to reduce the number contracting parties must have clearly and deliberately
of co-owners and avoid the entry of strangers into the conferred a favor upon a third person. (par. 2, Art. 1311,
co-ownership. If the alienation is in favor of a co-owner, Civil Code)
the number of co-owners is already reduced and no
QUESTION NO. 9
stranger has entered the co-ownership.
Abe gave Bea an engagement ring. Shortly before
QUESTION NO. 6
the wedding date, Abe was killed in a car accident.
In the following situations, two parties lay claim to Abe’s estate brought an action to recover the ring.
the same goods sold. Discuss which of the parties How would a court rule?
would prevail in each situation.
It depends. If Abe gave the ring to Bea in consideration
a. Abe steals Rey’s television set and sells it to of their marriage, the gift partakes of a donation propter
Larry, an innocent purchaser for value. Rey nuptias which may be revoked on grounds of non-
learns Larry has the set and demands its return. celebration of the marriage pursuant to Article 86(1) of
the Family Code. The action to recover the ring prevails.
Rey is entitled to the return of the set even without
reimbursement because he had been unlawfully If Abe gave the ring to Bea because of his love for her,
deprived of it. Possession of a movable, even if acquired the ring may be recovered if its value exceeds Php5,000.
in good faith, is not equivalent to title when the true This is pursuant to the rule that if the value of the
owner had lost it or had been unlawfully deprived of it, movable donated exceeds Php5,000, the donation as
unless the possessor had acquired it in good faith at a well as the acceptance shall be in writing to be valid.
public sale. (Art. 559, Civil Code) Here, Larry’s (Art. 748, Civil Code) Here, there is no showing that Abe
acquisition of the set was not at a public sale. His gave the ring to Bea in writing. The action to recover the
possession of the set, even if acquired in good faith, is ring also prevails.
never equivalent to title
But if the value of the ring does not exceed Php5,000,
b. Rey takes his television set for repair to Abe who the donation and the acceptance need not be in writing
sells new and used television sets. By accident, to be valid. Pursuant to Article 748 of the Civil Code, an
one of Abe’s employees sells the set to Larry, an oral donation of this kind is valid provided there is
innocent purchaser for value, who takes simultaneous delivery. The action to recover the ring
possession. Rey wants his set back from Larry. fails.
Rey can no longer recover the set, even if he offers QUESTION NO. 10
reimbursement. An owner of a movable who had lost it
Buyer and Seller enter into a contract under which
or had been unlawfully deprived of it can no longer
Seller is to sell all of the palay to be grown on his
recover the movable even with reimbursement if the
land to Buyer. After the contract is entered into but
possessor had acquired the property in good faith by
before the palay is harvested, the price of palay
purchase from a merchant’s stores, or in fairs, or
rises dramatically. Both Buyer and Seller claim the
markets in accordance with the Code of Commerce.
crop. Judgment for whom?
Since Larry acquired the set from a merchant’s store, his
possession of the set amounts to a valid title. Judgment for Buyer. Things having a potential existence
may be the object of a sale, but the efficacy of the sale is
QUESTION NO. 7
deemed subject to the condition that the thing will come
Amy married Ben in 2007. Amy is an actress and into existence. (Art. 1461, Civil Code) While future
Ben a businessman. In 2014, Amy figured that, even things or goods may not be donated, future things or
before their marriage Ben and his family were goods may be sold, as in this case.
notoriously involved in a networking scam. This fact
QUESTION NO. 11
was not disclosed to her at the time of the marriage.
Amy feels cheated and thinks that this can affect her Abe and Rey are co-owners of a parcel of land.
public image. Does she have a remedy? Unknown to Abe, Larry built a house on the
property with the consent of Rey. May Abe sue to
Amy has no remedy because Ben’s concealment of his
eject Larry from the property?
involvement in a networking scam does not constitute
fraud that would annul the marriage. To annul a Yes. Under Article 491 of the Civil Code, none of the co-
marriage on the ground of fraud, only the circumstances owners shall, without the consent of the others, make
enumerated under Article 46 of the Family Code alterations in the thing owned in common.
constitute fraud. No other misrepresentation or deceit Consequently, none of the co-owners can, without the
as to character, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute consent of the other co-owners, validly consent to the
such fraud as will give grounds for the annulment of making of an alteration by another person in the thing
marriage. Ben’s involvement in a shady scam, although owned in common.
concealed, constitutes misrepresentation as to his
character, but which would not annul the marriage. The consent given by Rey but without Abe’s consent
did not vest upon Larry any right to enter into the co-
QUESTION NO. 8 owned property. Larry’s entry into the property falls
under the classification “through strategy or stealth.”
SM Prime Holdings engaged a contractor for the
repainting of all SM malls nationwide. The contract The holding that there is no forcible entry because
expressly provided that the contractor use only Larry’s entry into the property was not through strategy
“paint manufactured and supplied by Yco Paints.” or stealth due to the consent given to him by one of the
The contractor used another manufacturer’s paint. co-owners is utterly wrong. Larry’s entry into the
May Yco Paints sue the contractor for damages? property without the permission of Rey could appear to
be a secret and clandestine act done in connivance with
No. Yco Paints was named in the contract merely as an
co-owner, Rey. Entry into the land effected
incidental beneficiary. If a contract should contain some
clandestinely without the knowledge of the other co-
stipulation in favor of a third person, he may demand its
fulfilment provided he communicated his acceptance to
owners could be categorized as possession by stealth. of Ana; and thirdly, Ana and Brad are not legally
(Cruz v. Catapang, G.R. No. 164110, Feb. 12, 2008) separated.
b. Can Ana and Brad file the petition jointly?
No. Under the Domestic Adoption Act, aliens are
QUESTION NO. 12 qualified to adopt Filipino children only if a) they are
former Filipino citizens who seek to adopt their
Abe leased to Rey a building subject to a monthly relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity;
rental of Php20,000. The contract stipulates that b) they seek to adopt the legitimate or illegitimate
non-payment of the rent would automatically cancel children of their Filipino spouses; and c) they are
the contract, but otherwise Rey could stay on married to Filipino citizens and seek to adopt jointly
indefinitely. After five years, Abe tried to eject Rey with their spouses a relative within the fourth civil
because he planned to tear down the building and degree of consanguinity or affinity of their Filipino
put up another. Rey refused. Can Abe eject Rey? spouses.
Yes, because the condition in the contract is purely Here, the child to be adopted is not a relative of Ana
potestative rendering it void. The continuance of the within the fourth degree of consanguinity. Neither is the
contract depends solely upon Rey’s choice: between child the legitimate or illegitimate child of Ana.
continuing paying the rentals or not, completely Therefore, Brad, being an alien, is not qualified to adopt
depriving the owner of all say on the matter. So long as the child. While Ana is qualified to adopt, Brad is not.
Rey elected to continue the lease by continuing the Even if Ana is qualified, she still cannot file the petition
payment of the rentals, the owner would never be able without being joined by her husband.
to discontinue it; conversely, although the owner should
desire the lease to continue, the lessee could effectively QUESTION NO. 15
thwart his purpose by simply stopping payment of Abe, owner of an antique shop, asked his friend,
rentals. (Encarnacion v. Baldemar, 77 Phil. 470) Rey, to mind the store while he went to a local mall
QUESTION NO. 13 to mail a package. While Abe was gone, Tessie came
into the store and purchased a rare painting for a
Tom made a will in 1998 giving to his friend, Fidel, very low price. When Abe returned, Rey told him
all his cars. In 1998, Tom had three cars, but in about the sale. Abe immediately brings action
2005, when Tom died, he already had eight cars. against Tessie for the return of the painting on
How many cars will Fidel get upon Tom’s death? claiming that Rey did not have authority to make
Fidel is entitled to three cars only, the number of cars the sale. Can Abe recover the painting?
Tom had when Tom made his will. Property acquired No. Abe cannot recover the painting because he is
between the execution of the will and the death of the estopped from denying Rey’s authority. Agency by
testator are not included among the properties estoppel arises when the principal (Abe) intentionally
disposed of, unless it appears in the will that such was or by want of ordinary care causes a third person
the intention of the testator. (Art. 793, Civil Code) (Tessie) to believe another (Rey) to be his agent who is
(NOTE: The rule under Article 793 of the Civil Code is not really employed by him.
applicable only to legacies and devises. As to institution When Abe placed Rey in charge of the store, Tessie had
of heirs, Article 781 of the Civil Code applies. Thus, an the right to assume that Rey was the agent of Abe. Rey
instituted heir is entitled to inherit from the testator on had apparent authority, because he appeared to be the
the basis of the testator’s net hereditary estate at the agent and Abe, the principal, is estopped from denying
time of his death, not at the time of execution of the the agency, even if none existed. (Art. 1883, Civil Code)
testator of his will)
QUESTION NO. 16
QUESTION NO. 14
Abe married Bea in 2005. Abe subsequently meets
Ana was an unmarried woman when a friend with an accident, and, as part of the treatment,
entrusted to her the care of an abandoned infant. receives a blood transfusion. The blood was infected
Eager to have a child of her own, she registered the with a communicable venereal disease, which Abe
child to make it appear that she is the child’s contracts, and later transmits to Bea. Can Bea sue
mother. Ana reared and cared for the child as if she for annulment?
were her own. She sent the child to exclusive
schools, doted on her, and used her surname in all No. Affliction of a contracting party with a serious and
of the child’s scholastic records. incurable sexually-transmissible is a ground to annul a
marriage only if such illness was existing at the time of
When the child was ten years old, Ana married the marriage. Moreover, affliction of a contracting party
Brad, an American. Ana later decided to adopt the of a sexually-transmissible disease, regardless of its
child by availing of the amnesty given under the law nature, existing at the time of the marriage and
to those individuals who simulated the birth of a concealed by such party, constitutes fraud that would
child. With the consent of Brad, Ana filed the annul a marriage. Here, Abe contracted the venereal
petition for adoption. disease only during the marriage. Therefore, Maria
a. Can Ana alone adopt the child? cannot use it as a ground for annulment.

No. The Domestic Adoption Act specifically provides QUESTION NO. 17

that the husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except if Tito devised one-half of a parcel of land to Ana, and
one spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the the other half to Ben, on condition that “upon Ben’s
other; or if one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own death, whether before or after that of Tito, the half
illegitimate child; or if the spouses are legally separated portion devised to Ben shall be delivered to Ana or
from each other. Ana does not fall under any of these her heirs should Ben die before Tito.” Upon Tito’s
exceptions for the following reasons: Firstly, the child to death, Ben immediately demanded partition of the
be adopted is not the legitimate child of Ana or of her property. Ana refused because according to her,
husband; secondly, the child is not the illegitimate child Ben is only a second heir. Is Ana correct?
Ana is wrong for refusing partition. A fideicommissary to Article 814 of the Civil Code. The original will
substitution has no effect unless it is made expressly. remains valid because a holographic will is not
The clause under consideration (“upon Ben’s death, invalidated by the unauthenticated insertions or
whether before or after that of Tito, the half portion alterations. (Ajero v. Court of Appeals, 236 SCRA 468)
devised to Ben shall be delivered to Ana or her heirs
QUESTION NO. 21
should Ben die before Tito”) is not a valid
fideicommissary substitution. The clause establishes Abe has a van for sale. He offers to sell the van to
only a simple or common substitution, the necessary Rey for Php300,000. Discuss the legal effect of the
result of which is that Ben, upon the death of Tito, following events on the offer.
became the owner of an undivided half of the property.
Being a co-owner of the property, Ben can rightfully a. Abe dies prior to Rey’s acceptance, and at the
demand its partition. time Rey accepts, he is unaware of Abe’s death.

QUESTION NO. 18 Abe’s death terminates the offer. An offeree’s power of

Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, a wealthy couple, offered a acceptance is terminated when the offeror or offeree
reward of Php2 million in a newspaper to the dies or is deprived of legal capacity to enter into the
person or persons furnishing information resulting proposed contract. An offer is personal to both parties
in the arrest and conviction of the person or and cannot pass to the decedent’s heirs, assigns or
persons guilty of the murder of their son. Shortly successors-in-interest. This rule applies whether or not
after the advertisement, the police arrested a the other party had notice of the death or incapacity of
suspect. The police learned that the suspect was the the other party.
boyfriend of a daughter of Ana who suggested the b. The night before Rey accepts, fire destroys the
location at which the suspect was later found and van.
arrested. The suspect was charged and convicted.
Ana tried to claim the reward money, arguing that Abe’s offer is terminated. Abe need not even tell Rey
the information she gave to the police led to the about the loss of the van for the offer to terminate. An
arrest and conviction of the murderer. When Ana offer is automatically terminated if the subject matter of
gave the information to the police, however, she had the offer is destroyed before the offer is accepted.
not known about the reward. Is Ana entitled to the
c. Rey pays Php10,000 for a thirty-day option to
reward?
purchase the van. During this period Abe dies,
Ana is not entitled to the reward because she did not and later Rey accepts the offer, knowing of Abe’s
know that it had been offered. To be effective, an offer death.
of reward, as well as any other contractual offers, must
Rey’s acceptance results in a perfected contract
be communicated to the offeree resulting in the
notwithstanding Abe’s death. When an offeror promises
offeree’s knowledge of the offer. An offer without
to hold an offer open for a specified period, and the
acceptance does not result into a contract. (Art. 1319,
offeree pays for the promise, an option contract is
Civil Code) One cannot agree to a bargain without
created. An option contract is a separate contract that
knowing that it exists.
takes away the offeror’s power to revoke the offer for
the period of time specified in the option. The death or
QUESTION NO. 19 incompetence of the offeror does not terminate an
In a cockfight involving the cocks of Abe and Rey, option contract -- unless the offeror’s personal
the sentenciador declares Abe’s cock the winner. performance is essential to the fulfillment of the
Not satisfied with the sentenciador’s decision, Rey contract. Consequently, Rey can still exercise the option
commences an action against Abe, praying that the against Abe’s estate, since Abe is not required to
judgment of the sentenciador be voided and his cock perform the act of conveying the van to Rey.
be declared the rightful winner. The judge QUESTION NO. 22
immediately dismisses the case because he knew of
no law governing cockfights. He also orders the Abe, a Filipino naturalized American, now a
return of Rey’s bet. Abe appeals. Who prevails? resident of New York, comes back to the Philippines
as a balikbayan. He is arrested at the NAIA in
Abe prevails. In Chu Jan v. Bernas, 34 Phil. 631, the possession of a caliber .38 Smith and Wesson.
Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s order of Charged with illegal possession of firearms, he
dismissal and remanded the case to the lower court. A moves to quash the criminal complaint based on his
judge should not refrain from rendering a judgment just constitutional right as a New Yorker to bear arms.
because there is no law that governs a particular case. Decide.
In the absence of a law or principle of law, the rules of
fair play must be applied. (Sec. of Justice v. Lantion, 322 Motion denied. The crime was committed within our
SCRA 160 [2000] When a provision of law is silent or territorial jurisdiction and is therefore punishable here.
ambiguous, judges ought to invoke a solution Under the principle of generality, no one is exempt from
responsive to the vehement urge of conscience. our penal laws, except those who enjoy diplomatic
(Amatan v. Aujero, 248 SCRA 511) immunity under international law. (Art. 14, Civil Code;
Art. 2 Revised Penal Code; see also 3 rd par., Art. 17, Civil
QUESTION NO. 20 Code)
Tom died in 2005 leaving a holographic will which QUESTION NO. 23
is entirely written, dated, and signed by his hand.
The will contains insertions and cancellations which Abe and Amy are married in Baguio City. Abe goes
are not authenticated by his signature. For this to Hongkong and marries Bea, a Filipina domestic
reason, the probate of the will is opposed by Tom’s helper. After a month of connubial bliss in the
relatives who stood to inherit intestate from him. Crown Colony, Abe goes to Singapore and marries
May Tom’s will be probated? Connie, a Filipina “house manager.” After two
months with Connie, Abe goes to Brunei where he
Yes, the will as originally written may be probated. The marries Annie, a Filipina GRO. After three months of
insertions and alterations are void because they were connubial bliss in Brunei, Abe heads for home sweet
not authenticated by the full signature of Tom pursuant
home. May Abe be prosecuted for bigamy in the producing calves). Based on this belief, Abe and Rey
Philippines at the instance of his first wife, Amy? negotiated a price several hundred pesos less than
it would have been had the cow been capable of
No, because Abe did not commit any crime in Philippine
breeding. Just before delivery, Abe discovered the
territory. (Art. 14, Civil Code) Bigamy is committed by
cow had conceived a calf, and he refused to deliver
entering into a second or subsequent marriage. The first
the much more valuable cow to Rey. Does Abe have
marriage, which was entered into in the Philippines, is
legal grounds to annul the contract?
not bigamous. The subsequent marriages, which are
bigamous marriages, were all entered into abroad, or Yes, Abe may annul the sale on the ground that he
outside Philippine territory, and therefore beyond our committed a substantial mistake as to the substance of
criminal jurisdiction. the subject matter of the contract. The mistake is
substantial enough because a barren cow is a
substantially different cow than a breeding one. The law
QUESTION NO. 24 is clear: Even though there may have been no damage to
the party seeking the annulment, a contract may be
Ana and Amy, Filipinos, both women, enter into a annulled where the consent is vitiated by mistake. (Art.
same-sex marriage in the United States, where such 1390, Civil Code)
a marriage is valid. Is the marriage also valid here?
QUESTION NO. 28
The general rule enunciated in the first paragraph of
Article 26 of the Family Code should apply, under which ABC Co. insured Pedro’s house for Php1 million. As
marriages valid where celebrated are also valid here. stated in the policy, ABC Co. undertakes, upon total
The case does not fit into any of the exceptions loss, to either pay the insured value of the house, or
enunciated in the foregoing provision of Article 26 of rebuild it, upon proof of total loss. If during the life
the Family Code. Therefore, same sex marriage is valid of the policy the insured property is completely
here if valid where celebrated. destroyed, may Pedro insist that ABC Co. rebuild his
house rather than being paid its insured value?
However, it would seem that the case falls under one of
the exceptions to the application of the proper foreign No, because in alternative obligations, the right of
law, i.e., it runs counter to an important public policy of choice is given to the debtor, unless it has been
the forum -- that a marriage should be between a man expressly granted to the creditor. (par. 1, Art 1200, Civil
and a woman. Because of this important public policy, Code) In the absence of an agreement in the insurance
same-sex marriage is void here. policy giving the right of choice to the insured, the
general rule applies, and therefore, the insurer may
QUESTION NO. 25 choose which of the two prestations to perform, the
A ten-year old boy shot a girl with an air gun performance of one being sufficient.
resulting in her death. The court acquitted the boy
in the criminal case for having acted without QUESTION NO. 29
discernment. Undaunted, the girl’s parents filed for
For damage or injuries arising out of negligence in
damages against the boy’s parents. How would a
the operation of a motor vehicle, what is the nature
court rule?
of the liability of the registered owner?

The court would hold the boy’s parents liable. Their The registered owner may be held civilly liable with the
liability is made natural as a logical consequence of the negligent driver either subsidiarily or solidarily.
duties and responsibilities of parents exercising The owner may be held subsidiarily liable if the
parental authority which includes controlling, aggrieved party seeks relief based on a delict or crime
disciplining and instructing their children. under Articles 100 and 103 of the Revised Penal Code.
In this jurisdiction, the liability of parents is vested by On the other hand, the owner may held solidarily if the
law which assumes that when minor children living complainant seeks relief based on a quasi-delict under
with their parent commit a tortuous act, the parents are Articles 2176 and 2180 of the Civil Code.
presumed negligent in the performance of their duty to (NOTE: It is the option of the plaintiff whether to waive
supervise the children under their custody. (Tamargo completely the filing of the civil action, or institute it
vs. CA, 209 SCRA 519) with the criminal action, or file it separately or
QUESTION NO. 26 independently of a criminal action. His only limitation is
that he cannot recover damages twice for the same act
Ana and Bea, grade 6 pupils, were assigned by their or omission of the defendant)
teacher to weed the grass in the school premises.
Ana found a plastic headband with an earthworm QUESTION NO. 30
and tossed it to Bea hitting Bea in her right eye Abe works as a janitor in a building at night. On his
resulting in the loss of the eye. Are Ana’s parents way to work, he finds a piece of gold necklace that
liable? contains several precious stones. The following day,
No. It was not shown that the parents could have Abe decides to take the necklace to a jewelry store
prevented the damage as their child was in school and to have it appraised. While pretending to weigh the
they have the right to expect their child to be under the jewelry, an employee of the jeweler removes
care and supervision of their teacher. Besides, the act several of the stones. Abe brings an action to
was an innocent prank and usual among children at recover the stones from the jeweler. Will he
play and which no parent could have any special reason succeed?
to anticipate much less guard against. (Cuadra Yes. As the party in physical possession of the jewelry,
vs .Monfort, 35 SCRA 160) Abe is entitled to be respected in its possession which
QUESTION NO. 27 he can enforce against anyone, except the true owner.
(Art. 559, Civil Code)
Abe and Rey entered into a contract for the
purchase of a cow. Abe, owner of the cow, told Rey QUESTION NO. 31
that the cow was barren (incapable of breeding and
If a Filipino is convicted by final judgment abroad, supervision of his employees because his liability is
may he be required to serve time here? based on a quasi-delict.
No, because there is no legislation allowing such
practice. It would in effect require the Philippine c. May Carlito claim moral damages from both
government not only to recognize, but also to enforce, a vehicle owners?
foreign judgment which is penal in nature. (Opinion of Yes, Carlito can claim moral damages against Ben, the
the Sec. of Justice No. 142, s. 1992) owner of the cargo truck, because of the injuries he
QUESTION NO. 32 suffered, but as against Abe, Carlito can claim moral
damages only if he proves reckless negligence on the
When may a divorce decree validly obtained in a part of the common carrier amounting to fraud.
foreign country be recognized in the Philippines?
d. May Dante’s heirs claim moral damages from
A divorce obtained abroad by an alien may be both vehicle owners?
recognized in our jurisdiction provided the decree of
divorce is valid according to the national law of the The heirs of Dante can claim moral damages against
foreigner. However, the divorce decree and the both vehicle owners because the rules on damages
governing national law of the alien spouse who arising from death due to a quasi-delict are also
obtained the divorce must be proved. Our courts do not applicable to death of a passenger caused by breach of
take judicial notice of foreign laws and judgments. Like contract by a common carrier. (Arts. 1755, 1764, 2206
any other facts, both the divorce decree and the national and 2219, Civil Code)
law of the alien spouse must be alleged and proved QUESTION NO. 35
according to our law on evidence. (Garcia v. Recio, G.R.
No. 138322, October 2, 2001) John, Paul, George, and Ringo are co-owners of an
unregistered land. Unknown to his co-owners, John
QUESTION NO. 33 registered the land in his name. What is the effect of
Tom died in 1990 with a will. In his will, he devised the registration of the land in John’s name?
a house and lot to Abe, as his first heir and to Abe’s John never acquired ownership of the land. Registration
son, Ben, as his second heir. Ben died in 1995 of a parcel of land subject of co-ownership in the name
survived by two children (Eric and Fidel). Abe died of one co-owner is not a repudiation of the co-
in 2000 also survived by two children (Chito and ownership for purposes of prescription. (Ceniza v. Court
Dante). of Appeals, 181 SCRA 552 [1990]) Under Article 494 (5)
In the settlement of Abe’s estate, Eric and Fidel of the Civil Code, no prescription shall run in favor of a
(Ben’s heirs) sought to exclude the house and lot co-owner or co-heir so long as he expressly or impliedly
originating from Tom on grounds that they are the recognizes the co-ownership. The registration by John
exclusive owners of the property. Chito and Dante of the community property in his name merely created
opposed the motion on grounds that Ben, the a trust in favor of his co-owners.
second heir, predeceased Abe, and that therefore,
the fideicommissary substitution did not produce QUESTION NO. 36
any effect as far as Ben, the second heir, is If a marriage is annulled or declared void by final
concerned. Who prevails? judgment, how soon may the former spouses
remarry?
Eric and Fidel, Ben’s heirs, prevail. Ben, the second heir,
acquires a right to the succession from the time of the A decree of annulment or decree of absolute nullity
testator’s death, even though he, Ben, should die before terminates a marriage. There being no more subsisting
the first heir. Ben inherited from Tom as second heir marriage to speak of, the former spouses may marry
when the latter died in 1990. When Ben died in 1995, he again, but only after they comply with Article 52 of the
transmitted his right as second heir to his own heirs, Family Code. This provision requires the former
Eric and Fidel, such that when Abe (first heir) died in spouses to register the with the appropriate local civil
2000, the right of Eric and Fidel over the property registry or registry of property the following: a)
became absolute. judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity of
marriage; b) partition and distribution of the properties
QUESTION NO. 34 of the spouses; and c) delivery of the children’s
presumptive legitimes. Failure to comply with these
A passenger bus owned by Abe and a cargo truck
(recording) requirements will render void the
owned by Ben collided. Carlito, a bus passenger,
remarriage of the former spouses.
suffered injuries, while Dante, another bus
passenger, died. The drivers of the two vehicles QUESTION NO. 37
were at fault. Carlito, the injured passenger, and the
heirs of Dante sued the owners of both vehicles for Abe is convicted by final judgment of a crime. Abe’s
damages. wife later files an action for legal separation. Which
of the following facts would most likely have an
a. May Abe successfully invoke the defense of due impact on the case?
diligence in the selection and supervision of his
employees to avoid liability? A. Abe is sentenced to suffer imprisonment for
more than six years.
No, he cannot. This is because his liability as a common
carrier is based on a breach of contract of carriage. Such B. Abe is convicted of a crime involving moral
a defense will only serve to mitigate Abe’s liability turpitude.
because by then he will be considered as a debtor in C. Abe is convicted of a crime which carries the
good faith. accessory penalty of civil interdiction.
b. May Ben invoke the same defense? D. Abe is a rescidivist.
Yes, Ben can properly and successfully invoke the same (A) would most likely have an impact on the case. Under
defense of due diligence in the selection and Article 55 of the Family Code, a final judgment
sentencing the respondent spouse to imprisonment of
more than six years, even if pardoned, is a ground for Abe leased to Rey a building for a ten years. Abe has
legal separation. repeatedly assured Rey that if he should decide to
sell the building, he will give Rey the right of first
That Abe is convicted of a crime involving moral
refusal.
turpitude as stated in (B) is of no consequence if the
penalty is less than six years. On the sixth year of the lease, Abe informed Rey that
he was willing to sell to Rey the building for Php5
That Abe is sentenced to suffer the accessory penalty of
million. Rey offered to buy the building for Php4.5
civil interdiction as stated in (C) would have an impact
million. Abe did not reply. One week later, Rey
only if the crime to which Pedro is convicted carries a
received a letter from Larry informing him that the
sentence of more than six years.
building had been sold to him by Abe for Php5
Abe’s rescidivism in (D) has no impact because it is not million, and that Larry will not renew Rey’s lease
one of the grounds for legal separation. when it expires.
QUESTION NO. 38 a. Did Abe violate Rey’s right of first refusal?
Amy donated to Betty a parcel of land on condition
that Betty builds on the property a one-storey No. The lessee’s right of first refusal does not go so far
kiddie library for a day care center within two as to give him the power to dictate on the lessor the
years. Betty has not yet built a library on the price at which the lessor should sell his property. Upon
property after two years. Amy, with notice to Betty, the facts given, Abe had sufficiently complied with his
sold the land to Connie. Is the sale a revocation of commitment to give Rey a right of first refusal when he
the donation? offered to sell the property to Rey for Php5 million,
which was the same price he got in selling it to Larry.
No. The act of selling the property donated cannot be Abe certainly had the right to treat Rey’s counter-offer
considered as a valid revocation because a formal action of a lesser amount as a rejection of his offer to sell at
in court to revoke the donation must be filed by the Php5 million. Thus, he was free to find another buyer
donor pursuant to Article 764 of the Civil Code which upon receipt of such counter-offer.
speaks of an action that has a prescriptive period of four
years from non-compliance with the condition stated in b. Suppose Abe gave Rey an option to purchase
the donation. instead of a right of first refusal, will that make
any difference in your answer?
The rule that there can be automatic revocation without
the benefit of a court action does not apply in this case No, the answer will still be the same. An option must be
because the donation is devoid of any provision supported by a consideration separate and distinct from
providing for automatic revocation in the event of non- the purchase price. In this case, there was no separate
compliance with the stipulated condition. Thus, a court consideration. Therefore, the option may be withdrawn
action is necessary to be filed within four years from the by Abe at anytime.
non-compliance with the condition violated. c. Is a right of first refusal governed by the Statute
QUESTION NO. 39 of Frauds?

Abe met Bea at a garments factory where both were No. A right of first refusal is not among the contracts
working. After a brief courtship period, the two got which are required to be in writing under the Statute of
married, and lived for a time as husband and wife. Frauds. The application of Article 1403, paragraph 2(e),
When the factory closed down, Bea went to Taiwan of the Civil Code presupposes the existence of a
to seek employment. That was the last time Abe saw perfected contract of sale of real property. A right of
her. Abe recently obtained a court decree declaring first refusal need not be written to be enforceable and
Bea presumptively dead. The Solicitor General may be proved by oral evidence. (Rosencor Development
disagrees with the ruling arguing that Abe had Corporation v. Inquing, 354 SCRA 119 [2001])
failed to exert earnest efforts to locate Bea and that QUESTION NO. 41
Abe failed to prove his well-founded belief that Bea
was already dead. The Solicitor General assails the Abe agrees to lease to Rey an office space for five
ruling through a Notice of Appeal. Should the appeal years at a fixed rent. Before Rey takes possession of
be given due course? the premises, Rey learns of a much more
advantageous opportunity and established his office
No. The decision of the court granting Abe’s petition for elsewhere. To force Rey to perform, Abe brings an
declaration of his wife’s presumptive death under action to enforce the agreement. What is Rey’s
Article 41 of the Family Code is immediately final and strongest argument?
executory upon notice to the parties. (Art. 247, Family
Code) The decision is therefore not subject to ordinary The Statute of Frauds is Rey’s strongest argument. To be
appeal, and the attempt to question it through a Notice enforceable, the Statute of Frauds requires certain
of Appeal is unavailing. agreements to be reduced into writing and signed by
the party to be charged, including agreements creating
In sum, the losing party in a summary proceeding for an interest in land. Leases for more than one year are
declaration of presumptive death under Article 41 of therefore generally covered by the Statute of Frauds.
the Family Code may file a petition for certiorari with Since the agreement between Abe and Rey is for a five-
the Court of Appeals on the ground that, in rendering year lease, the Statute of Frauds is Rey’s strongest
judgment thereon, the trial court committed grave defense to the enforcement of the agreement. (Art. 1403,
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. par. 2(e), Civil Code)
From the decision of the Court of Appeals, the aggrieved
party may elevate the matter to the Supreme Court via a QUESTION NO. 42
petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Abe is a police officer. During his lifetime, he
Rules of Court. (Republic v. Granada, G.R. No. 187512, contracted two marriages: the first with Bea, and
June 13, 2012) the second, with Carol. Upon Abe’s death, Bea and
QUESTION NO. 40 Carol separately filed claims for benefits pertaining
to Abe from various government agencies. Because
she received a smaller amount, Carol brought an
action for the return of at least one-half of the two months later he dies from pneumonia. The
amount which Bea received. administrator of Abe’s estate wants Rey to return
the car. Rey refuses, claiming the car was given to
Two important facts came to light during the trial.
him by Abe as a gift. Discuss whether Rey will be
First, Carol had no knowledge of Abe’s previous
required to return the car to Abe’s estate.
marriage and that she became aware of it only at
the funeral. Second, the prior marriage of Abe to Rey is required to return the car to Abe’s estate. The
Bea was solemnized without a marriage license. Is donation is mortis causa, not inter vivos. It is a mortis
Carol entitled to half of Abe’s death benefits? causa donation because Abe intended it to take effect
upon his death because of his heart attack. That Abe
The marriage of Abe and Bea is void for lack of a valid
died from a cause unrelated to the heart attack does not
marriage license. The same is true with respect to the
detract from the fact that Abe’s death is the operative
marriage of Abe and Carol for lack of a judicial decree
cause that would have conveyed ownership of the car to
declaring the first marriage a nullity. Given that the
Rey. Since the donation was not expressed in
marriages are void, the applicable property regimes
accordance with the formalities of wills, the donation is
would be governed by Articles 147 and 148 of the
void and Rey never acquired ownership of the car.
Family Code.
QUESTION NO. 45
Considering that the marriage of Abe and Carol is a
bigamous marriage, having been solemnized during the Tom’s driveway runs the entire length of his
subsistence of a previous marriage then presumed to be property and connects to Jerry’s property. Jerry has
valid, the application of Article 148 is in order. a right of way over Tom’s driveway, which is
obviously Jerry’s only access to the nearest public
The disputed death benefits clearly consists of benefits
road. The right of way is duly recorded in the
from governmental agencies earned by Abe as a police
Registry of Property. Jerry sells his property to
officer. Unless Carol presents proof to the contrary, it
Larry. Is Larry entitled to use the driveway?
could not be said that she contributed money, property
or industry in the acquisition of these monetary Yes, he being the new owner of the dominant estate.
benefits. Hence, they are not owned in common by Carol The owner of the dominant estate cannot use the
and Abe, but owned by the deceased (Abe) alone and easement except for the benefit of the immovable
Carol has no right whatever to claim the same. originally contemplated. Since the law makes no
distinction whether the owner of the dominant estate
By intestate succession, the “death benefits” of Abe shall
be the original owner at the time of the establishment of
pass to his legal heirs. Carol, not being the legal wife of
the easement, as in the case of Jerry, or a mere
Abe, is not one of them.
transferee of the dominant estate, as in the case of
QUESTION NO. 43 Larry, then there is no need to distinguish, and this is so
because the easement is constituted for the benefit of
On May 1, Abe goes into Rey’s Clothing Store to the dominant estate, regardless of its owner. (Art. 626,
purchase a suit. Abe finds a suit he likes for Civil Code)
Php7,000 and buys it. The suit needs alteration so
Abe leaves the suit at the store. Abe is to pick up the
repaired suit at the store on May 10. Consider the QUESTION NO. 46
following separate sets of circumstances: Romeo and Juliet are married. Shortly before their
a. One of Rey’s major creditors obtains a judgment wedding, Romeo donated to Juliet in a notarized
on the debt which Rey owes and has the court instrument a parcel of land on condition that should
issue a writ of execution to collect on that Juliet die before Romeo and there be no children,
judgment all clothing and other apparel in Rey’s one-half of the property shall be given to Juliet’s
possession. Discuss Abe’s right to the repaired parents. Nine months after the wedding, Juliet died
suit on which the judgment creditor has levied. without issue. Juliet’s parents now claim the one-
half share given to them in the deed of donation.
Abe is entitled to demand the return of the suit. Upon Will they succeed?
payment of the price and its delivery to him, Abe
became the owner of the suit. (Art. 1477, Civil Code) No. Insofar as the one-half share is concerned, it cannot
While Rey was in possession of the repaired suit at the be a valid donation propter nuptias nor a donation inter
time of the levy, Rey was in possession not as an owner vivos nor a donation mortis causa.
but in another capacity. The repaired suit therefore is The donation is not a donation propter nuptias because
already beyond the reach of Rey’s judgment creditor at the share was not given to one of the spouses. The
the time of the levy. donation is not a donation inter vivos, for there was no
acceptance on the part of the parents. The donation is
b. On May 9, through no fault of Rey, his clothing not a donation mortis causa because the deed of
store is completely burned, and all contents are donation did not have the formalities of a will, aside
a total loss. Between Abe and Rey, who suffers from the fact that the donor, Romeo, is still alive.
the loss of the suit destroyed by fire? Explain.
QUESTION NO. 47
Abe bears the loss of the suit pursuant to the res perit
A friend called Abe by cellular phone from Tarlac
domino rule, he being its owner. The obligation of Rey to
City to say that his car had suffered a tire blow out
return the suit after May 10 is deemed extinguished by
and that he must have a new tire for his car to get
a fortuitous event. (Art. 1174, Civil Code)
back home to Baguio City. Over the telephone, Abe
said to the owner of the car repair shop, “Give him
QUESTION NO. 44 the tire and I will pay for it.” Is Abe’s oral promise
Abe has a severe heart attack and is taken to the enforceable?
hospital. He is not expected to live, and he knows it. Yes. Abe’s promise was not one of guaranty, but one in
Because he is a bachelor without close relatives which he made himself directly and primarily
nearby, Abe gives his car keys to his close friend, responsible for the amount of credit extended. Thus,
Rey, telling Rey that he is expected to die and that Abe made his own contract with the repair shop owner,
the car is Rey’s. Abe survives the heart attack, but as he was not guaranteeing his friend’s obligation. Abe’s
oral promise is binding on him. This is not a case of a declaration of nullity of his first marriage is without
special promise to answer for the debt, default or merit. The Family Code settled once and for all the
miscarriage of another which the law requisites to be in conflicting jurisprudence on the matter. A declaration of
writing to be enforceable. absolute nullity of a marriage is now explicitly required
either as a cause of action or a ground for defense.
QUESTION NO. 48
Where the absolute nullity of a previous marriage is
Abe, a door-to-door salesman of vacuum cleaners, sought to be invoked for purposes of contracting a
demonstrated one of the latest model cleaners at second marriage, the sole basis acceptable in law for
Mrs. Peralta’s house. Mrs. Peralta said that she was said projected marriage to be free from legal infirmity is
interested in buying the cleaner but would have to a final judgment declaring the previous marriage void.
consult her husband before deciding. Abe offered to (Teves v. People, G.R. No. 188775, August 24, 2011)
leave the machine with Mrs. Peralta, saying, “I’ll
QUESTION NO. 51
leave it here so that you can show it to your
husband. Here is my number. If I don’t hear from Abe granted Rey a road right of way. Rey was at that
you by the end of the month, I’ll send you a bill for time using a cart and a carabao to transport his
the machine.” She agreed. A month passed and Abe’s products from his farm to the market. Ten years
bill arrived. Is Mrs. Peralta liable to pay the vacuum later, Rey asked for a widening of the easement as
cleaner? he had resorted to the use of a jeepney to transport
his products. Can Rey successfully demand a wider
Yes. By her silence, Mrs. Peralta accepted Abe’s offer
easement?
and would therefore be liable under the agreement
discussed with Abe. Both parties had agreed that Yes, because the width of an easement of right of way
continued silence would be the manner of acceptance. A shall be that which is sufficient for the needs of the
contract may be perfected in any manner sufficient to dominant estate and may, accordingly, be changed from
show a meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the time to time. (Art. 651, Civil Code) The needs of the
thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract, dominant estate determine the width of the passage.
including conduct by both parties manifesting such (Sta. Maria v. Court of Appeals, 285 SCRA 351 [1998])
meeting of their minds. (Art. 1319, Civil Code)
QUESTION NO. 52
QUESTION NO. 49
Abe, a widower, has two children (Basilio and
Husband obtains a decree of legal separation Crispin). Basilio has two children (Dante and Eric),
because of Wife’s sexual infidelity. Is Wife entitled and Crispin has one child (Fidel). Abe died without a
to inherit from Husband? will with an estate valued at Php600,000.
It depends. a. At the time of Abe’s death, Basilio and Crispin
have long died. How shall Abe’s estate be
By intestate succession, she cannot. According to Article
distributed?
63(4) of the Family Code, the offending spouse shall be
disqualified from inheriting from the innocent spouse The grandchildren inherit by representation and the
by intestate succession. following distribution would then take place: Dante and
Eric; Php150,000 each, taking Basilio’s share. Fidel;
By testate succession, if the husband executed the will
Php300,000, taking Crispin’s share.
prior to the decree of legal separation, the wife cannot
inherit from her husband. According to Article 63(4) of The above distribution is per stirpes in accordance with
the Family Code, provisions in favor of the offending the rule that grandchildren always inherit by right of
spouse made in a will shall be revoked by operation of representation, whether they concur with children of
law. However, if the will was executed subsequent to the the decedent or not. (Arts. 981 and 982, Civil Code)
decree of legal separation, the wife will then be able to
b. Suppose Basilio and Crispin have renounced
inherit from her husband. In such a case, there is a tacit
their inheritance, how shall Abe’s estate be
or implied pardon. (Art. 1033, Civil Code by analogy)
distributed?
QUESTION NO. 50
The grandchildren would inherit in their own right.
Abe and Bea were married in 1992. Shortly after Hence, Dante, Eric, and Fidel will each receive a one-
their wedding, Bea left to work abroad. While on third share, or Php200,000.
vacation in the Philippines in 2003, she discovered
The above distribution is per capita in accordance with
that Abe had married their neighbour, Mila, in 2001.
the rule that heirs who repudiate their share may not be
She also discovered that Abe filed in 2002 with the
represented (Art. 977, Civil Code) Since Basilio and
Manila RTC a complaint for declaration of nullity of
Crispin have repudiated their shares, the grandchildren
marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code.
will then inherit in their own right being the relatives
Aggrieved by Abe’s acts, Bea retaliated by filing with
(in the descending line) next in degree of the decedent.
the Makati RTC a complaint for bigamy against Abe.
In 2007, during the pendency of the bigamy case, QUESTION NO. 53
the Manila RTC rendered a decision invalidating the
marriage of Abe and Bea on grounds that Bea was Abe and Rey are business partners in buying,
psychologically incapacitated to comply with her developing, and selling real estate. Abe learns
essential marital obligations. This decision has through the partnership staff that five hectares of
since become final. Should the Makati RTC still land will soon come on the market and that the staff
convict Abe of bigamy? will recommend that the partnership purchase the
land. Abe purchases the property secretly in his
Yes. When Abe contracted a second marriage in 2001, own name. If the partnership discovers these facts
his marriage with Bea was still subsisting. The finality of and immediately brings suit, what will the court
the decision declaring the nullity of his first marriage say?
with Abe came about only in 2007 or about six years
after his second marriage. It is evident therefore that A court will create a constructive trust and declare that
Abe committed the crime charged. The contention that Abe, as legal owner of the property, holds the title to the
Abe cannot be charged with bigamy in view of the property in trust for the partnership who, in equity, is
actually entitled to the property. A constructive trust No, because Amy’s agency is coupled with interest and
may be imposed when a party holding legal title to therefore irrevocable. Even if Amy dies, the power is
property stands in a fiduciary relation to another still not affected. An agency coupled with an interest is a
resulting in an equitable duty to convey the property on relationship created for the benefit of the agent. The
the ground that he would be unjustly enriched if he agent actually acquires a beneficial interest in the
were permitted to retain it. In the problem presented, subject matter of the agency. Under these
Abe stood in a fiduciary relation to the partnership and circumstances, it is not equitable to permit a principal
would be unjustly enriched if allowed to retain the to terminate the agency at will. Hence, this type of
property. Because Abe secretly purchased the property agency is irrevocable.
in his own name and for his own benefit, Abe was under
QUESTION NO. 57
an equitable duty to convey the property to the
partnership. Seller, in reply to an inquiry from Buyer, sent a
letter dated December 8 stating terms upon which
(NOTE: A constructive trust arises by operation of law
he would sell 100 to 300 computer units of a certain
as an equitable remedy that enables plaintiffs to recover
brand at a certain price. On December 16, Buyer
property (and sometimes damages) from defendants
sent a letter to Seller ordering 90 computer units on
who would otherwise be unjustly enriched. In other
those terms. On December 18, Seller sent a telegram
words, when a transaction takes place in which the
to Buyer rejecting the order. The next day Buyer
person who takes the legal estate in prop `erty cannot
sent Seller a telegram stating, “Please enter an
also enjoy the beneficial interest without violating some
order for 150 computer units per your letter of
established principle of equity, the court will create a
December 8.” Seller refused the order, and Buyer
constructive trust. The legal owner is declared to be a
sued for breach of contract. Judgment for whom?
trustee for the parties who, in equity, are actually
entitled to the ownership of the property.) Judgment for Seller. Buyer’s telegram of December 16,
referring to the terms stated in Seller’s letter of
QUESTION NO. 54
December 8, varied the number of computer units, and
Tom names his friend, Fidel, as one of his heirs on was therefore a counter-offer. A counter-offer is a
condition that Fidel should not enter any gambling rejection of the original offer. On December 8, the Seller
casino here or abroad for one year after Tom’s declined to fulfill the Buyer’s order, thus the
death. Is Fidel entitled to receive the inheritance negotiations between the two parties was closed. As a
upon Tom‘s death? result, the Buyer’s attempt to fall back on the Seller’s
original offer by the telegram of December 19,
Yes, but Fidel must give a security to guarantee that he
therefore, created no rights against the Seller.
would not enter any gambling casino for one whole year
upon Tom’s death. The security is called “caucion QUESTION NO. 58
muciana.” If Fidel enters any casino during the
Husband sues Wife for declaration of nullity of
prohibited period, he should return whatever he may
marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code. In
have received, together with its fruits and interest. (Art.
due course, the court rendered judgment nullifying
879, Civil Code)
the marriage. The court then directed the former
QUESTION NO. 55 spouses to liquidate their common properties
pursuant to Article 147 of the Family Code, and to
Debtor owes Creditor Php400,000. The debt is the
partition the “family dwelling” and all their other
subject of a lawsuit, and the court awards Creditor a
properties in equal shares.
judgment of Php400,000. To satisfy the judgment,
the sheriff levies on Debtor’s family home in Baguio In addressing the issue on the disposition of the
City valued at Php500,000. Debtor opposes the levy family dwelling, the lower court declared that the
on grounds that his family home is exempt from property regime of the former spouses shall be
execution. Judgment for whom? governed by the rules on co-ownership, and that the
provisions on liquidation of the absolute
Judgment for Creditor. Under Article 160 of the Family community and conjugal partnership under Articles
Code, if judgment is rendered against the owner of a 102 and 129 of the Family Code find no application.
family home, and the creditor has reasonable ground to Not satisfied with the ruling, Husband seeks a
believe that the value of the family home is in excess of partial reconsideration on grounds that Articles 50,
Php300,00 (urban land) or Php200,000 (rural land), 51, and 52 in relation to Articles 102 and 129 of the
the creditor may apply for an order directing the sale of Family Code are applicable. Husband’s move is
the family home. In the case presented, the value of expected because the couple’s children have chosen
Debtor’s family home is in excess of Php300,000 so the to live with him, and applying Articles 102 and 129
same may be sold at public auction to satisfy the of the Family Code, the family dwelling will be
judgment against him. The foregoing rule applies even if adjudicated to him. Is Husband correct?
the increase in value of Debtor’s family home resulted
from improvements introduced by Debtor. No. In a void marriage, regardless of the cause, the
property relations of the parties during the period of
QUESTION NO. 56 cohabitation is governed by the provisions of Article
Amy needs Php100,000, so Ben agrees to lend her 147 of the Family Code. Under this provision, a peculiar
the money. To secure the loan, Amy delivers some form of co-ownership arises when a man and a woman
of her jewelry to Ben and signs a power of attorney who are capacitated to marry each other, live
giving Ben the power, in case she fails to repay the exclusively with each other as husband and wife
loan, to sell the jewelry as her agent for the best without the benefit of marriage or under a void
price that can be obtained and to pay out of the marriage.
proceeds the unpaid amount of the loan, giving any Article 147 of the Family Code presumes that property,
surplus to her. Having obtained the money, Amy including the family dwelling, in the absence of proof to
tells Ben that she revokes the power to sell. Is Amy’s the contrary, were acquired by the parties through their
power to sell revoked? joint efforts and will be owned by them in equal shares.
A party who did not participate in the acquisition of
property shall still be considered as having contributed
thereto jointly if said party’s efforts considered mainly the risk that he would not cause harm to others by
in the maintenance of the family household. operating the van.
The rules set up to govern the liquidation of either the b. Can Pedestrian prevail under the res ipsa
absolute community or the conjugal partnership, the loquitor rule concerning Driver’s alleged
property regimes recognized for valid and voidable negligence?
marriages, in the latter case until the marriage is
Driver is guilty of negligence but not on the basis of res
annulled, are irrelevant to the liquidation of the co-
ipsa loquitor. He was negligent because he operated the
ownership that existed between Husband and Wife.
van knowing that he was susceptible to falling asleep
The first paragraph of Article 50 of the Family Code, while operating a vehicle.
applying paragraphs (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Article 43
The fact that Driver left the road and struck Pedestrian
thereof, relates only, by its explicit terms, to valid and
is not a type of accident that happens only if the Driver
voidable marriages, and exceptionally, to a void
was negligent. There are many other situations that
marriage under Article 40 of the Family Code, i.e., the
could have caused the Driver to veer off the road,
declaration of nullity of a subsequent marriage
including mechanical failure, defective steering wheels,
contracted by a spouse of a prior void marriage before
or emergency reaction. Thus, Driver’s negligence is one
the latter is judiciary declared void. (Valdez v. RTC of
of the many possible causes. This factor makes it highly
Quezon City, 260 SCRA 221 [1996])
unlikely that res ipsa loquitur could be used in such a
QUESTION NO. 59 situation.
Distinguish between ordinary legitime and c. What arguments will Pedestrian make in
presumptive legitime. support of his claim of negligence, what defenses
can reasonably be asserted, and who is likely to
Ordinary legitime arises only when a person dies. (Art. prevail in a lawsuit filed by Pedestrian against
777, Civil Code) The decedent may either be a child, Employer?
parent or spouse, ascendant or descendant. In a
presumptive legitime, the spouses whose marriage is Pedestrian will argue that an employer is vicariously
annulled or declared void are still alive. It is the liable for the negligence of his employees committed
marriage itself which “died” or is terminated. within the scope of the employment relationship. Here,
Driver was negligent as discussed. Employer hired
While in both kinds of legitimes the marriage is
Driver to operate the van and is thus an employer
terminated, the causes of termination are not the same.
within the meaning of vicarious liability. Driver’s
In presumptive legitime, the cause is either the
negligence occurred within the scope of the
annulment of the marriage or its nullification. In
employment relationship because Driver was making
ordinary legitime, the cause of termination is the death
deliveries for Employer when the van left the road and
of the decedent who is not necessarily a spouse.
struck the Pedestrian.
The term legitime in the law on succession presupposes
Employer will argue that he is liable for negligence only
the existence of a valid and effective will; in presumptive
if it can be determined that he failed to exercise the
legitime, no will is presupposed. It applies without any
diligence required in the selection and supervision of
relation to the existence or non-existence of a valid and
his employees. Here, Employer made reasonable efforts
effective will of the “spouses.”
to investigate Driver’s prior job references and physical
QUESTION NO. 60 conditions. By exerting such efforts, Employer would
not be liable for negligent hiring or supervision of
Employer hired Driver to operate a delivery van. Driver.
Before allowing Driver to operate the van, Employer
checked Driver’s prior job references, required QUESTION NO. 61
Driver to undergo a physical examination by a
Abe, a widower, has two married children (Ben and
doctor, and provided Driver with extensive training
Carla). Carla has two children (Drew and Eric),
in motor vehicle safety. Medic, the doctor who
while Ben has no children. Abe dies, leaving a will
examined Driver, discovered that Driver had a sleep
that gives all his property equally to his children,
disorder that caused Driver to spontaneously fall
Ben and Carla, and provides that should a child
asleep and that Driver had on several occasions
predecease him, leaving grandchildren, the
fallen asleep while driving. Driver pleaded with
grandchildren are to inherit equally with the
Medic not to inform Employer of the sleep disorder.
surviving child. Carla has predeceased Abe. Abe dies
Medic agreed, and omitted this information from
with an estate valued at Php180,000.
the physical examination form that he sent to
Employer. Medic also sent a letter to Employer a. Discuss the distribution of Abe’s estate if the will
assuring Employer that Driver was “fit for is invalid.
employment as a delivery van operator.” Employer
then provided Driver with a daily delivery route Should Abe’s will be denied probate, his estate shall be
and paid him a monthly salary. distributed as in intestacy. Under Article 981 of the Civil
While Driver was making deliveries for Employer, Code, should children of the deceased and descendants
the van left the road and struck Pedestrian, who of other children who are dead, survive, the former shall
suffered severe injuries as a result. Pedestrian filed inherit in their own right, and the latter by right of
a lawsuit for damages against Driver and Employer. representation. Consequently, Ben shall inherit in his
own right Php90,000, while the grandchildren (Drew
a. Is Driver guilty of negligence? and Eric) shall each inherit Php45,000 by right of
Yes. By operating the delivery van, Driver owes a duty representation.
to exercise reasonable care to others on the road. Driver b. Discuss the distribution of Abe’s estate if the will
failed to conform to the required standard of care when is valid.
his van left the road and struck Pedestrian. He knew
that he was susceptible to falling asleep and yet he took Ben and Carla were the heirs originally instituted by
Abe in his will. Such institution concerns only the free
disposal. Because Carla predeceased Abe, the proviso community or conjugal partnership shall be
that the free disposal shall be received equally by Ben liquidated in the said proceeding.
and the children of Carla (Drew and Eric) is valid.
Consequently, Ben and the children of Carla are first 2. If no special proceeding for the settlement of estate
given their legitimes as follows: Ben, Php45,000 which of the deceased spouse is instituted, the surviving
he shall receive in his own right; Drew and Eric shall spouse shall liquidate the absolute community or
each inherit Php22,500 by representation. The free conjugal partnership either judiciary or extra-
disposal of Php90,000 is then divided equally among judiciary within one year from the death of the
the three instituted heirs, Ben, Drew and Eric. In sum, spouse.
the heirs shall inherit as follows:
Ben : 45,000 (in his own right) 3. If no liquidation is made within one year from the
30,000 (as voluntary heir) death of the deceased spouse, any disposition or
encumbrance involving any community or conjugal
Drew : 22,500 (by representation) property of the terminated marriage shall be void.
30,000 (as voluntary heir)
4. Should the surviving spouse contract a subsequent
Eric : 22,500 (by representation) marriage without liquidating the community
30,000 (as voluntary heir) property or conjugal partnership, a mandatory
regime of complete separation of property shall
QUESTION NO. 62 govern the property relations of the subsequent
marriage. This is to protect the heirs of the deceased
Abe owes Rey Php100,000 due on June 1. Abe has spouse. (Arts. 103 and 130, Family Code)
been in a freak car accident, has already missed a
great deal of work, and consequently will not have QUESTION NO. 65
the money on June 1. Larry, Abe’s father, offers to Abe has a wife and two sons, both legitimate. His
pay Rey Php25,000 in four equal installments if Rey estate, including a house, a car, shares of stocks, and
will excuse Abe from any further liability on the savings in a bank account, is worth Php2.1 million.
debt. Rey accepts. If Abe dies without a will, how shall his estate be
distributed?
a. Is the transaction a novation?
Abe’s wife and two sons will each inherit Php700,000. If
Yes, the transaction is a novation because it involves the a widow or widower and legitimate children or
substitution of Larry as new debtor in place of Abe, the descendants are left, the surviving spouse has in the
original debtor. This is true even if the substitution is succession the same share as that of each of the
with the knowledge of Abe or without his knowledge or children. (Art. 996, Civil Code)
against his will. (Art. 1290, Civil Code)
QUESTION NO. 66
b. Does the agreement between Rey and Larry have
to be in writing to be enforceable? Abe is married to Bea, while Chito is married to
Donna. Abe and Chito are brothers. Due to a
No. Larry’s promise was not one of guarantee, but one property dispute, Abe and Bea filed a possessory
in which he made himself directly and primarily action against Chito and Donna. Citing Article 151 of
responsible for the amount of credit extended. Thus, the Family Code, Chito and Donna moved to dismiss
Larry made his own contract with Rey, as he was not the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
guaranteeing his son’s obligation. Put otherwise, Larry’s Chito and Donna claim that the absence of an
oral promise is binding on him because this is not a case allegation in the complaint that earnest efforts
of a special promise to answer for the debt, default or toward a compromise between members of the
miscarriage of another which the law requisites to be in same family had been made and that it was
writing to be enforceable. (Art. 1403, par. 2(a)) unsuccessful, renders the complaint fatally
defective. Should the court dismiss the complaint?
QUESTION NO. 63
No. Article 151 of the Family Code does not apply
Mrs. Cruz leaves a painting worth Php50,000 in her
because it is not exclusively between or among family
will to her grandson, Sam. Shortly before her death,
members. The inclusion of Donna as defendant and Bea
the painting is destroyed in a fire. Mrs. Cruz does
as plaintiff takes the case out of the ambit of Article 151
not change her will. What will Sam receive?
of the Family Code. The phrase “members of the same
Sam is not entitled to receive anything from his family” refers to the husband and wife, parents and
grandmother’s estate. This is pursuant to Article 957 of children, ascendants and descendants, and brothers and
the Civil Code which provides that the legacy or devise sisters, whether of the full or half-blood. Here, Carol
shall be without effect if the thing bequeathed is totally (Abe’s wife) and Donna (Chito’s wife) are considered
lost during the lifetime of the testator, or after the strangers to the family of Abe and Chito for purposes of
testator’s death without the heir’s fault. Article 151 of the Family Code. (Hontiveros v. RTC Iloilo
City, Br. 25, 309 SCRA 340)
QUESTION NO. 64 QUESTION NO 67
What are the rules for the liquidation of the Seller and Buyer were dealers in cattle. During an
absolute community of property or conjugal extremely hot spell, Seller was worried over the fact
partnership of gains in case of death of a spouse? that he had too many cattle on the market.
The rules regarding the liquidation of the absolute Discovering this fact Buyer jokingly offered to buy
community or conjugal partnership are the same. These the cattle. After some dickering as to price, the
are: parties apparently came to an agreement. Buyer
later insisted that the whole transaction was a joke.
Seller believed that Buyer’s offer to buy the cattle
1. If a special proceeding for the settlement of estate of was made seriously. Seller sues for damages. Who
deceased persons under the Rules of Court has been wins?
instituted after the death of one spouse, the absolute
Seller wins. A contract results from an offer and the of the Civil Code is proper only in case of sale of the
acceptance thereof. In other words, every contract must credit in litigation, and not to cases of barter, donation,
have mutual consent of the parties which is manifested or other modes of acquisition.)
by a meeting of the offer and the acceptance upon the
QUESTION NO. 71
thing and the cause which are to constitute the contract.
The offer must be certain and the acceptance absolute. Aragon is indebted to Benitez and Chua in the
(Art. 1319, Civil Code) The elements of offer and amount of Php200,000. Upon maturity of the debt,
acceptance are present in the instant problem. Aragon fails to pay so Benitez and Chua sue him in a
Undisclosed intentions of one party are not part of the complaint for sum of money. Aragon answers the
contract. If the law were otherwise, a party might complaint and before actual hearing, Benitez
successfully escape his obligations on a contract by assigns his right to the credit to Chua (presumably
stating that he was only joking. ½ or Php100,000) for only Php75,000. How much is
Aragon obliged to pay Chua?
QUESTION NO. 68
Aragon is liable to pay Php200,000 to Chua because the
Brenda orally offers to sell a number of household
assignment was made to a co-owner. In other words,
items to Daria. No item is worth more than
Aragon cannot redeem the credit in litigation sold by
Php30.00, but the total price for the items is
Benitez to Chua. Article 1635 of the Civil Code
Php550.00. Daria orally accepts the offer. Brenda
enumerates the three instances when the debtor cannot
later receives an offer from another buyer to buy all
redeem a credit in litigation which is sold by his
the items for Php750.00, which Brenda accepts. Can
creditor, one of them being an assignment or sale to a
Brenda argue that the contract with Daria is not
co-owner.
enforceable because it was made orally and not in
writing? QUESTION NO. 72
Yes, because the total price in the contract is Php550.00. In 1976, pursuant to a homestead patent, Abe
In sale of goods, the Statute of Frauds, under Article obtained an original certificate of title over a big
1403 No. 2(d) of the Civil Code, requires that the tract of land. Upon Abe’s death in 1978, the land
contract be in writing to be enforceable if the price was transferred by succession to his son Ben who
isPhp500.00 or more. The claim that the Statute of obtained a certificate of title in his name. In 1989,
Frauds does not apply because the unit price of each Ben mortgaged the land to PNB as security for a
item sold is less than Php500.00 is not tenable because loan. Because Ben failed to pay, the bank extra-
what controls is not the unit price but the total price of judicially foreclosed the mortgage, purchased the
the goods sold. property at public auction, and secured a title in its
name in 1997.
QUESTION NO. 69
Invoking Section 119 of the Public Land Act, Ben
Husband and Wife own a property. Wife donated
tried to repurchase the property in 2002, but the
her interest in the property to Husband five years
bank refused. The bank defends that there can no
before her death; Husband devised his half of the
longer be any right of repurchase because the
property to his brother, Abe. Husband and Wife
property was no longer covered by a free patent but
died simultaneously in a car accident. Husband is
by a TCT, and that the right to repurchase had
survived by his brother, Abe, while Wife is survived
already prescribed.
by her brother, Rey. What interests do Abe and Rey
hold on the property? a. Is Ben still allowed to repurchase the property?
Abe inherits half of the property, while Rey inherits the Yes. The plain intent of Section 119 of the Public Land
other half, both as intestate heirs of the deceased Act is to give the homesteader every chance to preserve
couple. The couple died simultaneously, and therefore, and keep in the family the land that the State has
there shall be no transmission of successional rights gratuitously given him as a reward for his labor in
from one to the other. (Art. 43, Civil Code). Because the cleaning, developing, and cultivating it.
couple died simultaneously, they retained their
respective half interests in the property, which in turn The fact that the land had been inherited by Ben and a
devolve to their heirs. Wife’s earlier donation of her half new title in his name is issued does not bring it outside
share to Husband is void because it was made during the purview of Section 119. In fact, the policy behind the
the marriage and is not a moderate gift under the law is fulfilled because the land remains in the family of
circumstances. (Art. 87, Family Code) the patentee.

QUESTION NO. 70 b. Is Ben’s right to repurchase already time-

barred?
Debtor owes Creditor Php100,000. Upon maturity of
the loan, Debtor fails to pay and so Creditor sues No. If the land is mortgaged to parties other than rural
him for collection sum of money. Debtor answers banks, the mortgagor may redeem the property within
the complaint and before actual hearing, Creditor one (1) year from the registration of the certificate of
assigns Debtor’s promissory note to Stranger for sale pursuant to Act No. 3135. If the mortgagor fails to
Php80,000. Stranger now demands payment from do so, he or his heirs may repurchase the property
Debtor. How much is Debtor obliged to pay within five (5) years from the expiration of the
Stranger? redemption period also pursuant to Section 119 of the
Public Land Act. (Rural Bank of Davao City, Inc. v. CA,
Debtor is liable for Php80,000 only, plus cost and 217 SCRA 554 [1993])
interest. Under Article 1634 of the Civil Code, when a
credit in litigation is sold, the debtor shall have a right In extrajudicial foreclosures under Act 3135, the debtor
to extinguish it by reimbursing the assignee for the or his successors-in-interest may redeem the property
price the latter paid therefor, the judicial costs incurred within one year. This redemption period should be
by him, and the interest on the price from the day on reckoned from the date of registration of the certificate
which the same was paid. In paying only such amount, of sale. (Belisario v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 165
Debtor exercises his right of legal redemption. SCRA 191 [1988]. The five-year period fixed in Section
119 begins to run from the expiration of the one-year
(NOTE: The right of redemption granted in Article 1634 redemption period.
 the buyer himself delayed the actual delivery of the
Here, the certificate of sale in the name of the bank was
goods, he necessarily bears the loss of the goods. (Art.
registered in 1997 and the one-year redemption period
1504(2), Civil Code)
expired in 1998. Reckoned from that day, Ben had a
five-year period, or until 2003, to exercise his right to QUESTION NO. 77
repurchase under Section 119 of the Public Land Act.
Abe works for Yellow Cab delivering pizzas in a
Consequently, the complaint filed in 2002 was not time-
motorcycle to customers across the city. One day, in
barred. .
his haste to meet the “30 minutes or free pizza”
QUESTION NO. 73 delivery standard, he causes an accident in which
Rey’s car is damaged. Against whom can Rey file a
Tessie heard her neighbors talking about her son,
civil action for damages?
Abe, a minor and a polio victim. The neighbours
said that Tessie’s son is a cripple who has no future Rey can file a civil action either against Abe for
in life. Does Tessie have a remedy against her breaching his duty and causing Rey harm, or against
neighbors? Yellow Cab for being vicariously liable for Abe’s actions,
or against both. (Arts. 2176 & 2180, Civil Code)
Tessie is well within her right to institute a civil action
for damages against her neighbours because of their QUESTION NO. 78
vexing or humiliating comments about her son’s
Abe and Ana are engaged to be married. A month
physical condition. Article 26 of the Civil Code clearly
before their wedding, Ana was forced to marry Rey.
provides that every person shall respect the dignity,
Despite the marriage, however, Abe and Ana
personality, privacy, and peace of mind of his
continued their amorous relationship thru text
neighbours. Talking about Tessie’s crippled son is a
messaging and social networking expressing their
clear sign of disrespect warranting a cause of action for
love for each other. Rey consults you on whether
damages.
these acts of Abe and Ana would constitute an
QUESTION NO. 74 actionable wrong. Advise Rey.
Due to a sudden burst of lightning, Abe’s carabao I would advise Rey that he can commence an action
which was tied to a tree in his farm scampered to a against Abe for damages for meddling with or
nearby field. The crops on the field which were to be disturbing Rey’s married relations with Ana. This is an
harvested in a few days were totally destroyed. actionable wrong recognized under Article 27 (2) of the
Should Abe be held liable for the damages to the Civil Code.
crops?
QUESTION NO. 79
No. Article 1174 of the Civil Code expressly provides
Tito dies with a will leaving his entire estate of Php6
that no person shall be responsible for those events
million to his live-in partner, Marie. Tito is survived
which could not be foreseen, or which though foreseen,
by his brother, Sonny, and his legitimate half-sister,
were inevitable. Here, the incident under which Abe’s
Ana.
carabao scampered to the nearby field because of a
sudden burst of lightning. is an occurrence which could a. Is the testamentary disposition in Tito’s will
not have been foreseen by Abe. valid?
QUESTION NO. 75 Yes. Tito’s testamentary disposition of his entire estate
to his common-law wife is in accordance with the law
Debtor owes Creditor the sum of Php20,000 on a
on succession. Tito has no compulsory heirs, who can
personal debt. Trudy, a third person, promises
inherit from him. (Art. 887, Civil Code) Under the law,
Debtor that he would pay Creditor the full debt if
brothers and sisters are not compulsory heirs.
Debtor will give Trudy's children dance lessons.
Accordingly, Tito can bequeath his entire estate to
Debtor faithfully provides dance lessons regularly
anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated to inherit
over an extended period. Can Creditor sue Trudy for
from him. A common-law wife is not incapacitated
the payment of the debt?
under the law, as Tito is not married to anyone.
Yes, because Creditor is an intended beneficiary of the
b. Suppose Tito dies intestate, how shall his estate
agreement between Debtor and Trudy. Under Article
be distributed?
1311 of the Civil Code, if a contract should contain some
stipulation in favour of a third person, he may demand Assuming that Tito’s entire estate of Php6 million is his
its fulfilment provided he communicated his acceptance net hereditary estate, Sonny is entitled to receive Php4
top the obligor before its revocation. A mere incidental million which is twice the intestate share of Ana, a half-
benefit or interest of a person is not sufficient. The sister, who is entitled to inherit Php2 million. Marie is
contracting parties must have clearly and deliberately not entitled to inherit anything because she is not a
conferred a favour upon a third person. Such a legal heir of Tito. (Art. 1006, Civil Code)
stipulation obtains in this case.
QUESTION NO. 80
QUESTION NO. 76
Abe owns an agricultural land with no access to a
A seller shipped goods to a buyer by common public road. He had been passing through Rey’s land
carrier, using a shipment contract. When the carrier with Rey’s acquiescence for over 20 years. Abe
arrived at the buyer's location, the buyer refused to recently subdivided his property into ten
accept the goods unless the driver unloaded them residential lots and sold them to different persons.
inside the buyer's warehouse. The driver refused Rey immediately blocked the pathway and refused
and the goods were subsequently damaged. Who to let Abe’s buyers pass through his land. Did Abe
bears the risk of loss? acquire an easement of right of way over Rey’s land?
The buyer bears the risk of loss, since this was a No, he did not. An easement of right of way is
shipment contract and the seller had completed the discontinuous in nature - it is exercised only if man
performance obligations. Where actual delivery has actually passes over somebody’s land. Under Article 622
been delayed through the fault of either the buyer or of the Civil Code, discontinuous easements, whether
seller the goods are at the risk of the party in fault. Since
apparent or non-apparent, may only be acquired by
Y’s decision in building the perimeter fence is not
title.
binding upon X and Z. Expenses to improve the thing
owned in common must be decided upon by a majority
QUESTION NO. 81 of the co-owners who represent the controlling interest.
(Arts. 489 and 492, Civil Code) Since Y does not
To secure a loan from a bank, Abe assigned his constitute a majority with a controlling interest in the
leasehold rights over a stall at the public market in co-ownership, his decision does not bind the other co-
favour of the bank. The deed of assignment provides owners.
that in case of default in the payment of the loan, the
bank shall have the right to sell Abe’s rights over the d. Is the decision of Z in building a grotto binding
market stall as his attorney-in-fact, and to apply the on X and Y? May Z require X and Y to contribute
proceeds to the payment of the loan. their 2/3 share of the expense?
a. Is the deed of assignment a cession or a Z’s decision in building a grotto is not binding upon X
mortgage? and Y. Expenses to embellish the thing owned in
common must be decided upon by a majority of the co-
The deed of assignment is a mortgage, not a cession of owners who represent the controlling interest. (Arts.
leasehold rights. A cession would have transferred 489 and 492, Civil Code) Since Z does not constitute a
ownership to the bank. The grant of authority to the majority with a controlling interest in the co-ownership,
bank to sell the leasehold rights in case of default is his decision does not bind the other co-owners.
proof that no such ownership was transferred and that e. What is the legal effect of the sale executed by X
a mere encumbrance was constituted. There would and Z?
have been no need for such authority had the deed of
assignment been a true cession. The sale to B does not bind the 1/3 share of Y and
covers only the 2/3 share of X and Z in the land. (Art.
b. If the assignment is a mortgage, is the stipulation 493, Civil Code) Moreover, Y has the right to redeem the
authorizing the bank to sell the leasehold rights 2/3 share sold to B by X and Z considering that B is a
in case of default a pactum commissorium? third person to whom the ideal shares of the co-owners
No, it is not. The stipulation is pactum commissorium were onerously alienated. (Art. 1620, Civil Code)
only when default in the payment of the loan QUESTION NO. 83
automatically vests ownership of the encumbered
property in the bank. Here, the bank does not Seller sells to Buyer his house and lot for Php1
automatically become the owner of the property upon million payable in five equal annual instalments.
default of the mortgagor. (Art. 2088, Civil Code) The The sale is registered and title is issued to Buyer.
bank has to sell the property and apply the proceeds to Buyer later failed to pay the last three instalments
the loan. and Seller files an action for collection of sum of
money, damages and attorney’s fees. Seller
QUESTION NO. 82 immediately proceeds to the Registry of Deeds for
X, Y and Z are co-owners in equal shares of a annotation of a notice lis pendens on Buyer's
residential house and lot. During the co-ownership, certificate of title. Is the notice lis pendens proper?
the co-owners performed the following acts on the The notice lis pendens is not proper because Seller’s
co-owned property: a) X caused the repair of the action against Buyer is only for collection of sum of
foundation of the house, then titling to one side, to money, damages, and attorney's fees. Annotation of a
prevent the house from collapsing; b) Y and Z notice lis pendens is proper only in cases involving the
mortgaged the house and lot to secure a loan; c) Y recovery of possession of real property, quieting of title
built a concrete perimeter fence on the lot; d) Z built or removal of a cloud thereon, or partition or any other
a beautiful grotto in the garden; and e) X and Z sold proceeding affecting title to the land or for the use or
the property to B for a good price. occupation thereof. The action filed by Seller does not
a. Is the decision of X in repairing the foundation of fall on anyone of these.
the house binding on Y and Z? May X require Y
and Z to contribute their 2/3 share of the QUESTION NO. 84
expense? Abe lost Php100,000 in a card game, but he had no
Yes. Under the law, each co-owner has the right to more cash to pay Rey, the winner. When the card
compel the other co-owners to contribute to the game ended, Abe still owed Rey Php30,000 which
expense of preservation of the thing (house) owned in Abe promised to pay in two weeks. When Abe still
common in proportion to their respective interests in failed to pay after three months, Rey filed a suit to
the co-ownership. (Arts. 485 and 488, Civil Code) The collect.
expense incurred by X in repairing the foundation of the a. Will the collection suit prosper?
house is decidedly an expense to preserve the house by
preventing its collapse. The collection suit will not prosper. Under Article 2014
of the Civil Code, no action can be maintained by the
b. What is the legal effect of the mortgage executed winner for the collection of what he has won in a game
by Y and Z? of chance.
The mortgage does not bind X and shall be deemed to b. Could Tessie institute an action to recover the
cover only the respective rights and interests of Y and Z amount which her husband lost?
in the house and lot. The mortgage shall be limited to
the portion which may later be allotted to Y and Z in the If the money paid by Abe to Rey were conjugal or
partition of the property owned in common. (Art. 493, community property, the wife could sue to recover it
Civil Code) pursuant to Article 117(7) of the Family Code which
expressly provides that losses in gambling are borne
c. Is the decision of Y in building a perimeter exclusively by the loser-spouse. Conjugal or community
concrete fence binding on X and Z? May Y funds may not be used to pay for such losses. And if the
require X and Z to contribute their 2/3 share of money were the exclusive property of Abe, the wife may
the expense?
also sue to recover it under Article 2016 of the Civil
b. Is Rey obliged to pay Abe for the use of the
Code if she and the family needed the money for
passenger jeepney?
support.
No, Rey is not obliged to pay Abe for the use of the
QUESTION NO. 85
passenger ieepney because commodatum is essentially
Abe sold his car to Ben who issued a post-dated gratuitous. (Art. 1933. Civil Code)
check. Before the due date of the check, Ben sold the
car to Dave, an innocent purchaser for value. The
c. Is Rey liable to Abe for the loss of the jeepney?
check issued by Ben was later dishonored because
Ben had already closed his checking account when Yes, because Rey devoted the thing to a purpose
he issued the check. Abe sued to recover the car different from that for which it has been loaned (Art.
from Dave on grounds that he had been unlawfully 1942, par. 2, Civil Code)
deprived of the car by Ben’s deception. Will the suit
prosper? QUESTION NO. 88

The suit will not prosper because Abe was not Abe owns a mango plantation which he can no
unlawfully deprived of the car although he was longer properly manage due to a lingering illness.
unlawfully deprived of the price. The perfection of the Since Abe is indebted to Rey in the amount of
sale and the delivery of the car was sufficient to allow P500,000, he asks Rey to manage the plantation and
Ben to acquire ownership of the car, which he can apply the harvest to the payment of his obligation,
lawfully transfer to Dave. Article 559 of the Civil Code until his debt has been fully paid. Rey agrees.
applies only to a person who is in possession in good a. What kind of agreement did Abe and Rey enter
faith of the property, and not to the owner thereof. into?
Here, Ben was the owner, and, hence, Dave acquired the
title to the car. Non-payment of the price in a contract of Abe and Rey had entered into an accessory contract of
sale does not render ineffective the obligation to antichresis. Under Article 2132 of the Civil Code, by a
deliver. The obligation to deliver a thing is different contract of antichresis the creditor acquires the right to
from the obligation to pay its price. receive the fruits of an immovable of his debtor, with
the obligation to apply them to the payment of the
interest, and thereafter to the principal of his credit.
QUESTION NO. 86 b. What obligations are imposed by law on Rey as a
In 1980, Abe leased to Rey a piece of land for a consequence of his agreement with Abe?
period of three years with an option to purchase the Rey is obliged to pay taxes and charges upon the land
property during the period of the lease for the price and bear the necessary expenses for preservation and
of Php500,000. After the expiration of the three- repair which he may deduct from the fruits. (Art. 2135,
year lease period, Abe allowed Rey to remain in the Civil Code)
leased premises on a monthly basis at the same
rental rate. In 1984, Rey tendered the amount of c. Does the law require any specific form for the
Php500,000.00 to Abe and demanded that Abe validity of the contract?
execute a deed of absolute sale of the land in his
As to perfection, antichresis is a formal or solemn
favor. Abe refused on the ground that Rey no longer
contract. The amount of the principal and interest must
had an option to buy the property. If Rey files an
be specified in writing, otherwise the antichresis is void.
action for specific performance against Abe, who
(Art. 2134, Civil Code)
will prevail?
d. May Abe reacquire the plantation before
Abe will prevail. The implied renewal of the lease on a
payment of his indebtedness?
month-to-month basis did not have the effect of
No. Article 2136 of the Civil Code specifically provides
extending the life of the option to purchase which
that the debtor cannot reacquire the enjoyment of the
expired at the end of the original lease period. Abe is
immovable without first having totally paid what he
therefore correct in refusing to sell on the ground that
owes the creditor. However, it is potestative on the part
the option had expired.
of the creditor to do so in order to exempt him from his
QUESTION NO. 87 obligation under Article 2135 of the Civil Code. The
debtor cannot reacquire the enjoyment, unless Rey
Because of their friendship, Abe loaned his compels Abe to enter again the enjoyment of the
passenger jeepney to Rey to allow Rey to bring his property.
wife from Baguio City to NAIA for his wife’s travel to
Hongkong. On the way back to Baguio, people QUESTION NO. 89
stopped the passenger jeepney. Rey stopped for
On January 5, D obtains a loan of Php1 million from
them and allowed them to ride on board, accepting
C. The promissory note does not stipulate any
payments as if they were ordinary passengers of
payment of interest. The note is due on December
jeepneys plying their route.
31. Before the due date of the loan, D and C become
When Rey was cruising at moderate speed along political enemies. Out of spite, D deliberately
the national highway in Binalonan, Pangasinan, a defaulted in paying the note, forcing C to bring suit.
wayward vehicle coming from the opposite
a. How much can C recover from D?
direction hit the jeepney. The jeepney was wrecked.
C can recover from D the amount of Php1 million,
a. What kind of agreement did Abe and Rey enter
together with interest at the legal rate of 12% from the
into with respect to the use of the passenger
date of judicial or extrajudicial demand. Inasmuch as D
jeepney?
is in bad faith, he is also liable to pay all damages which
The contract is a commodatum.(Art. 1933. Civil Code) may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance
Commodatum is a contract by which one of the parties of the obligation. (Art. 2201(2). Civil Code)
(bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something not
b. Can C ask for moral damages?
consumable so that the latter may use it for a certain
time and return it.
Yes. Under Article 2220 of the Civil Code, moral QUESTION NO. 93
damages are recoverable in case of breach of contract
While sojourning in New York, A and B, both
where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
Filipinos, exchanged marital vows through the
Here, D acted in bad faith because he refused to pay the
internet. Assuming such a marriage is valid in New
value of the note to spite C.
York, is the marriage valid here?
c. Can C ask for nominal damages?
Yes, the marriage is also valid here. The case does not
No, he cannot. Nominal damages are not recoverable in appear to fall under any of the exceptions mentioned in
this case because C is already indemnified of his losses paragraph 1 of Article 26 of the Family Code. Such being
with the award of actual and compensatory damages. the case, the general rule on lex loci celebrationis
Nominal damages are adjudicated only in order that a applies, that is, valid there, valid here.
right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded
QUESTION NO. 94
by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and
not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any A and B are Filipino overseas workers in Libya.
loss suffered by him. (Art. 2231. Civil Code) They fell in love and decided to get married in
accordance with Libyan law. On the day of the
d. Can C ask for temperate damages?
wedding, A fell ill and could not make it to the
C may ask for, but would most likely not be awarded, ceremony. Upon advice of his Libyan lawyer, he
temperate damages considering that his actual damages requested his best man to stand as proxy during the
may already be compensated upon proof thereof with wedding. The marriage was celebrated in
the promissory note. Temperate damages may be accordance with Libyan law and valid there as such.
awarded only when the court finds that some pecuniary Is the marriage valid in the Philippines?
loss has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the
Yes. Under Article 26 of the Family Code, a marriage
nature of the case, be proved with certainty. (Art. 2224,
valid where celebrated is valid in the Philippines. To
Civil Code)
this general rule, the law enumerates exceptions, but a
e. Can C ask for attorney’s fees? marriage by proxy is not one of those enumerated.
Hence, the marriage is valid. Expressio unius est exclusio
Yes, considering that D's act or omission has compelled
alterius.
C to litigate to protect his interests. Furthermore.
attorneys' fees may be awarded by the court when it is QUESTION NO. 95
just and equitable. (Art. 2208, Civil Code)
H, a Filipino, marries W, an American, in New York.
QUESTION NO. 90 At the time of the marriage, H was psychologically
incapacitated to enter into marriage, although the
Abe, a widower, has three legitimate children
incapacity manifested itself five years after the
(Allan, Ben, and Charlie). He executed a will
wedding. Assuming that the marriage is valid in
instituting as his heirs to his estate of Php120,000
New York, is it also valid here?
his two children, Allan and Ben, and his friend,
Fidel. Upon his death, how should Abe's estate be No. The rule is: “valid there, valid here,” except those
divided? prohibited under Arts. 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37
and 38 of the Family Code. The marriage is void under
The institution of Allan, Ben and Fidel to the entire
Article 26 of the Family Code. The exception applies.
estate results in the preterition of Charlie, a compulsory
heir of Abe in the direct line. This preterition of Charlie QUESTION NO. 96
annuls the institution of Allan, Ben and Fidel as Abe’s
Two Filipino second cousins got married in Japan
heirs. Intestacy results. Allan, Ben and Charlie will each
where such a marriage is void. Is the marriage valid
get Php40,000. Fidel gets nothing.
here?
QUESTION NO. 91
In the preceding question, suppose Abe instituted No. The settled rule is: “valid there, valid here.” Hence,
his two children, Allan and Ben, as his heirsl, but he “void there, void here” also. This notwithstanding the
gave a legacy of Php30,000 to his friend, Fidel. How fact that had the marriage been solemnized here, it
should Abe’s estate be divided upon his death? would have been perfectly valid.

Assuming that Charlie was preterited, the institution of QUESTION NO. 97

Allan and Ben is annulled, but the legacy of Php30,000 H, a Filipino, marries W, his French girlfriend, in
to Fidel shall be respected for not being inofficious. Paris. At the time of the marriage, H is
Therefore, the remainder of Php90.000 will be divided psychologically incapacitated to enter into marriage
equally among Allan, Ben, and Charlie. under Philippine law. Under French law, the
QUESTION NO. 92 marriage is voidable. Is the marriage also voidable
in the Philippines?
Rey and Abe are co-owners of a parcel of land. Rey
recently discovered that Abe had sold his (Abe’s) No. The marriage is void. The rule is: “valid there, valid
share to Larry on January 1, 2015. The following here”; “void there, void here”; “voidable there, voidable
year, Rey offered to redeem Abe’s share from Larry, here.” However, the case falls under one of the
but Larry replied that Rey's right to redeem had exceptions, Article 36 of the Family Code.
already prescribed. Is Larry correct?
QUESTION NO. 98
Larry is not correct. Rey can still enforce his right of
legal redemption as a co-owner. Article 1623 of the Civil Abe constructed in good faith a house on the land of
Code gives a co-owner 30 days from written notice of Ben. As owner of the land, Ben opted to
the sale by the vendor to exercise his right of legal appropriate the house and bound himself to pay the
redemption. Here, the 30-day period for the exercise by proper indemnities.
Rey of his right of redemption had not even begun to
a. Before the indemnities are given, may the
run because no notice in writing of the sale appears to
builder (Abe) retain the house?
have been given to him by Abe.
Yes, Abe, the builder, is entitled to retain the house till agreement. Buyer now sues to compel Seller to sell.
he is paid the full indemnities since he is a builder in Is Seller required to sell the property to Buyer?
good faith. (Art. 448, Civil Code)
No, for this was merely a unilateral promise on the part
b. Is Abe entitled to the rents that accrue in the of Seller to sell, without a corresponding promise on the
meantime in case the building is leased to part of Buyer to buy. Seller’s promise is not binding on
another? him since there was no consideration distinct from the
price. Hence, even if Seller’s promise had already been
No, since his possession is no longer that of a possessor
accepted by the would-be buyer, Seller could still legally
in good faith. If Abe receives the rents, he must deduct
withdraw from the agreement.
them from whatever indemnity is due him.
QUESTION NO. 102
c. Is Abe legally entitled to the fruits that will
accrue during the time he retains the premises? X, the owner of a certain jewelry, entrusts them to Y
for sale or return of the jewelry upon a specified
No, for again we may say that he is no longer a
period. Y sells the jewelry to Z, but retains the price.
possessor in good faith.
Can X obtain possession of the jewelry from Z?
d. Is Ben entitled to collect rent from Abe while the It depends. If the phrase “on sale or return” refers to a
latter retains the house? true case of sale from X to Y, it is clear that delivery to Y
transferred ownership to him, and the subsequent sale
No, otherwise the right of retention till indemnity is
and delivery of the jewelry by Y to Z also transferred
given would be rendered nugatory.
ownership to Z. Hence, X cannot obtain possession of
e. If Ben elects to compel Abe to pay the value of the jewelry from Z. X’s right would be merely to proceed
the land (assuming that its value is not against Y as a buyer who has not paid.
considerably greater), is Abe, the builder,
If, on the other hand, the phrase “for sale or return”
entitled to the right of retention?
merely meant that X was constituting Y as his agent
No, because he is the one required to pay. The right of with authority to sell the jewelry, X would still have no
retention applies only when landowner appropriates right to recover the jewelry from Z (for after all, Z had
the building. already paid for it and therefore, there can possibly be
no rescission for non-payment of the price). But this
QUESTION NO. 99 time, X’s remedy would be to proceed against Y not as a
Abe purchased a property adjacent to that of Ben. buyer but as an agent who has failed to render an
Abe later discovered after a relocation survey that a account of his transaction and who has failed to deliver
30-square meter portion of his lot is occupied by to the principal whatever he may have received by
Ben’s house. Despite repeated demands, Ben virtue of the agency. (Art. 1891, Civil Code)
refused to vacate the encroached portion. He claims QUESTION NO. 103
that under Article 448 of the Civil Code, he has the
pre-emptive right to purchase the portion Seller sells to Buyer a house and lot for Php500,000
encroached upon. Is Ben correct? payable within 60 days after the execution of the
deed of sale. It is expressly agreed in the deed that
No. Article 448 of the Civil Code is unequivocal that the the sale would ipso facto be of no effect upon
option to sell the land on which another builds, plants Buyer’s failure to pay as agreed. Buyer fails to pay
or sows in good faith, belongs to the landowner. This on maturity, so Seller sues to declare the contract of
advantage in Article 448 of the Civil Code is accorded no force and effect. If Buyer tenders payment before
the landowner because “his right is older, and by the the filing of the action (but after the stipulated date
principle of accession, he is entitled to the ownership of of payment), would the action still prosper?
the accessory thing.” (Benitez v. C, 266 SCRA 242)
The action would not prosper. According to the law, “in
QUESTION NO. 100 the sale of immovable property, even though it may
A contract to sell stipulates that “title will be have been stipulated that upon failure to pay the price
transferred by Seller to Buyer only upon complete at the time agreed upon the rescission of the contract
payment of the purchase price.” When Buyer failed shall of right take place, the vendee may pay, even after
to pay, Seller filed for rescission. Is the action the expiration of the period, so long as no demand for
proper? the rescission of the contract has been made upon him
either judicially or by notarial act. After the demand, the
No. In a contract to sell, the seller retains title to the court may not grant him a new term. “(Art. 1592, Civil
thing sold until the buyer fully pays the purchase price. Code)
The full payment is a positive suspensive condition, the
non-fulfillment of which is not a breach of contract but QUESTION NO. 104
merely an event that prevents the seller from conveying Anton borrowed Ben’s truck. During a fire which
title to the purchaser. The non-payment of the purchase broke out in Anton’s garage, he had time to save
price renders the contract to sell ineffective and without only one vehicle, and he saved his car instead of the
force and effect. (Ayala Life v. Burton Dev. Corp., 479 truck. Is Anton liable for the loss of Ben’s truck?
SCRA 462).  Since the obligation of seller did not arise
because of the failure of buyer to fully pay the purchase Yes. The bailee in commodatum is liable for the loss of
price, Article 1191 of the Civil Code (which provides for the thing loaned, even if it should be through a
rescission) would have no application. fortuitous event if, being able to save either the thing
borrowed or his own thing, he chose to save the latter.
QUESTION NO. 101 (Art. 1492, Civil Code)
Seller agreed to sell to Buyer a parcel of land for QUESTION NO. 105
Php100,000. Buyer was given up to 30 days to raise
the necessary funds. Buyer paid nothing for the A, B, and C are co-owners of a parcel of land.
privilege of making up his mind. Before the lapse of Unknown to his co-owners, A sold a specific portion
the 30-day period, Seller backed out of the of the co-owned property to D, who immediately
takes possession and builds a house thereon. Per
deed of sale executed by A, the portion sold to D is About 15 years ago, A constructed a house on her lot
to be taken from the undivided share of A in the co- adjoining the lot owned by B. He provided it with
owned property. Several years later, D sold his windows overlooking B’s lot half a meter away from
portion to E. the boundary line. A month ago, B brought an
action against A for the closure of the windows on
Meanwhile, A, B and C sold the entire co-owned
the allegation that they violate the law on distances.
property to F who caused the reconstitution of the
Has A acquired an easement of light of view by
certificate of title of his sellers, by which title the
prescription of ten years?
entire property was transferred to him. Is the sale
by a co-owner of a specific portion of a community No. In the first place, there was no formal prohibition
property valid? under which A prohibited B from obstructing his light
and view. In the second place, A did not observe the
Yes. The mere fact that A transferred a definite portion
legal requirement that there should be a distance of at
of the co-owned property by metes and bounds to D
least two meters between the windows and B’s lot, since
does not per se render the sale a nullity. There can be
the view is direct. According to law, non-observance of
no doubt that the transaction entered into by A and D
this distance does not give rise to prescription.
could be legally recognized in its entirely since the
object of the sale did not even exceed the ideal share QUESTION NO. 109
held by A in the co-ownership. A’s right to sell a part of
H and W are husband and wife. Believing that his
his undivided interest in the co-owned property is
wife was sterile, H donated to C in 1990 a parcel of
absolute in accordance with the well-settled doctrine
land valued at Php40,000. In 1998, W gave birth to a
that a co-owner has full ownership of his pro indiviso
son, B. Assuming that the land is the exclusive
share and has the right to alienate, assign and mortgage
property of H and that the net value of H’s estate at
it, and substitute another person in its enjoyment. (Del
the time of B’s birth is Php40,000, what will be the
Campo v. CA, 351 SCRA 1 (2001)
extent of the reduction of the donation?
QUESTION NO. 106
The donation shall be reduced by Php20,000, because
A engaged B to build a residential condominium H’s free disposal is only to the extent of Php20,000.
building on his titled property. To finance the Thus:
construction, A obtained a loan from C, secured by a
40,000 value of donation
mortgage on the condominium project. When the
40,000 value of estate at B’s birth
loan was not paid. A entered into an agreement with
80,000 Net Hereditary Estate
C in whose favor he conveyed all his rights and
interests in the realty project. In the same Legitime of B: 40,000
agreement, both A and C recognized B’s contractor’s Legitime of W: 20,000
lien by virtue of which C agreed to assign to him 60,000
three bedroom units to come from the
condominium project. C later entered into a lease Free Disposal 20,000
agreement with AMA Computer School which Reduction 20,000 
converted the condominium building into a
computer school. Judicial action is necessary for reduction or revocation
of donation. (Art. 763, Civil Code) Period of prescription
Because the conversion included the bedroom units is four years.
assigned to him, B brought an action against C for
delivery of his condominium certificate of title. C QUESTION NO. 110
defends on the ground that B is not a “condominium X has no child. At the time he gave a donation of
buyer” within the purview of PD 957, the P100,000, he had P1 million. Therefore, after the
Condominium Law. Decide. donation, he had P900,000 left. Later he adopted a
Yes. The term “buyer” under the Condominium Law is minor child. At the time he made the adoption, he
not limited to those who enter into contract of sale. Its had only P50,000 left. Should the donation be
concept is broad enough to include those who “acquire reduced? How much and within what period?
for valuable consideration a condominium unit.” In the The donation of Php100,000 should be reduced by
instant case, B is a buyer within the contemplation of PD Php25,000 because the legitime is impaired to that
957. He acquired the three condominium units as they extent (the free disposal being only Php75,000). Thus:
were assigned to him by A in payment of his
indebtedness as contractor’s fees. Clearly, this
50,000 (value at the time of adoption)
acquisition of the units was for a valuable consideration.
100,000 (value of donation)
QUESTION NO. 107 150,000
A and B are neighbors. On his building’s wall, A The action for reduction must be brought within 4 years
opened a window beneath the ceiling joists to admit from adoption.
light in 1995. Even after 10 years, B may still
QUESTION NO. 111
obstruct the light by constructing on his own lot a
building higher than A’s unless A makes a notarial Homer died intestate survived by his wife (Winda)
prohibition prohibiting B from making the and their two sons (Abe and Ben). During their
construction. If in 2003 A makes the prohibition, marriage, the couple acquired a parcel of land
may B still make the obstruction in 2007? whereon they built their family home. Upon the
death of Homer, his wife, Winda, and their eldest
Yes, because it is only in 2013 (ten years after the
son, Abe, formally advised Ben of their intention to
notarial prohibition) when A may be said to have
partition the property and terminate the co-
acquired the negative easement of light and view. After
ownership. Ben refused on the ground that the
2013, B may no longer obstruct.
property which was a duly constituted family home
QUESTION NO. 108 cannot be partitioned while a minor beneficiary is
still living therein; namely, his minor son, Conrad,
who is the grandson of the deceased. Is Conrad a
beneficiary of the family home constituted by his the party seeking the annulment, a contract may be
paternal grandparents? annulled where the consent is vitiated by mistake. (Art.
1390, Civil Code)
To qualify as a beneficiary of a family home, three
requisites must concur: first, the beneficiary must be QUESTION NO. 113
among the relationships enumerated in Article 154 of
X died intestate. He is survived by: (1) A, B, D and E,
the Family Code; second, the beneficiary must live in the
his legitimate children; (2) F and G, legitimate
family home; and, third, the beneficiary is dependent for
children of C (predeceased), a legitimate son of X;
legal support upon the head of the family.
(3) H and I, legitimate children of D; and (4) J and K,
Moreover, Article 159 of the Family Code provides that legitimate children of E. D is incapacitated; while E
the family home shall continue despite the death of one repudiated the inheritance. If the net value of the
or both spouses or of the unmarried head of the family estate is P/120,000, how shall the distribution be
for a period of ten years or for as long as there is a made?
minor beneficiary, and the heirs cannot partition the
same unless the court finds compelling reasons There are three vacant shares. The share which C would
therefor. This rule shall apply regardless of whoever have inherited if he had not predeceased X. The share
owns the property or who constituted the family home. which D would have inherited if he had the capacity to
As to the first requisite, the beneficiaries of a family inherit from X. The share which E would have inherited
home under Article 154 of the Family Code are: (1) the if he had not repudiated it.
husband and wife, or an unmarried person who is the
head of a family; and (2) their parents, ascendants, The share of C in the estate goes to his legitimate
descendants, brothers and sisters, whether the children, F and G, by right of representation. The share
relationship be legitimate or illegitimate. of D in the estate goes to his legitimate children, H and I,
by right of representation. The share of E who
The term “descendants” includes all descendants of the repudiated the inheritance goes to his co-heirs, A and B,
person or persons who constituted the family home by accretion. This is so because an heir who repudiates
without distinction; hence, it must necessarily include cannot be represented. Therefore, the final distribution
the grandchild and great grandchildren of the spouses of X’s estate shall be as follows:
who constituted a family home. Thus, Conrad, who is
the grandchild of Homer, satisfies the first requisite.
A 24,000 own right
As to the second requisite, minor beneficiaries must be 12,000 accretion
actually living in the family home to avail of the benefits
derived from Article 159 of the Family Code. There is no B 24,000 own right
dispute that Conrad, the son of Ben, lives in the family 12,000 accretion
home; hence, he satisfies the second requisite.
F 12,000 own right
However, as to the third requisite, Conrad cannot
demand support from his paternal grandmother, Winda,
if he has parents who are capable of supporting him. G 12,000 own right
The liability for legal support falls primarily on Conrad’s
parents, especially his father, Ben, who is the head of his H 12,000 own right
immediate family. The law first imposes the obligation
of legal support upon the shoulder of parents, especially I 12,000 own right
the father, and only in their default is the obligation ________
imposed on the grandparents. 120,000
Conrad is dependent on legal support not from his QUESTION NO. 114
grandmother, Winda, but from his father, Ben. Thus,
despite residing in the family home and his being a Abe and Bea, Filipinos, got married and begot two
descendant of Homer, Conrad cannot be considered as children. Abe later worked in Rome where he
beneficiary of the family home under Article 154 of the acquired Italian citizenship. He got a divorce from
Family Code because he did not fulfill the third requisite Bea in Rome but, on returning to the Philippines, he
of being dependent on his grandmother for legal realized his mistake, asked forgiveness of his wife,
support. (Patricio v. Dario III, G.R. No. 170829, and resumed living with her. They had two more
November 20, 2006) children. What is the status of the four children?
The first two children who were born before the
QUESTION NO. 112 divorce are legitimate children, but the last two children
who were born after the divorce are illegitimate
Two farmers entered into a contract for the children since Abe got the divorce when he had ceased
purchase of a cow. The owner told the purchaser to be a Filipino. (Art. 15, Civil Code)
that the cow was barren (incapable of breeding and
producing calves). Based on this belief, the parties QUESTION NO. 115
negotiated a price less than it would have been had
Homeowner employed Broker to sell his house.
the cow been capable of breeding. Just before
Broker sold the house to his wife for Php1 million.
delivery, the owner discovered the cow had
Some months later, Broker sold the house to a third
conceived a calf, and he refused to deliver the much
person for Php2 million. Homeowner sues Broker
more valuable cow to the purchaser. May the owner
for the Php1 million profit. Judgment for whom?
annul the contract?
Judgment for Homeowner. It is a breach of an agent’s
Yes, the owner may annul the contract on the ground
fiduciary duty to retain secretly benefits or profits that,
that he committed a substantial mistake as to the
by right, belong to the principal. Under the law, every
substance of the subject matter of the contract. The
agent is bound to render an account of his transactions
mistake is substantial enough because a barren cow is a
and to deliver to the principal whatever he may have
substantially different cow than a breeding one. The law
received by virtue of the agency, even though it may not
is clear: Even though there may have been no damage to
be owing to the principal. (par. 1, Art. 1891, Civil Code)
 Under which of the following breach of contract
QUESTION NO. 116
situations would specific performance be an
Agnetha wishes to purchase a parcel of land owned appropriate remedy?
by Tropical Gardens. She learns that Tropical
a. Abe offers to sell his house and lot to Rey. Then,
Gardens is a partnership owned by Abe, Ben, and
upon finding another buyer willing to pay a
Chito. She also learns that the partnership needs
higher purchase price, he revokes his offer .
capital and that the need for capital is the major
reason the partners are selling their property. b. Amy contracts to sing in Abe’s videoke bar for
Because Tropical Gardens is a partnership, Agnetha one month, beginning May 1. She then refuses to
has the following concerns. You are now called upon perform.
to advise Agnetha of her concerns.
c. Abe contracts to purchase a rare coin owned by
a. Can the partnership convey the land in the name Rey, as Rey is breaking up his coin collection.
of the partnership? Abe gives Rey Php1,000 for the privilege of
deciding whether to buy the rare coin. At the last
Yes, because a partnership has a juridical personality
minute Rey decides to keep his coin collection
separate and distinct from that of each of the partners.
intact and refuses to deliver the coin to Abe.
This is true even if the formalities under Article 772 of
the Civil Code which requires that the articles of d. Abe contracts to sell to Rey 100 cavans of
partnership which must be in a public instrument is not dinorado rice that Abe intends to harvest from
recorded in the Office of the Securities and Exchange his farm. Because the price of rice rises
Commission. (Art. 1768, Civil Code) Besides, any dramatically, Abe refuses to go on with his
immovable property or interest in immovable property promise.
belonging to the partnership shall be conveyed only in
the partnership name. (Art. 1774, Civil Code) The remedy of specific performance would most likely
be appropriate in (c). If the offerer has allowed the
b. If there is a breach of contract, against whom offeree a certain period to accept, the offer may be
must Agnetha file a lawsuit? withdrawn at any time before acceptance by
If there is a breach of contract arising from the sale of communicating such withdrawal, except when the
the property, Agnetha must maintain the lawsuit option is founded upon a consideration as something
against the partnership, not against the individual paid or promised. (Art. 1324, Civil Code) In this case, Abe
partners. This is because a partnership has a juridical gave Rey Php1,000 for the option of buying or not the
personality of its own separate and distinct from that of rare coin. Being so, the option is valid and cannot be
each of the partners. (Art. 1768, Civil Code) withdrawn by Rey.

c. If Agnetha obtains judgment against Tropical An action for specific performance in (a) would most
Gardens, against whom can she execute it? likely be dismissed by the court. This is so because Abe
can withdraw his offer to Rey at anytime before Rey’s
Partnership liability is first paid out of partnership acceptance; the option given to Rey is not founded upon
assets when a judgment is rendered against the firm a consideration as something paid or promised. (Art.
name. In a general partnership, the personal assets of 1324, Civil Code)
the individual members are subject to liability if the
partnership’s assets are inadequate. Even in limited The remedy of specific performance is inappropriate in
partnerships, at least one of the partners – the general (b) which involves a personal obligation. To compel
partner – subjects his personal assets to liability for the Amy to comply with her contractual obligation would
partnership’s obligations. amount to involuntary servitude.

QUESTION NO. 117 The obligation in (d) involves the delivery of a generic
thing. When what is to be delivered is indeterminate or
S contracts to sell his house and lot to B for Php3 generic, the creditor may ask that the obligation be
million. The terms of the contract call for B to pay complied with by another person at the expense of the
10 percent of the purchase price as deposit or down debtor. (Art. 1165, Civil Code)
payment. B pays the deposit, but because his
expected financing of the balance falls through, he QUESTION NO. 119
breaches the contract. Two weeks later S sells the Abe, who is eight months short of his eighteenth
house and lot to another buyer for Php3.2 million. B birthday, buys a car from Delta Motors. Five months
demands his deposit back, but S refuses, claiming later, Abe drives the car to Delta Motors to make the
that B’s breach entitles him to keep the deposit. fifth monthly payment and tells Delta Motors, “I love
Decide who is correct. this car.” Sixty days and two payments later, Abe
B is correct because the deposit is in the nature of drives the car to Delta Motors and says, “I’m tired of
earnest money. Under Article 1482 of the Civil Code, this junk. Take it and give me my money back.” Is
whenever earnest money is given in a contract of sale, it Abe too late to get his money back?
shall be considered as part of the purchase price and as No. Contracts entered into by a minor are voidable at
proof of the perfection of the contract. By its very the option of that minor, and the minor has four years
nature, an earnest money is an advance payment which from the time the guardianship ceases to annul the
must be deducted from the purchase price. Hence, the contract. (Art. 1391, Civil Code) Abe’s declaration that
parties could not have intended that the earnest money he loves the car after five months of the sale does not
or advance payment would be forfeited when the buyer constitute ratification that would have cured the defect
should fail to pay the balance of the price, especially in in the contract. Besides, he was still a minor at the time
the absence of a clear and express agreement thereon. when he made such declaration.
Moreover, to allow the forfeiture of the earnest money
or advance payment in favor of the seller would amount QUESTION NO. 120
to unjust enrichment of the seller at the expense of the Abe purchased a female pedigreed miniature
buyer. (Goldenrod, Inc. v. CA, 299 SCRA 141 [1998]) poodle dog from a pet shop. Unknown to either
party, the dog was pregnant. When the litter was
QUESTION NO. 118
born, both Abe and the pet shop claimed the right of
QUESTION NO. 123
ownership. Who is correct?
Arnel sold his land to Bert who began to possess it.
Abe is correct. Under the law, a creditor has a right to
Conrad, a stranger, sold the same land,
the fruits of the thing from the time the obligation to
unauthorized by anyone, and in his own name, to
deliver it arises. However, he shall acquire no real right
Dondon, who registered the sale in good faith. Who
over it until the same has been delivered to him. (Art.
owns the land, Bert or Dondon?
1164, Civil Code) Here, the litter was born after the
poodle dog was actually delivered to Abe. Upon delivery Bert should be considered as the owner even if he did
of the dog, Abe necessarily became its owner thereby not register the land. This is so because Dondon, who
giving him the ownership of the litter by accession. (Art. registered the sale, did not buy the land from its lawful
441, Civil Code) owner, but from a complete stranger totally
unconnected with the land. Article 1544 of the Civil
QUESTION NO. 121
Code cannot therefore apply, because it cannot be said
that the land had been sold twice by the same person.
Isabella is the daughter of Carlos, a widower. Over (Art. 1544, Civil Code)
the objections of Carlos, Isabella adopted a 5-year
old girl named Barbara who grew up into a fine QUESTION NO. 124
woman and trained to be a nurse. When Carlos fell Seller sells to Buyer a parcel of land under a
ill, he was admitted to the hospital where Barbara notarized deed of sale. On the same day and along
took care of him. They fell in love and got married. with the execution of the deed of sale, the parties
What is the status of their marriage? execute a separate instrument, denominated as
Their marriage is valid because Barbara and Carlos are “Right of Repurchase” granting Seller the right to
not at all related to each other, either by blood or by repurchase the lot within four years. Within four
affinity or by fiction of law. The fact that Barbara is the years, Seller offers to redeem but Buyer refuses.
adopted child of Isabella does not make Barbara a direct Who is correct?
descendant of Carlos, adoption being personal between Buyer is correct. The right of repurchase is not a right
Isabella, the adopting parent, and Barbara, the adopted granted the vendor by the vendee in a subsequent
child. instrument, but a right reserved by the vendor in the
same instrument of sale as one of the stipulations of the
contract. Once the instrument of absolute sale is
QUESTION NO. 122 executed, the vendor can no longer reserve the right to
repurchase, but some other right like an option to buy.
Which of the following contract situations need not (Vasquez v. Court of Appeals, 198 SCRA 102 [1991])
comply with the Statute of Frauds?
a. Debtor is indebted to Creditor. Friend orally QUESTION NO. 125
agrees to pay Creditor if Debtor defaults in his
loan obligation. Abe and Ben are childhood friends. Because of their
friendship, Abe gave to Ben in usufruct a parcel of
b. Grandfather orally promises to give Grandson, a land to last up to the time their high school teacher,
first year law student, a particular car upon Mrs. Aguada, reaches the age of 70. Mrs. Aguada
Grandson’s graduation from law school. died at the age of 65. Is the usufruct extinguished?
c. Lessee orally assigns his leasehold rights to No. Under Article 606 of the Civil Code, a usufruct
Assignee for the remaining six years of a 10-year granted for a time that may elapse before a third person
lease term. attains a certain age shall subsist for the number of
d. An oral sale of a car whereby Buyer takes years specified even if the third person should die
delivery of the car with a promise to pay the car before the period expires, unless such usufruct has been
after 15 months from delivery. granted only in consideration of the existence of such
person. If the document constituting Bernard as a
The contract situation in (d) need not comply with the usufructuary does not state that it will end the moment
Statute of Frauds because the statute applies only to Mrs. Aguada is dead, then it will continue.
executory contracts, not to partially executed contracts.
The delivery of the car to the buyer takes the contract QUESTION NO. 126
out of the ambit of the Statute of Frauds. Buyer buys on instalment a residential subdivision
The Statute of Frauds governs the contract situation in lot. After the 5th year, he is unable to make further
(a) because the promise of Friend to pay “if Debtor payments. Can Developer unilaterally cancel the
defaults in his loan obligation” constitutes a special sale? Is Buyer entitled to any refund?
promise to pay Debtor’s loan, a promise which is
subsidiary or collateral, like guaranty. Yes. The Developer need not even go to court to obtain
cancellation of the sale, provided that the actual
Grandfather’s promise to Grandson, as in the contract
cancellation takes place after 30 days from receipt by
situation in (b), is a promise that by its terms is not to
Buyer of the notice of cancellation or demand for
be performed within a year from the making thereof. In
rescission of the sale by a notarial act and upon full
other words, Grandfather’s performance (giving of car)
payment of the cash surrender value to Buyer. (Sec. 3,
is to be made after one year from the making of the
R.A. No 6552) Buyer is entitled to a cash surrender
contract. This is so because Grandfather’s promise was
value which is 50% of the total payments made by him.
made when Grandson was still a first year law student
who is expected to graduate from law school after more QUESTION NO. 127
than one year.
Seller contracts to sell to Buyer a parcel of land.
The Statute of Frauds requires that lease of real They agree that Buyer shall pay the purchase price
property for a period longer than one year be in writing on October 25, and that in case of Buyer’s failure to
to be enforceable. Therefore, the contract situation in pay, the contract shall be automatically rescinded. If
(c) is governed by the Statute of Frauds.
Buyer does not pay on October 25, can he still pay
QUESTION NO. 131
on October 29?
Principal appoints Agent, a minor, to sell a
Yes, provided no judicial or notarial demand for
particular car. Agent sells the car to Buyer.
rescission of the contract as of October 29 has been
Principal afterwards seeks to annul the sale, and
made by Seller to Buyer. Under Article 1592 of the Civil
brings an action to recover the car on the ground
Code, in the sale of an immovable property, even though
that Agent’s act was voidable, as a minor cannot be
it may have been stipulated that upon failure to pay the
an agent. Judgment for whom?
price at the time agreed upon the rescission of the
contract shall of right take place, the vendee may still Judgment for Buyer. Agent is deemed to be an extension
pay even after expiration of the period, as long as no of the personality of Principal who is himself
demand for rescission of the contract has been made capacitated. Hence, Principal cannot annul the contract
upon him either judicially or by a notarial act. on the ground of Agent’s incapacity.
QUESTION NO. 128 QUESTION NO. 132
In a letter, Seller offers to Buyer the sale of a parcel Martha died, leaving her son, Sam, as her sole heir.
of land. Buyer sends a reply. Which of the following Among the items inherited by Sam were some old
statements in Buyer’s reply will NOT result in a oil paintings that had been stored in Martha’s attic
contract? for a number of years. Sam knew nothing about art
 
and had no place to put them in his house. He placed
a. “I accept your offer to sell the land. I wish I could
an ad in the paper offering to sell the paintings “at a
have gotten a better price.”
  price to be mutually agreed upon.” Riza, a buyer for
b. “I accept your offer to sell the land, but can you an art gallery, responded to the ad and examined
shave the price?” the paintings. From the signature and the style, Riza
recognized that the artist was Ben Cab, a renowned
c. “I accept your offer to sell the land, but only if I
Filipino portrait artist. Sam and Riza agreed upon a
can pay on 90 days credit.”
price and executed a contract.
d. “I accept your offer to sell the land, provided that Which of the following facts, if true, would give Sam
you are the owner.” the best basis for annulling the contract with Riza?
The reply in (c) will not result in a contract. Acceptance
is a voluntary act by the offeree that shows agreement a. Sam told Riza that his mother, Martha, had
to the offer. The acceptance must be unequivocal and dabbled in painting when she was younger and
communicated to the offeror. The acceptance in (c) is had undoubtedly painted them herself.
not an unequivocal acceptance because of the condition
b. Sam did not know that Riza was a buyer for an
to pay on credit; such a condition operates as a counter-
art gallery and was very familiar with the works
offer.
of renowned artists.
An acceptance may be unequivocal even though the
c. Sam told Riza that he wanted to get rid of the
offeree expresses dissatisfaction with the offer, as in the
paintings as soon as possible because he was
case of the replies in (a) and (b).
angry at his mother for giving away most of her
The condition imposed by Buyer in his reply in (d) that possessions to her friend just before she died.
the offeror owns the property is implied in every sale of
d. Riza falsely told Sam that the paintings were to
land, so the condition does not add any new or different
be used to furnish Riza’s newly-constructed
terms to the offer.
vacation house in Baguio.
QUESTION NO. 129
The statement in (a) would enable Sam to annul the
Batman, Superman and Iron Man are co-owners of a contract on the ground of mistake if Riza was aware
parcel of land. They later sold the land to Flash that Sam was mistaken about the identity of the artist.
Gordon with a right to repurchase. Only Batman Under the facts in this choice, Riza knows that Sam is
exercised the right of repurchase for which he mistaken about the identity of the artist, which mistake
obtained a title to the property. Is the co-ownership refers to the substance of the thing which is the object
terminated by Batman’s repurchase of the of the contract. (Art. 1311, Civil Code)
property?
The statement in (b) is wrong because the fact that one
No. The repurchase of the land by Batman did not of the parties to the contract has superior knowledge
terminate the co-ownership nor did it give him the title about the subject matter of the contract does not by
to the entire land. Superman and Iron Man remain as itself justify annulment, even if the other party is
co-owners with obligation to reimburse Batman their unaware of that fact. Riza’s knowledge or lack of it was
respective shares in the repurchase price of the land. not the principal cause on which the contract was made
and was not relied on by Sam in making the sale.
QUESTION NO. 130
The statement in (c) is wrong because the fact that Sam
Pedro owns a car. To raise money for his business was angry when he agreed to the contract is not a
venture, he instructs Abe to sell the car. Abe, in his ground for annulment of a contract under the law.
own name, sells the car to Menardo. Can Menardo Regardless of Sam’s state of mind, there was a meeting
sue Pedro in case the car has hidden defects? of the minds between the parties.
Yes. Although Abe acted in his own name, still the sale The statement in (d) is incorrect because Riza’s
involved a car belonging to Pedro, the principal. Here, misrepresentations to Sam as to how she will use the
we apply the exception stated in the second paragraph paintings does not appear to go to the substance of the
of Article 1883 of the Civil Code which provides, “In thing which is the subject matter of the contract or to
such case the agent is the one directly bound in favor of have been relied on by Sam. Hence, the
the person with whom he has contracted, as if the misrepresentation is not significant enough to serve as
transaction were his own, except when the contract a ground for annulling the contract.
involves things belonging to the principal.” As a matter
of fact, the sale is completely valid. QUESTION NO. 133
 loan if Ann cannot. Because of Betty’s reputation,
Is the sudden emergency rule an absolutory cause in the loan is made. Ann is making the payments, but
negligence cases? because of illness she is not able to work for one
month. She requests that East Bank extend the loan
for three months. East Bank agrees, raising the
Yes. A person who is confronted with a sudden and
interest rate for the extended period. Betty is not
unforeseeable occurrence, because of the shortness of
notified of the extension. One month later Ann
time in which to react, should not be held to the same
drops out of school. All attempts to collect from Ann
standard of care as someone confronted with a
fail. Can East Bank collect from Betty?
foreseeable occurrence.
One who suddenly finds himself in a place danger, and No. Unlike a surety who is primarily liable, a guarantor
is required to act without time to consider the best is merely subsidiarily liable. The guarantor can be
means that may be adopted to avoid the impending required to answer for the obligation only after the
danger, is not guilty of negligence, if he fails not to adopt principal has defaulted. (Art. 2047, Civil Code) The
what subsequently and upon reflection may appear to creditor must also have attempted to collect from the
be the better method, unless the emergency in which he principal, and the latter still has not paid. (Art. 2058,
finds himself is brought about by his own negligence. Civil Code) Under Article 2079 of the Civil Code, an
(Gan vs CA, 165 SCRA 378) The rule applies, for extension granted to the debtor by the creditor without
instance, in the following cases: 1) a child suddenly the consent of the guarantor, as in this case,
darts into the road between parked cars; 2) a load from extinguishes the guaranty.
a truck suddenly bounces across the highway; or 3) a
QUESTION NO. 136
driver of a car is suddenly stricken by a period of
unconsciousness which he has no reason to anticipate Ben, Calvin, and Don form a limited partnership.
and which renders it impossible for him to control the Ben is a general partner, and Calvin and Don are
car he is driving. limited partners. Consider each of the separate
events below, and discuss fully which will constitute
QUESTION NO. 134
a dissolution of the partnership.
Husband and Wife were married in 1974. Their
A. Calvin assigns his partnership interest to Don.
marital union bore two children (Abe and Ben). The
birth certificates of the children identified Husband B. Don goes into bankruptcy.
as their father and their status as legitimate.
Husband died in 1990. C. Ben dies.
The event in (C) dissolves the limited partnership of
In a notarized document in 1991, Gigolo admitted Ben, Calvin, and Don. This is by express provision of
his illicit relations with Wife and acknowledged Abe Article 1860 of the Civil Code which provides that the
and Ben as his illegitimate children. After Gigolo’s death, insolvency, insanity or civil interdiction of a
death in 1993 and on the strength of Gigolo’s general partner dissolves the limited partnership,
notarized acknowledgment, Abe and Ben brought unless the business is continued by the remaining
an action for the partition of Gigolo’s substantial general partners. The partnership here consists of only
estate. Will the action prosper? one general partner (Ben), and there being no other
remaining general partner to continue the business, the
No. The attempt to establish the status of Abe and Ben,
partnership is dissolved.
as the illegitimate children of Gigolo would in effect
impugn their legitimate status as children of Husband The event in (A) does not dissolve a partnership
and Wife. This cannot be done because the law itself because a limited partner’s interest is assignable (Art.
establishes the legitimacy of children conceived or born 1859, Civil Code)
during the marriage of the parents. There is perhaps no
The insolvency of the other limited partner, an event
presumption of law more firmly established and
stated in (B,) does not likewise dissolve the limited
founded on sounder morality than children born in
partnership because the partnership business can still
wedlock are legitimate. (Tison v. Court of Appeals, 276
continue despite such insolvency.
SCRA 582 [1997])
QUESTION NO. 137
The presumption indeed becomes conclusive in the
absence of proof that there is physical impossibility of Abe took his car to a carwash station and asked to
access between the spouses during the first 120 days of have it washed. While it is being washed, Abe went
the 300 days which immediately preceded the birth of to a nearby mall for two hours. In the meantime,
the child due to: a) the physical incapacity of the one of the workers at the car wash had mistakenly
husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife; b) the hand-waxed the car. When Abe came back, he was
fact that the husband and wife are living separately in presented with a bill for a wash job and a hand wax.
such a way that sexual intercourse is not possible; or c) Is Abe liable to pay for the hand wax job?
serious illness of the husband which absolutely
prevents sexual intercourse. (Art. 166, Family Code) No. The doctrine of quasi-contract does not apply when
Considering that Abe and Ben were born during the there is a contract between the parties. Although there
marriage of their parents, they are therefore considered was a benefit bestowed to Abe, Abe did not receive an
the legitimate children of Husband and Wife. unjust benefit because the hand wax job was not
contemplated by his agreement with the owner of the
car wash station.
QUESTION NO. 135
QUESTION NO. 138
Ann is a working student at a local university. In
need of funds to pay for tuition and books, she Mao Tse Tung, a Chinese national donated in
attempts to secure a short-term loan from East Germany in favor of Fidel, a Filipino, a parcel of land
Bank. The bank agrees to make a loan if Ann will situated in the Philippines.
have someone financially responsible guarantee the
a. The law of which country governs the formalities
loan payments. Betty, a businesswoman and a
of the donation?
friend of Ann’s family, agrees in writing to pay the
 What if legal separation occurs, is the wife entitled
Philippine law governs the formalities of the donation. to continue using the husband’s surname even if she
The lex loci celebrationis does not apply because the is the guilty spouse?
transaction relates to land and must therefore be Article 372 of the Civil Code does not distinguish
governed by the law of the place where the land is whether the wife is the guilty spouse or not, unlike in
situated. the case of annulment of marriage under Article 371,
b. The law of which country governs the capacity of because in legal separation the marriage ties still
the Chinese to make the donation? subsist.

Philippine law, the situs of the property, governs the QUESTION NO. 144
capacity of the Chinese to alienate. Here, the doctrine of Brian, an American, and Juana, a Filipina, cohabited
national law under Article 15 of the Civil Code yields as husband and wife ten years ago without
because the subject matter is land. marriage. During their cohabitation, the couple
QUESTION NO. 139 bought a parcel of land in Baguio City. Although the
deed of sale was placed in the names of the couple
as buyers, the sale was registered in the name of
Dingdong was coerced into marrying Marian.
Juana alone because of Brian’s American
Dingdong sued for annulment. During the pendency
citizenship. It is sufficiently established, however,
of the case, Dingdong married Karylle. When
that the funds used to buy the property came solely
Karylle learned of the first marriage, Karylle sued
from Brian, as Juana has no sufficient source of
Dingdong for bigamy. Dingdong now alleges that the
income.
pendency of the annulment case is a prejudicial  
question. Is Dingdong correct? After their relationship turned sour and they went
separate ways, Brian sold all his rights and
Dingdong is wrong because the decision in the
interests in the property to Caloy, a Filipino. When
annulment case is not important. The first marriage
Caloy tried to register the property in his name, he
will either be annulled or not. If not annulled, bigamy
discovered that the certificate of title of the
can prosper. And if annulled, still bigamy can prosper,
property is registered in the name of Juana, and that
for when Dingdong married the second time, he was
it had already been mortgaged.
still married to his first wife, Marian, a voidable
marriage being considered valid until annulled.
a. If Brian is the true buyer of the property, what is
QUESTION NO. 140 the effect of the registration of the property in
the name of Juana?
Dingdong, a married man, was forced by Marian to
contract marriage with her. Dingdong then sued for The registration of the property in the name of Juana
annulment of the second marriage. Marian does not make her the owner of the property in
retaliated with a charge of bigamy. In the bigamy question. It is settled that registration is not a mode of
case, Dingdong moved to suspend the criminal acquiring ownership. Certificates of title are not a
proceedings until after the termination of the source of right. The mere possession of a certificate of
annulment case on the ground that the annulment title does not make the holder the true owner of the
case is a prejudicial question. Should the motion be property. The mere fact that Juana has the title of the
granted? disputed property in her name does not necessarily,
conclusively, and absolutely make her the owner.
Yes, because the annulment case poses a prejudicial
question. If Dingdong was really forced into marrying b. Given that Brian is disqualified to own real
Marian, then his consent was defective; hence, the properties in the Philippines, what is the legal
second marriage is to be annulled on that ground. He status of the sale of the property by Brian to
cannot therefore be guilty of bigamy. Caloy?
QUESTION NO. 141 Because aliens are disqualified to own real properties in
If a marriage is dissolved because of the death of the the Philippines, the sale of the property to Brian, who is
husband, what surname may the widow use? an American, would have been declared invalid if
challenged, had not Brian conveyed the property to
Although the death of the husband dissolves the Caloy who is a Filipino citizen. According to
marriage ties, still the widow may desire to cherish her jurisprudence, if the land is invalidly transferred to an
deceased husband’s memory by the continued use of his alien who subsequently becomes a Filipino citizen (or
surname. However, if she does not want to, she is transfers it to a Filipino), the flaw in the original
allowed to use her maiden surname again. Notice the transaction is considered cured and the title of the
use of the word “may” in Article 373 of the Civil Code. transferee is rendered valid. (Borromeo v. Descallar, G.R.
No. 159310, February 24, 2009)
QUESTION NO. 142
QUESTION NO. 145
If a marriage is annulled, is the wife required to Buyer, a minor, purchased a used car for
resume her maiden name and surname? Php250,000 from a used car dealer. The minor used
It depends. If WIFE IS THE GUILTY SPOUSE, she SHALL the car for three months and then damaged it in an
resume her maiden name and surname. But if WIFE IS accident. The car is now worth Php100,000. Buyer
THE INNOCENT SPOUSE, she MAY resume her maiden takes the car back to the dealer and demands the
name and surname, but she may choose to continue return of the purchase price. Dealer refused.
employing her former husband’s surname, unless (1) Judgment for whom?
the court decrees otherwise; or (2) she or the former Judgment for the minor. A contract may be invalidated
husband is married again to another person. (Art. 371, when one of the parties to the contract does not have
Civil Code) the legal capacity to give consent to the contract. A
QUESTION NO. 143
minor is certainly one who lacks legal capacity. (Art. S apparently confuses certificate of title with title.
1390, Civil Code) Placing a parcel of land under the mantle of the Torrens
system does not mean that ownership thereof can no
QUESTION NO. 146
longer be disputed. Ownership is one thing, registration
Baguio Country Club made public an offer to pay is another. (Lee Tek Sheng v. CA, 292, SCRA 554 [1998])
Php500,000 to any person who, having paid
QUESTION NO. 149
Php2,000 for the opportunity of attempting to do so,
shot a hole in one on its golf course pursuant to Manuel (judicially) adopts Minerva in Baguio. They
certain conditions. Abe complied with the go to Paris and there get married. Assuming the
conditions, including the payment of the money, and marriage to be valid under French law, is it also
shot a hole in one. Baguio Country Cluf refuses to valid here?
pay contending the contract was a wagering
No. Even if the marriage is valid in Paris, where it is
contract. Abe claims the shooting of the hole in one
celebrated, it is void here because it is “void from the
was a feat of skill and not a feat of chance. Who
beginning for reasons of public policy” it being a
prevails?
marriage between the adopting parent and the adopted
child. (Art. 35 (4), Family Code)
Abe prevails. Gambling is essentially a “chance for a
prize for a price.” Gambling is illegal regardless of the QUESTION NO. 150
name attached to it. But if the result of a game does not Abe was engaged and intended to get married as
depend entirely on chance and may also depend upon soon as he completed his college education. Abe’s
the skill of a person, such game is not a game of chance parents did not approve of the marriage and offered
as to make it a gambling game. him a one-half interest in the family business if he
QUESTION NO. 147 would give up his plans for marriage. Abe agreed,
but after he finished college his parents refused to
Pedro wished to delay action by a government Bids give him the share of the business that they had
and Awards Committee for the execution of a public promised. May Abe enforce the promise made by his
works project in which he was interested. He made parents?
a contract with Abe to pay the latter Php100,000 if
Abe could get the members of the bid committee to No. Promises not to marry in return for some benefit is
postpone to a later date the committee’s scheduled void because it is contrary to public policy. The law has
bidding. Abe gave a majority of the members of the always regarded marriage as a sacred institution (Art. 1,
bid committee and their wives a round trip ticket to Family Code) and a the right and privilege of all persons,
Hongkong, at which time Abe gave each of the wives not to be denied by private contract with other persons.
shopping money and convinced the wives to talk to QUESTION NO. 151
their husbands regarding a postponement of the
scheduled bidding. Subsequently, the bid committee After searching for months, a young married couple
postponed the bidding. Pedro refuses to pay. found a house which fitted their needs perfectly.
Decision? The location, size, price, sale terms, proximity to
church, school, and malls were all they had been
Decision for Pedro. Pedro’s commitment to pay Abe looking for. After thorough discussion with the
Php100,000 for the latter to influence the owner, they agreed to buy the house and sealed
postponement of the scheduled bidding of a their agreement with the owner with a handshake.
government agency to execute a public works project Is there a contract?
tends to be against public interest. Such agreement is
unquestionably void and cannot be enforced, especially Yes, because all the essential elements of a contract of
so because both parties are in pari delicto. sale are present; namely, consent of the parties, a
determinate object, and a price certain in money or its
QUESTION NO. 148 equivalent. However, if the owner of the house later
F and M are the parents of S. Upon the death of M, S refuses to perform, the sale could not be enforced by
immediately brings an action against his father for court action because it was made orally. This is because
the partition of his mother’s estate. F counterclaims of the statutory requirement that all contracts for the
for reconveyance of a parcel of land which is transfer of any interest in real property must be in
registered in the name of S. F claims that the lot is writing to be enforceable. (Art. 1403, par. 2(e), Civil
owned by the conjugal regime but was registered in Code)
the name of S as a trustee because at that time, S QUESTION NO. 152
was at the time the only Filipino citizen in the
family. F caused the annotation of a notice lis An applicant in a land registration case failed to
pendens on his son’s certificate of title. S objects on mark in evidence the original tracing cloth plan of
the ground that the notice lis pendens amounts to a the land applied for. Instead, he presented a blue
collateral attack on his title obtained more than 20 print copy of the plan as evidence. Is this sufficient?
years ago. He argues that his sole ownership of the
property would be improperly assailed in the Yes. It is true that the best evidence to identify a parcel
partition case and that it should be done through a of land for registration is the original cloth plan, yet the
separate action. Should the notice lis pendens be blue print copy of the plan suffices for the purpose
cancelled? where the original tracing cloth plan was attached to
No. The annotation of a notice lis pendens does not in the application for registration. (Republic v. IAC, 144
any way amount to a collateral attack on the certificate SCRA 705) Moreover, even the true certified copy of the
of title of a parcel of land. What cannot be collaterally white paper plan would suffice if it bears the approval
attacked is the certificate of title and not the title. The of the Land Registration Authority and verified by the
certificate referred to is that document issued by the Bureau of Lands. The fact therefore that the original
Register of Deeds known as the Transfer Certificate of survey plan was recorded on white paper instead of a
Title. By title, the law refers to ownership which is tracing cloth plan should not detract from the probative
represented by the document. value thereof. (Dir. of Lands v. CA, 158 SCRA 586 [1988])
QUESTION NO. 153
 thirty days if he found it to be unsatisfactory for
A fire broke out on the fifth floor of the Venus
his needs. Abe found that the laptop did not suit
Parkview Hotel. Although the fire was confined to
his needs and was preparing to return it within
that floor, several guests on the other floors
the stipulated period when it was stolen.
reported losses to their property due to fire and
water. The hotel was able to prove that the fire had Abe bears the loss of the laptop. When goods are sold
started from a cigarette dropped on a bed by one of with right of return, the buyer becomes the owner upon
the guests. Such careless smoking violated a Baguio delivery, but he may revest the ownership of the thing
City ordinance and a rule of the hotel. Is the in the seller by returning it within the time fixed in the
hotelkeeper liable? contract, or if no time is fixed, within a reasonable time.
(par. 1, Art. 1502, Civil Code) Buyer may return the thing
No. The loss of property due to accidental fire, in which
sold to the seller event if he finds nothing wrong with
no negligence may be attributed to the hotelkeeper is an
the quality of the thing. Until he returns the thing, buyer
exception to the hotelkeeper’s liability as a depositary
owns the thing. And if it is lost, regardless of the cause,
of valuables of hotel guests. This is in keeping with the
buyer bears such loss.
rule that no person may be held liable for those events
which could not be foreseen, or, even though foreseen,
were inevitable. (Art. 1174, Civil Code) Here, the c. Abe purchased a treadmill on ten days’ approval.
hotelkeeper would not be responsible for the losses Before expiration of the ten-day period, the
caused by the fire because it has not breached its duty treadmill was destroyed by fire of accidental
of care. origin.

QUESTION NO. 154 Seller bears the risk of loss of the treadmill. When goods
are sold on approval, they remain the property of the
Abe was anxious to sell his house located on seller until the buyer has expressed his approval or
Rainbow Hills Subdivision. He made a luncheon does any other act adopting the transaction. (par. 2, Art.
appointment with a real estate broker and at that 1502, Civil Code) The sale thus becomes absolute if the
time requested the broker to sell the house, buyer does not signify his approval or acceptance to the
agreeing on specific details of price and seller, but retains the goods.
commission. Since they were friends of long
standing, the two men did not discuss the necessity d. Abe purchased at Php5.00 per kilo all the
of a written agreement and sealed their agreement potatoes that farmer Rey had piled in a storage
with a handshake. If the broker secured a buyer, bin on his vegetable farm. Rey was able to put
would Abe be obligated to sell the house and pay the the potatotes in sacks to determine the price.
broker his commission? Lighting struck the bin, and the resulting heat
and fire ruined the potatoes.
No. An agency may be oral, unless the law requires a
specific form. However, when a piece of land or any Seller bears the loss of the potatoes. Article 1504 of the
interest therein is through an agent, the authority of the Civil Code is explicit: goods remain at the seller’s risk
latter shall be in writing. (Art. 1874, Civil Code) Here, until the ownership therein is transferred to the buyer
any attempt of the broker to hold Abe to his agreement (Art. 1504, Civil Code), either by actual or constructive
will not succeed since the broker’s authority was not in delivery thereof. (Art. 1477, Civil Code). Parenthetically,
writing and therefore void. the seller’s obligation to deliver to Abe the same
quantity of potatotes stored at his storage bin is not
extinguished by the loss of the potatoes presently piled
at his storage bin. Genus nunquam peruit.

QUESTION NO. 155

QUESTION NO. 156
In each of the following cases, name the party on
whom the loss due to damage to, or destruction of,
Rey, a mechanic, performed Php5,000 worth of
the goods falls, and give the reasons for your
repair work on Abe’s car, on a thirty-day credit
answer.
terms. Abe failed to pay the bill at the expiration of
a. Abe purchased a used car. The seller was to put a the credit period, but returned the car to Rey two
mechanic on it and make several mechanical months later for Php1,000 worth of additional
adjustments. After the adjustments had been repairs. When the repairs were made, Rey refused
made, and while the seller was testing the car to deliver the car to Abe until Php6,000, the bill for
before delivery, the car was badly damaged in a the full amount due him, was paid. Does Rey have
collision. the right to retain possession of the car until the full
amount of the bill is paid?
The seller bears the loss of the car pursuant to the res
perit domino rule -- the thing perishes with the owner. Abe may demand delivery of his car upon payment of
Under the law, the goods remain at the seller’s risk until the charges for the current repairs only. Rey’s obligation
the ownership therein is transferred to the buyer (Art. to return the car arises from a contract of deposit (Art.
1504, Civil Code), either by actual or constructive 1968, Civil Code) under which Rey as depositary may
delivery thereof. (Art. 1477, Civil Code) retain the car in pledge until the full payment of what
may be due him by reason of the deposit. (Art. 1994,
The extinguishment of the obligation to deliver affects Civil Code) Until Rey is reimbursed of his expenses by
both vendor and vendee since their obligations are reason of the deposit, he may retain the car in pledge.
reciprocal. If the obligation of the vendor to deliver is Accordingly, Rey’s lien does not extend to amounts
extinguished, the correlative obligation of the vendee to owed for previous service.
pay, which depends upon it, is also extinguished.
Besides, a contract of sale is onerous in character; the QUESTION NO. 157
cause, as far as the vendee is concerned, is the
acquisition of the thing which is the object thereof. Abe spent a night at a hotel, taking with him an
b. Abe bought a very expensive laptop, with the overnight bag. Since no rack was provided in the
understanding that he might return it within room for a guest’s luggage, Abe placed his bag on
the floor. Later that night, when he came into the
room he tripped over the bag and injured himself. considering how it was used. A statement of fact must
Both Abe and the hotel are shown to have been be of the essence of the subject matter.
negligent in the creation of the situation that led to
QUESTION NO. 160
Abe’s injuries. Is the hotel liable to Abe?
An airline pilot bought a watch from a reputable
Abe’s contributory negligence relieves the hotel of any
watch dealer. He stressed the importance of great
liability to compensate Abe for Abe’s injury. The
accuracy in any watch bought by him, and the seller
hotelkeeper is not liable for compensation if the loss is
said, “In my opinion you will find this watch the
due to the acts of the guest himself, as in the case of Abe
most accurate of any watch sold today. You will be
in the problem. (Art. 2002, Civil Code)
able to keep exact schedules by it.” Suppose the
QUESTION NO. 158 watch does not meet such specifications, does the
pilot have a cause of action?
Donald, a Californian, and Ann, a poor barrio girl
from the hinterlands of La Union, are married. Two Yes. Expressions of opinion by professionals or experts
years into their marriage, the couple purchased may be accepted by others as statements of fact under
from Juan a house in Baguio City. Although the sale certain conditions. This is especially true when the
was solely financed by Donald, the sale document purchaser has no knowledge of the product that he is
was issued in Ann’s name as vendee as a result of buying. Although the seller prefaced his remarks with
which title to the property was issued solely in the word “opinion,” under the circumstances, his words
Ann’s name as owner. When the couple had a falling would represent statements of fact because of his
out, Ann immediately sold the house to Ben without position.
her husband’s consent.
QUESTION NO. 161
a. If Donald maintains an action to annul the sale,
What is meant by the requirement under Section 23
what would be his strongest cause?
of P.D. No. 1529 that publication of the notice of
Donald has no other recourse but to anchor his suit on initial hearing in the Official Gazette “shall be
the argument that the sale is void because it was made sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the court?”
without his consent; that in bringing the action, he is
As explained by the Supreme Court in Republic v.
merely exercising the prerogative of a husband in
Marasigan, 198 SCRA 219, the provision under Section
respect to absolute community property.
23 of P.D. No. 1529 was never meant to dispense with
b. If the case goes to trial, what would be the most the requirement of notice by mailing and posting. What
likely result? it simply means is that insofar as publication is
concerned, there is sufficient compliance if the notice is
Being an alien, Donald is prohibited from acquiring
published in the Official Gazette. Although the law
private and public lands in the Philippines. Considering
mandates that it be published once in the Official
that Ann appeared to be the designated vendee of the
Gazette and once in a newspaper of general circulation
property, she acquired sole ownership thereto. This is
in the Philippines, publication in the latter alone would
true even if Donald’s claim that he provided the funds
not suffice. This is to accord primacy to the official
for such acquisition is to be sustained. By entering into
publication in the Official Gazette. According to the
such contract knowing that it was illegal, no implied
Supreme Court, such provision was never meant to
trust was created in Donald’s favor; no reimbursement
dispense with the other modes of giving notice, which
for his expenses can be allowed; and no declaration can
remains mandatory and jurisdictional.
be made that the subject property was part of the
conjugal or community property. If the intention of the law were otherwise, Section 23
would not have stressed in detail the requirements of
In any event, Donald had, and has, no capacity to
mailing of notice to all persons named in the petition
question the sale of the property by his wife on the
who per Section 15 of the Decree, include owners of
ground that in so doing, he was merely exercising the
adjoining properties and occupants of the land.
prerogative of a husband in respect to conjugal
property. To sustain such an argument would (NOTE: In Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals, 276
countenance indirect violation of the constitutional SCRA 276 [1997], the Supreme Court categorically
prohibition. If the property were to be declared declared that publication of the notice of initial hearing
conjugal, this would accord the alien husband a in a newspaper of general circulation is mandatory and
substantial interest and right over the land, as he would imperative. Absent such publication, the land
then have a decisive vote as to its transfer or registration court cannot validly confirm the title of the
disposition. This is a right that the Constitution does not applicant for registration.)
permit him to have. (Matthews v. Taylor, June 22, 2009)
QUESTION NO. 162
QUESTION NO. 159
Henry and Wilma are the conjugal owners of a ten-
Abe intends to buy a new battery for his car. At an hectare farm. Upon the death of Henry, Wilma
auto parts supply store, a salesman tells Abe: “This immediately sold to Ben a 2,000-square meter
is the finest battery you can buy and we guarantee portion of the farm. The children of Henry and
that you will find it superior to any you have owned. Wilma later brought an action to annul the sale on
This battery will no doubt outlast the life of the car the ground that it was made without prior
itself.” Is the store liable for breach of express liquidation of the conjugal partnership of their
warranty if the battery does not meet the parents. Will the action prosper?
salesman’s statements?
No. Article 130 of the Family Code expressly provides
No express warranty is created simply by the seller that if no liquidation of the conjugal partnership is made
expressing his personal opinion to the buyer, nor do his within six months from the death of a spouse, any
statements to the buyer constitute a warranty if he is disposition or encumbrance involving conjugal
just “talking up” the merchandise (called “puffing”), partnership property of the terminated marriage shall
even though the buyer may rely on such statements. be void. This provision must be read with Article 493 of
Even the use of the word “guarantee” adds little, the Civil Code which allows a co-owner to alienate,
assign, or mortgage his undivided share in the co-
owned property. However, the effect of such alienation fraud. To annul a marriage, only the circumstances
or mortgage is limited only to the portion which may be enumerated under Article 46 of the Family Code
allotted to the co-owner upon the termination of the co- constitute fraud. No other misrepresentation or deceit
ownership. The recourse of co-owners in cases where as to character, rank, fortune or chastity shall
their consent were not secured in a sale of the entire constitute such fraud as will give grounds for the
property, as well as in the sale merely of the undivided annulment of marriage.
shares of some of the co-owners, is an action for
QUESTION NO. 165
partition under Rule 69 of the Rules of court. (Heirs of
Go v. Go, G.R. No. 157537, Sept. 7, 2011) Determine which of the following statements is
correct. Explain your answer.
QUESTION NO. 163
a. When a right to sue upon a civil obligation has
Anna, a Filipina nurse, married Brent, an American
lapsed by extinctive prescription, the obligor
engineer, in Baguio City. A few days after the
who voluntarily performs the obligation can
wedding, they immediately left for California to
recover what he has delivered or the value of the
reside there permanently. Anna then became a
services he has rendered.
naturalized American citizen. Five years later, Anna
and Brent came to the Philippines for a short b. Natural obligations grant a right of action to
vacation. When the couple visited Anna’s enforce their performance, and after voluntary
hometown, they decided to adopt Anna’s younger fulfillment by the obligor, they authorize the
brother to give him a better future. Are Anna and retention of what has been delivered or
Brent qualified to adopt Anna’s younger brother? rendered by reason thereof.
No. Under the Domestic Adoption Act, an alien is c. When a testate or intestate heir voluntarily pays
qualified to adopt a Filipino child only if a) he is a a debt of the decedent exceeding the value of the
former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative property, which he received by will or by the
within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity; b) he law of intestacy from the estate of the decedent,
seeks to adopt the legitimate or illegitimate child of his the payment is valid and cannot be rescinded by
Filipino spouse; and c) he is married to a Filipino citizen the payor-heir.
and seeks to adopt jointly with his spouse a relative
within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or The statement in (c) is correct because an heir who pays
affinity of the Filipino spouse. the debt of a decedent in excess of his inheritance is
estopped from rescinding the payment. His only
Here, Anna and Brent are aliens seeking to adopt a recourse is to recover the excess from the decedent’s
Filipino child. Being a former Filipino citizen, Anna is estate.
qualified to adopt because the child to be adopted is her
relative within the fourth degree of consanguinity. The statement in (a) is wrong because a debtor’s
While Anna is qualified, Brent is not because he does voluntary payment of the debt despite his knowledge
not fall under one of the exceptions. Firstly, he is not a that the debt had already prescribed does not entitle
former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative him to recover. His payment constitutes a natural
within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity. obligation under Article 1423 of the Civil Code.
secondly, he is not seeking to adopt the legitimate or The statement in (b) is wrong because a natural
illegitimate child of Anna; and thirdly, he is not married obligation - unlike a civil obligation which is based on
to a Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt jointly with his positive law - derives its binding force from equity and
spouse a relative of the latter within the fourth civil justice, and does not grant a right of action to enforce its
degree of consanguinity or affinity. performance; but after voluntary fulfillment by the
And even if Anna is qualified to adopt her brother, she obligor, it authorizes the retention of what has been
cannot file the petition for adoption by herself. The delivered or rendered by reason thereof.
Domestic Adoption Act specifically provides that the
QUESTION NO. 166
husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except if one
spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the other; With prior court approval, Greg, the guardian of
or if one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own Willy, a minor, sells the 2010 Mitsubishi Montero
illegitimate child; or if the spouses are legally separated which was inherited by Willy from his deceased
from each other. parents for Php500,00 although the vehicle was
worth PhpPhp1 million at the time of the sale. What
Here, Anna cannot file the petition for adoption by
is the legal standing of the sale?
herself because the child to be adopted is not the
legitimate child of Brent, nor is the child the illegitimate The sale is valid despite the fact that Willy suffered
child of Anna. Moreover, Anna and Brent are not legally lesion by more than one fourth of the value of the
separated. vehicle This is because the sale was made with prior
court approval. Had the sale been made without court
QUESTION NO. 164
approval, the sale would have been a complete nullity
Abe is a sales representative of a drug company who and even unenforceable against Willy.
.
looks exactly like Vic Sotto. In one of his provincial
QUESTION NO. 167
sorties, Abe met Tessie, a winsome lass from an
affluent family. To win Tessie’s affection, Abe acted Abe, a law graduate, never intended to marry his
and pretended to be Vic Sotto. After a brief pregnant girlfriend, Ana. Fearing that Ana would file
courtship, Tessie fell in love with Abe. In less than a an administrative complaint against him with the
year, Tessie realized her mistake when she Bar Confidant if he does not marry her, Abe
discovered that Abe is not Vic Sotto. Does Tessie reluctantly married Ana. To allow him a way out of
have a remedy? the marriage, Ahe submitted to the solemnizing
officer a fake marriage license. Abe left Ana after
Tessie does not have any remedy. She cannot seek to
passing the bar.
declare the marriage void on the ground of mistaken
identity of the other party, Here, she married Abe who Knowing that his marriage to Ana was void, he
was the very person she fell in love with. Neither can married Bea. When Bea learned of Abe’s prior
she sue for annulment of marriage on the ground of
marriage, she promptly filed an action to declare swimming, Abe shouted for help. Because Abe
her marriage void for non-compliance with Article appeared to be frantic and drowning, the life guard
40 of the Family Code requiring a prior court on duty swam to where Abe was and rescued Abe. At
declaration of nullity. the beach, Abe begged Ana to marry him, declaring
his undying love for her. Believing that Abe was at
What regime of property relations will govern the
the point of death, Bea consented, and they were
cohabitation of Abe and Ana and of Abe and Bea?
married instantly by a priest who was nearby.
The marriage of Abe and Ana is void for lack of a valid
After the ceremony, Abe bounced back to life as if
marriage license. The same is true with respect to the
nothing happened. He then confided to his friend
marriage of Ana and Bea for lack of a judicial decree
that he pretended to be drowning when he shouted
declaring the first marriage a nullity.
for help. Abe died of drowning the following day.
Given that the two marriages are void, the applicable What is the legal standing of Abe’s marriage to Ana?
property regimes would be governed by Articles 147
The marriage is void for lack of a valid marriage license.
and 148 of the Family Code.
A marriage in articulo mortis is exempt from a marriage
As to the property regime of Abe and Ana, Article 147 license. It is a marriage where either or both parties are
governs. Article 147 creates a co-ownership between a at the point of death. Abe was not at the point of death
man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each when the marriage was performed. Consequently, the
other but live exclusively as husband and wife without marriage is not a marriage in articulo mortis which
the benefit of marriage and between a man and a would have excused Abe and Ana from securing a
woman who live together under a void marriage where marriage license. That Abe died of drowning the
the parties do not have an existing marriage with other following day does not detract from the fact that at the
persons. time of the marriage, Abe was not at the point of death.
Considering that the marriage of Abe and Bea is a QUESTION NO. 170
bigamous marriage, having been solemnized during the
Tom, a widower, who was 89 years of age and
subsistence of a previous marriage then presumed to be
suffering from minor ailments, including decreased
valid, Article 148 governs. This provision creates a
hearing and impairment of vision, made a will a
limited co-ownership (depending on the wages and
month before his death leaving an estate valued at
salaries earned by the parties and their actual
Php900,000. In his will, Tom disinherited his eldest
contributions in the acquisition of properties) between
son, Abe, without stating the reason therefor. Tom
a man and a woman who cohabit under a bigamous
emphatically stated in his will that his two other
marriage; between a man and a woman who are
children, Bea and Carl, are the only heirs who are to
engaged in an adulterous relationship; between a man
inherit from his estate to the exclusion of Abe. Tom
and a woman who cohabit in a state of concubinage,
appointed his friend, Rey, as executor of his will.
between a man and a woman who are married to other
How shall Rey distribute Tom’s estate?
persons, and in case of multiple dalliances of the same
man with different women. The institution of Bea and Carl as Tom’s heirs remains
valid, but their shares are to be reduced to allow Abe to
QUESTION NO. 168
receive his legitime. Abe is legally entitled to receive his
Abe and Bea, a childless couple, brought Christian, legitime because he was disinherited for no cause by his
the infant son of their driver who died in an father. Had there been preterition here, as when Abe
accident, into their home. The couple took care of was omitted from the inheritance, Tom’s three children
Christian, doted on him, reared him, and treated would be entitled to receive Php300,000 each from the
him as their own son. When Christian went to estate. But because this is not a case of preterition but
Manila to study, Abe and Bea became so lonely that one for ineffective disinheritance, the estate would be
they judicially adopted Digna, a 10-year old orphan. distributed as follows:
After several years, Christian and Digna fell in love,
and, when both were over 25, they got married Abe: 150,000 (legitime)
without informing Abe and Bea. Believing that it
was unfair not to have legally adopted Christian, Bea: 150,000 (legitime)
Abe and Bea decided to legally adopt him. The court 225,000 (free portion)
granted the adoption.
Carl: 150,000 (legitime)
a. Is Christian’s adoption valid? 225,000 (free portion)
________
Yes. Even assuming that Christian was already of legal 900,000
age when Abe and Bea adopted him, the decree of
adoption is still valid because a person of age can be QUESTION NO. 171
adopted if he had been consistently considered and Pedro died without a will. He is survived by his
treated by the adopter as his or her own child during legitimate children, Abe and Bea; by his widow,
minority. Wendy; and by Carl, his illegitimate child. The net
b. What is the legal standing of Christian’s value of Pedro’s estate is Php1.4 million. How shall
marriage to Digna? Pedro’s estate distributed?

Christian’s marriage to Digna is valid. Article 38 (8) of Satisfy the legitimes of the heirs first. The balance must
the Family Code expressly declares by reason of public be divided among the heirs in the proportion of 2:2:2:1.
policy that a marriage between adopted children of the LEGITIMES:
same adopter is void. This prohibition does not apply
here because at the time of their marriage, Christian
was not yet the legally adopted child of Abe and Bea. Abe 350,000
Bea 350,000
QUESTION NO. 169 Wendy 350,000
Carl 175,000
Abe and Ana travelled to Boracay with their friends
________
and co-employees on a company outing. While
BALANCE 175,000 refuses to see him. Apparently, Abe suffers from
dementia; and there is a pending proceeding to
The balance of 175,000 is to be divided equally among
place him under guardianship. The court has
the heirs in the proportion of 2:2:2:1. Thus, Abe, Bea,
temporarily placed Abe in the care of his nephew,
and Wendy are entitled to 2/7 each of 175,000, or
Larry, as guardian ad litem pending the issuance of
50,000 each. Carl is entitled to 1/7 of 175,000, or
letters of guardianship that will officially appoint
25,000. The final distribution would be as follows:
Larry as Abe’s guardian. What is Rey’s remedy?
Abe 350,000 plus 50,000 Rey is obliged to tender the payment to Larry pursuant
Bea 350,000 plus 50,000 to Article 1240 of the Civil Code which provides that
Wendy 350,000 plus 50,000 payment shall be made to the person in whose favour
Carl 175,000 plus 25,000 the obligation has been constituted, or his successor in
TOTAL 1.4 million interest, or any person authorized to receive it. Since
Abe, the creditor, was placed in the care of a temporary
guardian ad litem who is authorized to administer Abe’s
QUESTION NO. 172
estate pending the appointment of a permanent
Determine the appropriate remedy of the aggrieved guardian, the temporary guardian is decidedly a person
party in the following cases. Explain your answer. authorized to receive the payment.
a. Abe, pretending to be a horticulturist, sells to QUESTION NO. 174
Tessie a bonsai plant which he claims will bear
Paterno, 87, died of a heart attack without having
cherry tomatoes. Tessie buys the bonsai plant
executed a will in his lifetime. Surviving Paterno at
only to learn later that it won’t bear fruit.
the time of his death were his widowed mother,
b. Abe, a florist, agrees to decorate the tables at the Marie; his wife, Wendy; his legitimate children, Abe
wedding reception of Tessie’s daughter. In the and Bea; his grandson, Eric, who is the son of Bea;
purchase order form, Abe agreed to supply 12 his grandson, Fidel, who is a legitimate son of Carl, a
table centerpieces made of a bunch of yellow legitimate son of Paterno who died five years ago;
roses in elaborate floral arrangement. Instead, and another grandson, Greg, the latter being the
Abe delivers 12 centerpieces made of a single legitimate son of Dante, a legitimate son of Paterno
yellow rose surrounded by Malaysian mums. who repudiated his inheritance from his father.
How shall Paterno’s estate of Php1.2 million be
c. Rey hires Abe to transport Rey’s friends to Mt. distributed?
Pinatubo for a trek to the summit on a 4x4
vehicle due to the difficulty of the terrain. Abe The legal heirs of Paterno are Abe, Bea, Fidel, and
borrows a vehicle from Larry, but Larry lends Wendy. Eric is excluded by his mother Bea who is still
Abe a vehicle which is not 4x4. alive. Fidel represents Carl who predeceased Paterno.
Greg is excluded because of the repudiation of Dante.
d. Ana sells to Bea her diamond ring. Bea, Marie is likewise excluded in view of the survival of
accompanied by Ana, brings the ring to an Paterno’s legitimate children.
appraiser who certifies the ring to be genuine.
Unknown to Bea, Ana had the appraiser examine In addition to their respective legitimes, Abe, Bea, Fidel
a different ring such that the ring that was and Wendy are entitled to equal shares in the free
brought by Bea was not real. portion of Php400,000. Consequently, the final
distribution of Paterno’s estate is as follows:
Tessie has no remedy in (a). No express warranty is
created simply by the seller expressing his personal Abe 200,000 plus 100,000
opinion to the buyer, nor do his statements to the buyer Bea 200,000 plus 100,000
constitute a warranty if he is just “talking up” the Fidel 200,000 plus 100,000
merchandise (called “puffing”), even though the buyer Wendy 200,000 plus 100,000
may rely on such statements. Even the use of the word
“guarantee” adds little, considering how it was used. A QUESTION NO. 175
statement of fact must be of the essence of the subject With her deceased first husband, Bea begot two
matter. children, Don and Eric. With her deceased second
Abe is liable for damages in (b) for breach of the husband, Bea begot Fidel, Greg, Henry, and Inigo.
obligation. Article 1170 of the Civil Code refers to Bea died last year followed by Don who died this
incidental fraud (dolo incidente) committed in the year without a will. Don is survived by all his
performance of an obligation already existing because siblings. The net value of Don’s estate is Php1.2
of a contract. Here, Abe is liable because he deviated million.
from his agreement with Tessie to decorate the a. How shall Don’s estate be distributed?
centerpieces with a bunch of yellow roses.
The rule of double share for full-blood relative applies.
Abe is liable for damages in (c) because he deviated Here, Eric is entitled to a share double that of his half-
from his undertaking to transport Rey and his friends siblings Fidel, Greg, Henry, and Inigo. Therefore:
on board a 4x4 vehicle which is an essential element of
the undertaking given the difficult terrain of in reaching Eric 400,000
the summit of Mt. Pinatubo. Fidel 200,000
Greg 200,000
Bea can sue for annulment of the sale with damages in (d) on
Henry 200,000
the ground that Ana committed fraud in inducing Bea to agree
to the sale. It is clear here that had Bea known that she was not Inigo 200,000
buying a genuine diamond ring, she would not have consented ________
to the sale. 1.2 million
QUESTION NO. 173 b. Suppose all of Don’s siblings predeceased him,
and the only survivors are his nephew, John, the
Abe, 70, lends Rey the sum of Php1 million with
legitimate son of Eric, and his nephews, Kurt and
interest thereon at 15% per annum. When the loan
Lyle, the legitimate children of Henry, how shall
fell due, Rey attempted to deliver a personal check
the estate be divided?
to Abe, inclusive of the stipulated interest, but Abe
The rule of double share for full-blood collateral still a. Does Juan still have a remedy?
applies. If there are nephews and nieces surviving the
Yes. Juan’s remedy is to file an action for the recovery of
decedent, relationship by the whole or half-blood
the property or for declaration of nullity of the sale on
becomes material in the distribution of the estate. Here,
the ground that the contract of sale is void for being
all the nephews inherit in their own right because they
contrary to public policy.
do not concur with an uncle or aunt.
b. Has the action prescribed?  
John 600,000
Kurt 300,000 The action has not yet prescribed. The sale of the land
Lyle 300,000 by Maria to Pedro four years after the issuance of the
________ free patent, being in violation of Section 118 of the
1.2 million Public Land Act, is void from its inception. Juan’s action
QUESTION NO. 176 to declare the nullity of the contract and to recover the
land should therefore be given due course. The defense
After securing a marriage license, Abe and Bea, both of prescription is even untenable because an action
residents of Manila, went to the Office of the Mayor which seeks to declare nullity of a contract does not
of Baguio City, to get married. The mayor was not at prescribe. (Art. 1410, Civil Code)
his office but a secretary at the office asked Abe and
Bea and their witnesses to fill up and sign the c. Can Pedro successfully invoke the pari delicto
marriage contract forms. Thereafter, the secretary doctrine rule in his defense?
went out of the office to look for the mayor who she No. While as a rule, parties who are in pari delicto have
found in another office holding a meeting. The no recourse against each other on the principle that a
mayor signed all copies of the marriage contract transgressor cannot profit from his own wrongdoing
and gave them back to the secretary who returned (Art. 1412[1], Civil Code), such rule does not apply to
to the office. The secretary then gave a copy of the violations of Section 118 of the Public Land Act. This is
marriage contract to Abe and Bea and told them so because of the underlying public policy in said law to
they are already married. What is the legal standing conserve the land which a homesteader has acquired by
of the marriage? gratuitous grant from the government for himself and
The marriage is void because the mayor did not his family.
perform a ceremony. A marriage ceremony is one which QUESTION NO. 179
takes place with the appearance of the contracting
parties before the solemnizing officer and their Abe and Bertha, both of marriageable age and not
personal declaration that they take each other as suffering from any impediment, are living together
husband and wife in the presence of not less than two as husband and wife without the benefit of
witnesses of legal age. (Article 3[3], Family Code) marriage. Not able to beget a child after five years of
cohabitation, they sought medical advice from a
QUESTION NO. 177 doctor. After some tests, the doctor found Abe to be
Ana is the wife of Abe. Abe was among the sterile. Longing to have a child, Bertha underwent
passengers on board a passenger plane that artificial insemination using the sperm of Abe’s
mysteriously crashed in 2002. Five years after the brother, Rey. The consent of the three to the
crash, and believing that her husband had died in procedure was reduced in writing. Lea later gave
the crash, Ana married Rey. The marriage was birth to Larry. Which of the following statements
performed without Ana obtaining a prior judicial accurately describes Larry’s status?
declaration of her missing husband’s presumptive a. Larry is the legitimate child of Abe and Bertha
death. Ten years later, the authorities found the because their consent to the medical procedure
remnants of the plane. After a diligent search, Abe’s was in writing pursuant to law.
body was recovered. Per official report submitted
by government officials on the cause of the accident, b. Larry is the illegitimate child of Abe and Bertha
no passenger survived in the plane crash. What is because the couple are not married.
the status of Ana’s marriage to Rey? c. Larry is the illegitimate child of Rey and Bertha
The marriage is valid because there was no impediment because they are the biological parents.
to the valid celebration of Ana’s second marriage, Ana’s d. Larry is the illegitimate child of Bertha because
husband being dead at that time. That there was no she is not married and there is no presumption
prior judicial declaration of presumptive death of Ana’s as to who the father is.
husband before Ana’s remarriage is of no moment
because it turned out that the husband died in the plane e. There is no presumption as to Larry’s status.
crash thereby removing any impediment to Ana’s
The statement in (e) is correct because there is no law
remarriage.
which provides for the status of a child born of artificial
QUESTION NO. 178 insemination procured by persons who are not lawfully
married, as in the case of Abe and Bertha.
Maria, an illiterate widow, verbally sold to Pedro in
1978 the farm which she and her deceased husband The statement in (a) is wrong. Larry is not the
had acquired by way of free patent from the legitimate child of Abe and Bertha because they are not
government in 1974. After receiving the agreed lawfully married. This is clear from the provision under
purchase price, Maria vacated the property and the second paragraph of Article 164 of the Family Code
turned over possession to Pedro. Shortly after which declares that children conceived as a result of
Maria’s death in 1994, Pedro attempted to resell the artificial insemination of the wife with the sperm of the
farm, but failed to do so because the title remained husband or that of a donor or both are legitimate
in Maria’s name. Informed of the attempted sale, children of the husband and his wife provided that both
Maria’s only child, Juan, demanded that Pedro of them authorized or ratified such insemination in
vacate the property and return it to Juan. Juan is writing before the birth of the child and recorded in the
aware of the previous sale but he was a still minor civil registry together with the birth certificate of the
at the time of the sale. child.
The statement in (b) is wrong because Larry is not the
g. Maria, single, adopted Carol, the infant daughter
illegitimate child of Abe and Bertha. The provision
of her driver. A few years later, Maria gives birth
under Article 165 of the Family Code that “children
to David out of her relationship with her
conceived and born outside a valid marriage are
boyfriend, Abe, a good for nothing gigolo. Maria
illegitimate” is applicable only when the child was
doted on Carol and treated her as if she were her
naturally conceived, and not through artificial
son. Maria also took care of David and, together
insemination.
with Carol, sent both children to exclusive
The statement in (c) is wrong for the same reason schools. In college, David falls in love with, and
stated in the preceding paragraph. marries Carol.
The statement in (d) is wrong for the same reason
stated in the preceding paragraph. The marriage is valid because it is not contrary to public
policy. While Article 38 (7) of the Family Code prohibits
QUESTION NO. 180 the marriage between an adopted child and a legitimate
Determine the validity of the following marriages: child of the adopting parent, there is no similar
prohibition regarding the marriage between an adopted
a. Abe is married to Bea, while Carol is married to child and an illegitimate child of the adopting parent.
David. Abe and Carol are legitimate brother and
sister, respectively. Upon the death of Abe and QUESTION NO. 181
Carol who died in the same plane crash, Bea Petronilo, an illegitimate person, dies without a
marries David. will. He is survived by his father, Fidel; his widow,
The marriage is valid because it is neither incestuous Wanda; his brother, Arnel; and his brothers, Ben
nor contrary to public policy. Article 38 of the Family and Cosme, children of Fidel from his lawful
Code enumerates the marriages which are void by marriage. The net value of Petronilo’s estate is
reason of public policy. Bea’s marriage to David is not Php1.2 million. How shall the distribution be made?
one of those prohibited.
Only Fidel and Wanda are entitled to inherit from
b. Abe, the only son of Pedro, is lawfully married to Petronilo’s estate, at Php600,000 each. Illegitimate
Bea, the only daughter of Maria. Pedro a parents, such as Fidel, do not exclude the surviving
widower, later marries Maria who is herself a spouse. Arnel, Ben, and Cosme, brothers of Petronilo,
widow. are not entitled to inherit because they are excluded by
The marriage is valid because it is neither incestuous Fidel pursuant to the principle of preference of line in
nor contrary to public policy. Article 38 of the Family succession.
Code enumerates the marriages which are void by QUESTION NO. 182
reason of public policy. Pedro’s marriage to Maria is not
one of those prohibited. Tristan designated his legitimate children, Arnel
and Ben, and his friend, Fidel, as his heirs to an
c. Pedro is a widower, while Maria is a widow. estate valued at Php6 million. Tristan dies. Divide
Being sweethearts in high school, they rekindled the estate.
their long lost love and got married. After
several years, Abe, Pedro’s son by his former The institution of Arnel, Ben and Fidel concerns only the
marriage, marries Bea, Maria’s daughter by her free disposal of Php3 million. Arnel and Ben are first
deceased husband. given their respective legitimes (Php1.5 million each.
The free disposal is then divided equally among the
The marriage is valid because it is neither incestuous three instituted heirs:
nor contrary to public policy. Abe and Bea are
stepbrother and stepsister, respectively. Article 38 of
the Family Code enumerates the marriages which are Arnel: 1.5 million (compulsory heir)
void by reason of public policy. Abe’s marriage to Bea is 1 million (voluntary heir)
not one of those prohibited. Ben: 1.5 million (compulsory heir)
d. Abner, a narcotics agent, kills Benjie, a notorious 1 million (voluntary heir)
drug pusher. Abner is later acquitted of Benjie’s Fidel: 1 million (voluntary heir)
killing, and marries Cynthia, Benjie’s widow.
QUESTION NO. 183
Abner’s marriage to Cynthia is valid because Benjie’s
killing by Abner was not for the purpose of marrying Is a motion for intervention appropriate in a land
Cynthia, but in line with his duty as a narcotics agent. registration case?

e. Arnold, single, adopted Brad. Carol, also single,

No. Unlike in ordinary civil actions where parties may
adopted Dina. Arnold and Carol get married.
include a plaintiff, a defendant, a third-party
Fifteen years later, Brad marries Dina.
complainants, cross-claimants, and intervenors, the
The marriage is valid because it is not contrary to public only parties in cases of original applications for land
policy. While Article 38 (8) of the Family Code prohibits registration are the applicant and the oppositor. (Secs.
the marriage between adopted children of the same 14 , 25 PD 1529) If a party desires to be heard in a land
adopter, Brad and Dina are not the adopted children of registration case, he should ask for the lifting of the
the same adopter – Brad being the adopted child of order of general default, and then if lifted, file an
Arnold, and Dina being the adopted child of Carol. opposition to the application for registration.  
f. Abe is the husband of Bea. Upon Abe’s death, Bea QUESTION NO. 184
marries Pedro, the widowed father of Abe.
Is a motion to dismiss allowed in a land registration
The marriage is void because it is a marriage between a case?
father-in-law and a daughter-in-law which is prohibited
Yes. Both the Land Registration Act (Act No. 496) and
under Article 38 (3) of the Family Code for being
the Property Registration Decree of 1978 (PD No. 1529)
contrary to public policy.
do not provide a prohibition for the filing of a pleading
similar to a motion to dismiss. Section 34 of PD 1529 canned goods imported from Australia. Kiram
specifically provides that, “the Rules of Court shall, received the batik items, but did not send the
insofar as not inconsistent with the provisions of this canned goods to Abdul because of news reports that
Decree, be applicable to land registration and cadastral the incursion of Abu Sayyaf had stopped the barter
cases by analogy or in a suppletory character and trade. Is Kiram in breach of his obligation?
whenever practicable and convenient.”
Yes, because he failed to do what is incumbent upon
QUESTION NO. 185 him upon delivery of the batik goods to him. Moreover,
Kiram is not even allowed to invoke the defense of
Husband is the operator of a public utility vehicle
fortuitous event considering that he was already in
which meets an accident resulting in the death of a
delay in the performance of his obligation.
passenger. When judgment is rendered against
him, and execution is levied on a conjugal house and QUESTION NO. 189
lot, he claims that the share of his wife in the
Abe promises to sell to Melany a parcel of land at a
property should not be made to answer for the debt.
reduced price on condition that Melany should stay
Is Husband’s contention tenable?
single and not marry anyone. Melany subsequently
Yes. The absolute community is not liable because of enters a convent to become a nun. The following
par. 9, Article 94 of the Family Code, which provides year, Melany demands fulfilment of Abe’s promise.
that “liabilities incurred by either spouse by reason of a Is Abe bound by his promise?
crime or quasi-delict, in case of absence or insufficiency
of the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse…” Abe is not obliged to sell the land to Melany because the
presupposes that the husband alone is liable, but the condition attached to it is contrary to law and public
payment may be advanced by the community property policy as an undue restraint on individual freedom.
to be deducted from the husband’s share upon
liquidation of the community. QUESTION NO. 190
QUESTION NO. 186 Abe owes Rey Php2 million payable on or before
December 31. To secure the loan, Abe executes a
Abe and Betty, husband wife, are the parents of mortgage in favor of Rey on Abe’s building. On
Arnel and Ben. By a previous marriage, Abe has a October 25, the mortgaged building is totally
legitimate child, Carl. Also by a previous marriage, destroyed in a fire of accidental origin. After the
Betty has a legitimate child, Denver. Abe gave each fire, Rey immediately demands payment from Abe.
of the four children for their education a donation, Is Rey’s demand valid?
but did not get Betty’s consent. Who is liable for the
value of the donations? Yes. The debt becomes due and demandable at once
because the security is lost even through a fortuitous
The donations given to Arnel and Ben are valid because event, unless the debtor can furnish another security for
they were made to the common children of Abe and the loan which is equally satisfactory. (Art. 1198, Civil
Betty in furtherance of the career of both children. Code) This is once instance where the debtor loses the
Therefore, the expenses are to be borne by the absolute benefit of the period.
community despite the fact that Betty’s consent had not
been obtained.
QUESTION NO. 191
On the other hand, the donation given to Carl is valid,
but the absolute community is not liable. Only the Husband catches Wife having illicit relations with
husband is liable. It is true that it was given for the Gigolo. Husband then tells Wife that he will file an
purpose of finishing a career, but here the consent of action against her for legal separation to which the
the wife was not obtained. Carl is not a common child of latter agreed provided she will not be charged
Abe and Betty, but of Abe only. The donation given to criminally. Husband promptly files a complaint for
Denver is void. This is so because the donation would legal separation. Wife defaults. When questioned
be an indirect donation of Abe to Betty who is a by the Public Prosecutor why she failed to file an
presumptive heir of Denver. answer, Wife signifies her intention to the petition
for legal separation. Is there a confession of
judgment?
QUESTION NO. 187
No. On the contrary, the petition for legal separation
If useful improvements can be removed by the should be granted in view of the presence of other
possessor in good faith without injury, may the evidence. Here, there was only an extra-judicial
owner decide to retain them? If so, how much admission and not a confession of judgment (which
should the owner refund to the possessor in good usually happens when the defendant appears in court
faith? and confesses the right of plaintiff to judgment or files a
pleading agreeing to plaintiff’s demand). Even if the
A possessor in good faith has the right to remove his statement of Wife really constitutes a confession of
useful improvements provided no substantial damage judgment, still, inasmuch as there is evidence of sexual
or injury is caused to the principal, reducing its value, infidelity on the part of the wife independently of such
unless the owner refunds to the possessor in good faith statement, the decree of legal separation would be
the amount spent in the increase in value which the premised not on her confession, but on the strength of
thing may have acquired by reason of the the evidence of sexual infidelity on the part of the wife.
improvements. What the law prohibits is a judgment based exclusively
on the confession of judgment. If a confession can
QUESTION NO. 188
automatically and itself defeat the suit, any defendant
Abdul is a barter trader in Zamboangan City. He who opposes the legal separation will immediately
communicates via text messaging to Kiram, who is confess judgment, purposely to prevent the giving of the
based in Jolo, to transact business. Last month, he decree.
agreed with Kiram to exchange a cargo of batik
QUESTION NO. 192
clothing, numbering 200 pieces of assorted shirts,
malong, and skirts, with a cargo of 50 boxes of
According to Article 58 of the Family Code, an action QUESTION NO. 195
for legal separation shall in no case be tried before
Tom in his will designated his legitimate children,
six months shall have elapsed since the filing of
Abe and Ben, and his childhood friend, Fidel, as his
petition, the purpose being to provide the parties a
universal heirs. Abe predeceased his father, Tom,
cooling-off period. Is this requirement absolute?
without any descendant to inherit from him. Tom
An action for legal separation requires a “cooling-off” died with an estate valued at Php600,000. Divide
period of six months. However, when the ground the estate.
alleged is one of those falling under R.A. No.9262 (Anti-
Violence Against Women and their Children Act), there Abe’s supposed share in the legitime (Php150,000) goes
is no such “cooling-off” period because the courts are to his brother, Ben, who will inherit it in his own right
mandated to proceed with the hearing of the case as since it is the legitime. Abe’s share in the free portion
soon as possible. (Sec. 19, RA No. 9262) (Php50,000) will go equally to Ben and Fidel by
QUESTION NO. 193 accretion since it is the proportion in which they were
instituted to the free portion. If Fidel predeceases Tom,
Homer is married to Winda. Before their marriage, his share in the free portion will go to Abe and Ben by
Winda confessed to Homer that she was two-month accretion. It is so because they were instituted as
pregnant with the child of an African-American voluntary heirs.
engineer who had already left the country. When
the child was born, Homer could not accept it for QUESTION NO. 196
being too black in complexion. What is the status of Paco has three legitimate brothers (Abe, Ben, and
the child? Chad) Abe predeceases Paco, but he is survived by
The child is the legitimate child of Homer and Winda his legitimate child, Arnel. Ben is incapacitated, but
because it was born within a valid marriage. This is so he has two legitimate children, Brad and Bien. Chad
because under the law, a child conceived and born repudiates the inheritance. How shall Paco’s
during lawful wedlock is almost conclusively presumed intestate estate of Php1.2 million be distributed?
legitimate. The presumption is almost conclusive The Php400,000 share of Abe who predeceased his
because the law allows certain grounds to disprove it. brother, Paco, goes to his legitimate child, Arnel, by
(Art. 164, Family Code) representation. The Php400,000 share of Ben who is
QUESTION NO. 194 incapacitated to inherit goes to his legitimate children,
Brad and Bien, also by representation, or Php200,000
Husband and Wife are living separately from each each. The Php400,000 share of Chad who repudiated
other. After their separation, Wife cohabited with the inheritance goes to Arnel, Brad and Bien by
Gigolo from 1985 up to the latter’s death in 2005. In accretion in the same proportion that they inherit, or in
1994, Wife gave birth to Son. During the three-day the proportion of 2:1:1.
stay of Wife at the hospital, Gigolo visited and
stayed with her and the new-born baby. All the Arnel 400,000 by representation
200,000 by accretion
medical and hospital expenses, food, and clothing of
Wife and the baby were paid under the account of Brad 200,000 by representation
Gigolo. 100,000 by accretion

A few months later, Gigolo would bring Son to his Bien 200,000 by representation
office, introduce him as his son, and had their 100,000 by accretion
pictures taken together. On the occasion of Gigolo’s QUESTION NO. 197
last birthday, he expressly acknowledged Son to be
his son in the presence of a priest and other friends. What are the essential characteristics of a decree of
Since his birth, Son had been in continuous registration or certificate of title?
possession and enjoyment of the status of a
recognized child of Gigolo by the latter’s direct and FIRST: A decree of registration or the corresponding
overt acts. After Gigolo’s death, Wife, as guardian of certificate of title binds the land, quiets title thereto, and
Son, brought an action to claim his son’s share in the is conclusive against all persons, including the
estate of Gigolo claiming that her son is the government.
illegitimate child of the deceased. Is Son the SECOND: After one year from its entry or even earlier in
illegitimate child of Gigolo? cases where title to the land has been transferred to an
No. A child born and conceived during a valid marriage innocent purchaser for value, the decree becomes final
is presumed to be legitimate. While physical and incontrovertible.
impossibility for the husband to have sexual intercourse THIRD: A torrens title issued pursuant to a homestead patent,
with his wife is one of the grounds for impugning the free patent, or sales patent under the Public Land Act has the
legitimacy of a child born to the wife, the grounds for same force and effect as a Torrens title.
impugning such legitimacy under Article 166 of the
FOURTH: The operative act that conveys or affects a
Family Code may only be invoked by the husband, or in
registered land is the act of registration insofar as third
proper cases, his heirs under the conditions set forth
persons are concerned.
under Article 171 also of the Family Code.
Outside of these cases, no one - even the heirs - can FIFTH: No title to registered land in derogation of the
impugn legitimacy. If the husband who is presumed to title of the registered owner shall be acquired by
be the father does not impugn the legitimacy of the prescription or adverse possession. However, the
child, then the status of the child is fixed and the latter registered owner may be barred from invoking the
cannot choose to be the child of his mother’s alleged imprescriptibility of his title by virtue of the equitable
paramour. Moreover, it is settled that a child born principle of laches. (Heirs of Batiog-Lacamen v. Heirs of
within a valid marriage is presumed legitimate even Lauran, 65 SCRA 605)
though the mother may have declared against its
legitimacy or may have been declared as an adulteress. SIXTH: Torrens titles are not subject to collateral
(Liyao v. Liyao, 378 SCRA 563 [2002]) attack. It cannot be altered, modified, or cancelled,
except in a direct proceeding in accordance with law.
 competent witnesses to such will. However, such
QUESTION NO. 198
person so attesting shall be admitted as a witness as if
such devise or legacy had not been made or given. (Art.
Which of two titles is superior: an earlier title 823, Civil Code)
secured administratively or a later title secured
through a judicial proceeding? QUESTION NO. 201
 
The person holding the prior certificate of title is Abe, single, died without a will with an estate valued
entitled to the land as against the person who relies on at Php1.2 million. He is survived by the following
the second certificate. Pursuant to Section 32 of P.D. No. relatives:
1529, upon the expiration of one year from the issuance a. Ana, the daughter of Rey, the latter being Abe’s
or entry of the decree of registration, the decree and legitimate brother. Rey has never been married.
certificate shall become indefeasible and
incontrovertible. This provision also applies to titles b. Bea, the daughter of Sam, the latter being Abe’s
acquired through homestead or other public land legitimate brother. Sam was not yet married to
patents. (Lahora v. Dayanghirang, 37 SCRA 346) Bea’s mother when Bea was born. Sam has since
married Bea’s mother.
QUESTION NO. 199
c. Candy, the adopted daughter of Sam.
If the title of a land applicant to a public agricultural
land is incomplete or imperfect, what is his ultimate d. Dina, the daughter of Tina, the latter being Abe’s
remedy under the law? legitimate sister. Shortly after Dina’s birth, Tina
and her husband died in an accident. Dina was
If the applicant of a parcel of land cannot sustain his later adopted by an American couple.
claim of private ownership or does not have enough
evidence to overcome the presumption that the land Who is entitled to inherit from Abe?
belongs to the public domain under the Regalian Only Bea and Dina are entitled to inherit from Abe. Bea
Doctrine, his ultimate recourse is to admit that the land is entitled to inherit because she is Abe’s niece, she
is a public land but invoke his right to confirm his being the legitimated daughter of Sam, Abe’s legitimate
imperfect or incomplete title to the land under Section brother. A legitimated child shall enjoy the same rights
48 of the Public Land Act, C.A. No. 141. as legitimate children. (Art. 179, Family Code)
QUESTION NO. 199 Dina is also entitled to inherit because she is the
Which of the following marriages would a court legitimate daughter of Tina, Abe’s sister. That Dina was
most likely declare void? adopted by an American couple does not disqualify her
to inherit from Abe because an adopted child remains
a. Abe and Bea are married and have a son, Charlie, an intestate heir of his parents and other blood
who is 19. David and his girlfriend, Elnora, have relatives.
a daughter, Fiona, who is 18. Abe and David are
brothers. Charlie and Fiona got marriage last Ana is not qualified to inherit from Abe because of her
year with the consent of their parents. status as an illegitimate child of Rey. An illegitimate
child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the
b. Arnulfo and Anabelle are husband and wife. legitimate relatives of his father or mother. (Art. 992,
Anabelle died of pancreatic cancer two years Civil Code). Since Abe is a legitimate brother of Rey, Ana
ago. Distraught by his wife’s death, Arnulfo is therefore excluded from Abe’s inheritance.
married Angela, 26. Anabelle and Angela are
sisters. Candy is also not qualified to inherit from Abe because
of her status as an adopted child of Sam, Abe’s brother.
The marriage in (a) between Charlie and Fiona would Candy’s relationship with Sam, her adoptive father, is
most likely be declared void, but not the marriage in (b) purely personal between them and does not extend to
between Arnulfo and his sister-in-law, Angela. Abe.
The marriage in (a) is void because Charlie and Fiona QUESTION NO. 202
are first cousins. Their marriage is void under Article 38
(a) of the Family Code because they are collateral Abe wanted to have his house remodeled. He called
relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity, a number of building contractors and received bids
and it doesn’t matter whether their relationship is ranging from Php1 million to Php1.5 million. Ben
illegitimate. submitted a bid to do the work for Php900,000. Abe
then entered into a notarized contract with Ben to
The marriage in (b) is valid because Arnulfo was no have the house remodeled.
longer suffering from any impediment when he married
his sister-in-law, Angela. A marriage between a brother- Shortly before Ben was scheduled to begin work, he
in-law and a sister-in-law is valid because it is not one called Abe and said, “I just found out my secretary
of those prohibited by law for reasons of public policy. made a mistake in adding figures. I couldn’t possibly
(Art. 38, Family Code) do the work for Php900,000 or I’d lose money.” Abe
sues Ben for breach of contract. Judgment for
QUESTION NO. 200 whom?
Tom executed a will giving a legacy of Php1 million Judgment for Abe if he did not have reason to know
to his friend, Frank. Tom executed the will in the Ben’s erroneous bid. Ben cannot refuse to perform on
presence of three instrumental witnesses. One of grounds of unilateral mistake because mistake cannot
the instrumental witnesses was Frank. Is the will and ought not co-exist with negligence, as in this case.
valid? (Art. 1331, Civil Code)
The will is valid and binding because of the presence of QUESTION NO. 203
three instrumental witnesses, but Frank is incompetent
to receive the legacy. If a person attests the execution of Which of the following agreements need not comply
a will, to whom a devise or legacy is given by such will, with the Statute of Frauds?
such devise or legacy, so far as such person is a. Abe is indebted to Ben which is now due. Clay, a
concerned, shall be void, unless there are three other friend of Abe, promises to pay Ben what Abe
 owes in case the latter defaults in his obligation Abe and Bea, a childless couple, were married ten
to Ben. years ago. Despite several trips to Obando, Bulacan,
Bea still failed to conceive a child. Bea attributes her
b. Abe intends to borrow money from Ben to
failure to conceive a child to the fact that Abe’s
finance a business. Clay, a friend of Abe, tells Ben
family has a history of fertility problem. Anxious to
to extend the loan to Abe and represents that
have a child, Bea secretly had herself artificially
Abe financially able in paying the loan
inseminated with the sperm of an unnamed donor.
obligation.
When Abe discovered Bea’s pregnancy through this
c. Abe sells to Rey a car for Php150,000. procedure, he immediately commenced an action
for legal separation. Will Abe prevail?
d. Abe assigns his leasehold rights to Rey for the
remainder of the lease period. Abe will not prevail because Bea is neither guilty of
sexual infidelity nor of any other ground for legal
The agreement in (d) need not comply with the Statute separation under Article 55 of the Family Code. Abe’s
of Frauds. The contracts which are required to be in only remedy in law is to impugn the legitimacy of the
writing to be enforceable are those enumerated under child on grounds that his wife procured the artificial
Article 1403 (2) of the Civil Code. The list is exclusive. insemination without his consent.
An assignment of leasehold rights, even if the lease
involves real property, is not among the contracts QUESTION NO. 207
which is required to be in writing to be enforceable.
Abe and Bea lived together for many years as
Inclusio unius, est exclusio alterius.
husband and wife, but never married. Due to Abe’s
The agreements in (a), (b), and (c) are required to be in advancing age, Bea became increasingly concerned
writing because they all fall under the Statute of Frauds. about her economic security in the event anything
The agreement in (a) constitutes a special promise to should happen to Abe. Although Abe repeatedly
answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another; promised to take care of Bea in his will, Bea always
the agreement in (b) constitutes a representation as to insisted that Abe must “do something now, not
the credit of another; while the agreement in (c) later” to provide her with some security. One day,
involves the sale of personalty the price of which is in Abe asked Bea to meet him at his lawyer’s office.
excess of Php500.00. There, he signed a notarized deed donating to her a
parcel of land. Gratified by Abe’s generosity, Bea
QUESTION NO. 204 accepted the donation in the same document.
Ali and Raida, both of age and not suffering from Shortly thereafter, Abe died. Abe’s intestate heirs
any impediment, have lived together for several immediately commenced an action against Bea for
years as husband and wife without marriage. recovery of the property. Who prevails?
Following the birth of a son, the couple got married. Abe’s heirs will prevail because the prohibition against
The marriage proved to be a failure when it was donation between spouses during the marriage also
annulled on grounds that, at the time of the applies to persons living together as husband and wife
marriage, Ali concealed to Raida his affliction with without a valid marriage. If the rule were otherwise,
a serious and incurable sexually-transmissible persons in common-law relationships would be in a
disease. What is the child’s status? better position than those in lawful wedlock. This is
The subsequent annulment of the marriage of Ali and certainly not the intendment of the law.
Raida does not affect the legitimated status of their son. QUESTION NO. 208
This is so because a voidable marriage is one which is
valid until annulled. Abe gives Rey in usufruct a parcel of land, including
a residential building thereon, for a period of ten
QUESTION NO. 205 years. During the life of the usufruct, the building is
Two years ago, Abe, an engineer, and Bea, a nurse, totally destroyed in a fire of accidental origin. Abe
were introduced to each other by a mutual friend. now demands that Rey vacate the land on grounds
Tessie was a single parent with a two-year old son, that the usufruct has been extinguished by the total
Sam. Abe and Bea were married last year. destruction of the building. Is Abe correct?

Immediately after the marriage, Abe, with Bea’s Abe is wrong. Rey still has the right to use the land and
consent, filed a petition to adopt Sam. Sam’s birth the materials left on it until the end of the ten-year
certificate identified Rey as the father. When Sam period.
was a baby, Rey denied paternity and left the
Philippines. The court granted the adoption. Is the QUESTION NO. 209
adoption of Sam by Abe valid?
Abe promises to buy a new house for Tessie’s
Sam’s adoption by Abe is void. Under the Domestic parents if Tessie were to marry him. Tessie agrees.
Adoption Act, a person who is financially capable of Abe later refuses to make good his promise. Can
giving care and support may adopt a child. Although Tessie compel Abe to buy a house for her parents?
Abe, being a lawyer, is financially capable of giving care
and support to Sam, his adoption of Sam is void. The
Domestic Adoption Act specifically requires that the No. The promise of marriage was used as consideration
husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except if one for the promise to buy a new house. Therefore, if Tessie
spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the other; wants to enforce this promise, the promise must be
or if one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own proved through something in writing, and Abe needed
illegitimate child; or if the spouses are legally separated to sign the writing. Abe’s promise falls squarely within
from each other. Abe does not fall under any of these the Statute of Frauds.
exceptions. His adoption of Sam, although with Bea’s QUESTION NO. 210
consent, is a complete nullity. To be valid, the adoption
should have been filed jointly with Bea. Andy and Ben inherited from their parents a farm.
On January 1, Andy sold his half interest over the
QUESTION NO. 206 property to Celso for Php500,000. Ben learned of
the sale on May 5 when Andy gave him a copy of the
sale document. Ben went to Celso and offered to
The clerical or typographical errors which may be
redeem Andy’s share for Php550,000. Ben offered
administratively corrected under R.A. No. 9048 are
his check of Php400,000 as partial payment, and
limited to those mistakes committed in the performance
promised to pay the balance in 60 days upon the
of clerical work in writing, copying, transcribing, or
approval of his bank loan. Celso refused. On July 20,
typing an entry in the civil register that are harmless
Ben launched an action against Celso for legal
and innocuous, which are visible to the eyes, obvious to
redemption.
the understanding, and can be corrected or changed
a. Did Ben make a valid and effective offer to only by reference to other existing record or records.
redeem Andy’s share?
QUESTION NO. 212
No. The law, in granting unto a co-owner the right of
What kind of errors are not correctible under R.A.
redemption, intended that the offer to redeem must be
No. 9048?
valid and effective, accompanied by an actual tender of
an acceptable redemption price. Here, Ben failed to Those errors that involve the change of nationality, age,
make a valid tender of the redemption price. Ben or status of the petitioner are excluded from the
merely offered a check for P400,000, which was not coverage of the law. Consequently, any petition to
even legal tender and which Celso rejected. correct any error that would subsequently change the
nationality, age, or status of a person shall be filed with
Celso was not obligated to accept Ben’s promise to pay
the proper court, and not with any local civil registrar.
the balance by means of a loan to be obtained from a
bank. Bona fide redemption necessarily imports a QUESTION NO. 213
seasonable and valid tender of the entire repurchase
price, and this was not done. There is no cogent reason On what ground may a petition for change of first
for requiring Celso to accept payment by instalments name be filed under R.A. No. 9048?
from a redemptioner, as it would ultimately result in an Under R.A. 9048, the following are the grounds for the
indefinite extension of the 30-day redemption period, change of a person’s first name: a) the petitioner finds
when the purpose of the law in fixing a short and the first name or nickname to be ridiculous, tainted with
definite term is clearly to avoid prolonged and anti- dishonor, or extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
economic uncertainty as to ownership of the thing sold. b) the new first name or nickname has been habitually
All told, the offer to redeem was not in pursuance of a and continuously used by the petitioner and he has
legal and effective exercise of the right of redemption as been publicly known by that first name or nickname in
contemplated by law; hence, refusal of the offer on the the community; c) the change will avoid confusion. Any
part of Celso is justified. The conditions precedent for of these grounds, if supported with convincing proof,
the valid exercise of the right do not exist will be sufficient basis of changing a person’s first name.
.
b. Suppose Ben offered to pay in cash the QUESTION NO. 214
redemption price, and Celso refused, did Ben Abe was born on February 12, 1975. What was
seasonably file his complaint for legal recorded as his date of birth in his birth certificate
redemption on July 20? was February 22, 1975, while all the other entries in
No, the complaint was filed out of time. Article 1623 of the birth certificate are February 15, 1975, the date
the Civil Code does not prescribe any particular form of when the attendant signed the document; the date
notice, nor any distinctive method for notifying the when the informant gave the information; the date
redemptioner. So long, therefore, as the redemptioner is when the clerk prepared the document; and the
informed in writing of the sale and the particulars date when the instrument was received at the office
thereof, the 30 days for redemption start running, and of the civil registrar. May the error be corrected
the redemptioner has no real cause to complain. under R.A. No. 9048?

Here, Andy showed Ben a copy of the sale document in Yes. There is in this case an impossible event whereby
favor of Celso on May 5. The furnishing of this copy is registration of birth was done ahead of the occurrence
equivalent to the giving of written notice required by of birth. That the birth was registered prior to its
law: it came from the vendor and made available in occurrence indicates a glaring clerical error especially if
writing the details and finality of the sale. It served all the date of birth, as recorded, is compared with the
the purposes of the written notice, in a more authentic other significant dates in the same document. This
manner than any other writing could have done. As a error is visible to the eyes and is very obvious to the
necessary consequence, the 30-day period for the legal understanding; hence, it can be considered a clerical
redemption by Ben began to run its course from and error, which can be corrected under R.A. No. 9048.
after May 5, ending on June 5. In this case, the correction is not an attempt to change
QUESTION NO. 211 the age of Abe, but to correct the impression that
registration was done prior to the occurrence of birth.
What is Republic Act No. 9048?
QUESTION NO. 214
Republic Act No. 9048 which took effect on April 22,
2001 is the law which expanded the basic quasi-judicial Abe was born on January 2, 1962, but the typist
duties and functions of Civil Registrars as provided entered the date of his birth as “2-1-62” which could
under paragraph c, Section 479 of the Local be interpreted as “February 1, 1962” or “January 2,
Government Code. It amended Articles 376 and 412 of 1962.” May Abe file for correction of his date of
the Civil Code by granting the city and municipal birth?
registrars the authority to correct clerical or Yes, because the date was misleading since a numeric
typographical errors and to change first names or character or symbol was used for the month. In
nicknames in the civil registrar without need of judicial accordance with the order of writing the date in the
order. birth certificate, the “day” should be entered first,
QUESTION NO. 212 followed by the “month” and the last, the “year.” The
month should be spelled out and not represented by
What kind of clerical or typographical errors may numerical symbol, like “January” and not “1”. The error
be corrected administratively under R.A. No. 9048?
in question is clearly a clerical error within the meaning following month, March 14, 1998, Bea registered
of R.A No. 9048. the birth of Caroline under the rules governing the
delayed registration of births. The complete name
QUESTION NO. 215
of Caroline which was recorded in her birth
Abe and Bea, both of age and not suffering from any certificate was Caroline Santos Cruz, and the date of
impediment, lived together as husband and wife marriage of her parents was entered as February
without a valid marriage. Bea gave birth to a son, 14, 1998 and the place of such marriage as Baguio
Rey, on October 25, 1995. Abe and Bea subsequently City. The Civil Registrar later refuses to correct the
got married on February 20, 1996. The following entries. Decide.
month, March 5, 1996, Abe’s birth was belatedly
The entries are not clerical errors within the meaning of
registered on March 5, 1996. Because Abe was born
R.A. No. 9048. The correction of the date of marriage of
illegitimate, he used in his birth certificate the
the parents will affect the status of the child.
surname of his mother. In the entry under “Date and
Place of Marriage of Parents,” however, the entries The civil registrar was correct in denying the correction
“20 February 1996, Baguio City” were made when it of the entries in Caroline’s certificate of birth
should have been “not married.” May Abe seek a considering that Caroline’s surname should have
correction under R.A. No. 9048? followed that of her mother’s because she was born
illegitimate. Moreover, the date and place of Caroline’s
Yes. The error here is a clerical error within the
parents are erroneous because of the principle in civil
meaning of R.A No. 9048 because a future event cannot
registration that only the facts obtaining at the time of
be recorded in the birth certificate. The correction will
birth shall be recorded in the birth certificate and not
not alter the status of the child who, by his recorded
those facts prevailing at the time of registration
name, is an illegitimate child who is legitimated by
virtue of the subsequent marriage of his parents. The QUESTION NO. 218
error here arose because only information obtaining at
Abe and Bea, both 14 years old, eloped. A daughter,
the time of birth shall be recorded in the birth
Joy, was born to them when they were 16 years old.
certificate, and not information prevailing at the time of
When they reached the age of 19, they got marriage
registration.
with the consent of their parents. Is Joy legitimated
QUESTION NO. 216 by the marriage of her parents?
Maria Lourdes Cruz filed for correction of entry in Yes. Pursuant to R.A. No. 9858, children born to parents
her certificate of live birth. She was baptized as below marrying age may now be legitimated. R.A. No.
Maria Lourdes Cruz, the name entered in her 9858 amended Article 177 of the Family Code to the
certificate of live birth. When she started schooling, effect that if the child born to parents are disqualified to
however, she used the name Ma. Lourdes Cruz. marry each other because they are below 18 years of
Petitioner’s name was abbreviated to “Ma.” in all age, the child may be legitimated by the subsequent
her records, except her birth certificate. She now marriage of the parents. Article 177 of the Family Code,
wants her name corrected to Ma. Lourdes Cruz, as amended by R.A. 9858, now reads: “Children
instead of Maria Lourdes Cruz. Will she prevail? conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents who, at
the time of the conception of the former, were not
No. There is no clerical error in this case. Petitioner’s disqualified by any impediment to marry each other, or
name as recorded in her birth certificate is perfectly were so disqualified only because either or both of them
correct. There is no misspelling, no misplaced letter, no were below eighteen (18) years of age, may be
omitted letter, no unnecessary letter, and no misplaced legitimated.”
word. Petitioner’s remedy is to file for change of first QUESTION NO. 219
name and not for correction of clerical error.
The attestation clause of a will reads: “x x x
QUESTION NO. 216 and he (the testator) signed at the bottom of the
Abe and Bea were married on January 15, 1996. On aforesaid will in our presence and we at his request
February 7, 1997, Bea gave birth to Carla. Prior to did the same in his presence and in that of each other
Carla’s birth, Abe left the conjugal abode and lived as witnesses to the will, and lastly, the testator, as
with another woman. Because of Abe’s infidelity, well as we, as witnesses, signed in the same manner
Bea registered Carla as illegitimate with an on the left margin of each sheet.”
“unknown” father. The item regarding the date and Is the attestation clause sufficient?
place of marriage of parents was left blank.
The attestation clause is sufficient because the
In 1999, Abe and Bea reconciled. It was then that words “in the same manner” mean nothing but that
Abe discovered the following: (a) The last name of the testator and the witnesses signed on the left
Carla is the maiden surname of his wife; (2) His margin of each sheet of the will “in the same
name as the father of Carla is not entered, but manner” in which they signed at the bottom
marked “unknown,” and (3) There is no information thereof, that is, the testator in the presence of the
about the date and place of marriage of the parents. witnesses and the latter in the presence of the
Are the errors correctible under R.A. No. 9048? testator and of each other (Fernandez v. Vergel de
The errors are not clerical within the meaning of R.A. Dios 46 Phil. 922 [1936)
No. 9048 because the correction involves the change of QUESTION NO. 219
status of Carla from “illegitimate” to “legitimate.”
Abe executes a document in his handwriting
QUESTION NO. 217 denominated as “Kasulatan sa Pag-aalis ng Mana.”
Abe Cruz and Bea Santos, both of age and not The document reads:
suffering from any legal impediment, lived together “Ako, si Abe, may asawa, naninirahan
as husband and wife without a valid marriage. On sa 465-A Flores St., Ermita, Manila, at
October 25, 1995, Bea gave birth to Caroline. A few nagtataglay ng maliwanag na pag iisip at
months later, Abe and Bea got married, particularly disposisyon, ay tahasan at hayagang
on Valentine’s Day on February 14, 1998. The inaalisan ko ng lahat at anumang mana ang
 panganay kong anak na si Rey dahil siya ay The institution is valid. The mere statement of a cause
naging lapastangan sa akin at ilang beses contrary to law will not invalidate a will nor invalidate
s’yang nagsalita ng masama sa harapan ko an institution, so long as it does not appear in the will
at kapatid niya na si Mimi na labis kong that such illegal cause is the only motivating factor for
ikinasama ng loob ko.” the institution. The principle underlying the rule on the
statement of a false cause under Article 850 of the Civil
Rey opposes the will on grounds that it does not Code should also apply in the case of an illegal cause, if
contain any disposition of estate and therefore does the true cause is the generosity of the testator, and the
not meet the definition of a will under Article 783 of disposition is essentially based on the affection of the
the Civil Code. Rey claims that the will only shows testator, the mere statement of an illegal cause should
an alleged act of disinheritance by Abe of his son, not impair the institution. But if it clearly appears from
Rey, and nothing else; that all other compulsory the will itself that the testator’s only reason for making
heirs were not named nor instituted either as heirs, the disposition is the illegal cause, then the disposition
as legatees or as devisees, hence; there is should be void.
preterition which would result in intestacy. QUESTION NO. 221
a. Is the document a valid holographic will? Abe donated to his nephew, Rey, a house and lot
Yes. A holographic will, as provided under Article 810 of valued at P1 million. Due to business reverses, Abe
the Civil Code, must be entirely written, dated, and died poor ten years later. Larry, Abe’s son,
signed by the hand of the testator. It is subject to no immediately commenced an action to recover the
other form, and may be made in or out of the donated property on grounds that his legitime has
Philippines, and need not be witnessed. An intent to been impaired. The property is now valued at P5
dispose mortis causa can be clearly deduced from the million. Decide.
terms of the instrument, and while it does not make an The action, insofar as it seeks to reduce the donation,
affirmative disposition of the testator’s property, the will prosper because Larry’s legitime has been
disinheritance results in the disposition of the property impaired. Larry’s legitime is half of Abe’s estate.
of the testator in favor of those who would succeed in However, what is to be collated to the estate is the value
the absence of Abe. of the property at the time of the donation and not the
It is a fundamental principle that the intent or the will of value at the time of the donor’s death. Accordingly,
the testator, expressed in the form and within the limits Larry is not entitled to half of the present value of the
prescribed by law, must be recognized as the supreme property (Php5 million), but only to half of its value of
law in succession. Accordingly, the document, even if Php500,000 which Rey may pay in cash.
captioned as Kasulatan sa Pag-aalis ng Mana, was QUESTION NO. 222
intended by Abe to be his last testamentary act and was
executed by him in accordance with law in the form of a Abe died in 1999. Before his death, he left a notarial
holographic will. Unless the will is probated, the will instituting his five sons, Ben, Charlie, Dante,
disinheritance of Rey cannot be given effect. Enrico and Fidel as his sole heirs. Ben died in 1997
in a vehicular accident. He left two children, Greg
b. Is there a valid disinheritance of Rey? and Homer. Charlie, who has been convicted of an
Yes. For disinheritance to be valid, Article 916 of the attempt against the life of Abe, has a son Inigo.
Civil Code requires that the same must be effected Dante was disinherited for a cause not recognized
through a will wherein the legal cause therefore shall be by law. He is the father of John, Karl, Lito and
specified. With regard to the reason for disinheritance Manuel. Enrico repudiated his inheritance because
that was stated by Juan in his document, the same can his father never accepted his wife. They have two
be considered a form of maltreatment of Abe by his son, children, Nomer and Orly. The net value of Abe’s
Rey, and that the matter presents a sufficient cause for hereditary estate is P1 million. Distribute the estate.
the disinheritance of a child or descendant under Article Since Ben predeceased Abe, the testator, his legitimate
919 of the Civil Code. children Greg and Homer shall represent him in the
c. Is there preterition of compulsory heirs in the succession. The same is true in the case of Charlie, since
will? he is incapacitated to inherit from his father because of
an act of unworthiness. His legitimate child, Inigo, shall
No. Abe’s holographic will was his last expression to represent him in the succession. Also, John, Karl, Lito
bequeath his entire estate to all his compulsory heirs, and Manuel shall inherit by right of representation
with the sole exception of Rey. Also, Abe did not because their father, Dante, was disinherited. It is
institute an heir to the exclusion of his other different in the case of Enrico. An heir who repudiates
compulsory heirs. The mere mention of the name of his inheritance cannot be represented. (Art 977, Civil
Abe’s daughter did not operate to institute her as a Code) The legitime of Enrico shall be distributed in
universal heir. Her name was included plainly as a accordance with the rules on intestate succession, while
witness to the alteration between Abe and his son, Rey. his share as a voluntary heir shall accrue to his co-heirs,
Since the document is Abe’s holographic will, and that Ben, Charlie, Dante and Fidel. But Ben is already dead,
the law favors testacy over intestacy, the probate of the Charlie is incapacitated, and Dante was disinherited.
will cannot be dispensed with. Thus, unless the will is The only living and capacitated heir is Fidel. Thus:
probated, the rights of a person to dispose of his
Fidel 100,000 as compulsory heir
property may be rendered nugatory. (Seangio v. Reyes,
100,000 as voluntary heir
508 SCRA 177 [2006])
100,000 by right of accretion from B
QUESTION NO. 220 100,000 by right of accretion from C
100,000 by right of accretion from
The testator’s will contains the following
D
disposition: “I institute my brother, Juan, as my
100,000 by right of accretion from E
universal heir because he had killed my political
25,000 as legal heir
rival.” The testator himself had nothing to do with
the crime. Is the institution valid?
Greg 50,000 by right of representation
 12,500 as legal heir
As to property relations, the spouses are governed by
the regime of conjugal partnership of gains. This is so
Homer 50,000 by right of representation
because they were married when the operative law was
12,000 as legal heir
the Civil Code. But as to the liquidation of their conjugal
partnership assets, the Family Code is the law
Inigo 100,000 by right of representation
applicable because it is already the operative law at the
25,000 as legal heir
time of the dissolution of their conjugal partnership.
John 25,000 by right of representation The applicable law in so far as the liquidation of the
6, 250 as legal heir conjugal partnership assets and liabilities of Abe and
Amy is concerned is Article 129 of the Family Code
Karl 25,000 by right of representation (provision on liquidation of the conjugal partnership) in
6,250 as legal heir relation to Article 63 (effects of a decree of legal
separation). The latter provision is applicable because
Lito 25,000 by right of representation according to Article 256 of the Family Code ”[t]his Code
6,250 as legal heir shall have retroactive effect insofar as it does not
prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in
Manuel 25,000 by right of representation accordance with the Civil Code or other law.”
6,250 as legal heir Amy’s contention that her vested right over half of the
QUESTION NO. 223 common properties of the conjugal partnership is
violated when her share in the conjugal partnership is
Judge Abe, a municipal trial court judge of forfeited in favor of her children pursuant to Article
Naguilian, La Union, performed a marriage in Tuba, 63(2) and 129 of the Family Code has no basis.
Benguet, upon written request of the parties. Is the
marriage valid? While it is true that the couple were married at the time
when the operative law was the Civil Code, the Family
Yes. The solemnization by a judge of a marriage outside Code should be given retroactive application for
his court’s jurisdiction is merely a resultant irregularity purposes of determining the “net profits earned” by the
in a formal requisite laid down in Article 3 of the Family conjugal partnership which is subject to forfeiture. A
Code which, while it may not affect the validity of the spouse’s claim of a vested right is not etched in stone.
marriage, may subject the officiating official to To be vested, a right must have become a title – legal or
administrative liability. (Navarro v. Domagtoy, 259 equitable – to the present or future enjoyment of
SCRA 137 [1996]) property. In one case, the Supreme Court reiterated its
long standing ruling that “prior to the liquidation of the
QUESTION NO. 224 conjugal partnership, the interest of each spouse in the
conjugal assets is inchoate, a mere expectancy, which
Which voidable marriage is not susceptible of constitutes neither a legal nor an equitable estate, and
ratification by cohabitation under the law? does not ripen into title until it appears that there are
Marriages which are voidable because of the physical assets in the community as a result of the liquidation
incapacity of a party to consummate the marriage and and settlement. The interest of each spouse is limited to
those by reason of affliction of a party with a serious the net remainder resulting from the liquidation of the
and incurable sexually-transmissible disease are not affairs of the partnership after its dissolution. Thus, the
susceptible of ratification by cohabitation. (Art. 45, Nos. right of the husband or wife to one-half of the conjugal
5 & 6, Family Code) assets does not vest until the dissolution and liquidation
of the conjugal partnership, or after the dissolution of
QUESTION NO. 225 the marriage, when it is finally determined that, after
settlement of conjugal obligations, there are net assets
Abe and Amy were married in 1978, or ten years
left which can be divided between the spouses or their
before the Family Code. After 15 years of marriage,
respective heirs.”
Abe obtained a decree of legal separation after
catching his wife having illicit relations with their b. Is the computation of net profits earned in the
neighbor. In the decree, the court forfeited Amy’s conjugal partnership of gains the same with the
share in the net profits earned by the conjugal computation of net profits earned in the absolute
partnership in favor of her children pursuant to community?
Article 63(2) in relation to Article 129 of the Family
Code. The term net profits is defined in Article 102(4) of the
Family Code. Under this provision, the term net profits
Amy quickly assailed the ruing claiming that the net “shall be the increase in value between the market value
assets of the conjugal partnership shall be of the community property at the time of the
computed in accordance with Article 102 of the celebration of the marriage and the market value at the
Family Code, instead of Article 129. She claimed that time of its dissolution.” Without any doubt, Article
Article 102 applies because there are no other 102(4) applies to both the dissolution of the absolute
provisions under the Family Code which defines net community regime under Article 102 of the Family
profits subject of forfeiture as a result of legal Code, and the dissolution of the conjugal partnership
separation. She argued that her vested right over regime under Article 129 of the Family Code. The
half of the common properties of the conjugal difference lies in the processes used under the
partnership is violated when the forfeiture is to be dissolution of the absolute community regime under
made pursuant to Article 129 in relation to Article Article 102 of the Family Code, and in the processes
63(2) of the Family Code. used under the dissolution of the conjugal partnership
regime under Article 129 of the Family Code.
a. What law governs the property relations of the
spouses given that they were married before the
ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY REGIME: Applying Article 102
effectivity of the Family Code? What law governs
of the Family Code, the “net profits” requires a prior
the dissolution of their common properties since
determination of the market value of the properties at
the decree of legal separation was issued after
the time of the community’s dissolution. From the
the Family Code is already in effect?
totality of the market value of all the properties, the and Amy, is the latter entitled to receive any
debts and obligations of the absolute community are to property from the conjugal partnership?
be deducted and this will result to the net assets or net
remainder of the properties of the absolute community, No. What remains in the conjugal properties of Abe and
from which the value of the properties at the time of Amy (after payment of all debts and obligations) should
marriage is to be deducted, which then results to the net be divided equally between them. However, since Amy
profits. is the guilty party, her share from the “net profits” of the
conjugal partnership is forfeited in favor of the common
CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP REGIME: Applying Article children pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Family Code.
129 of the Family Code, the “net profits” requires a prior Nothing will be returned to Amy because in the conjugal
determination of the separate properties and debts of partnership regime, there is no separate property which
the spouses under the following procedure a) an may be accounted for in the guilty party’s favor. (Quiao
inventory shall be prepared, listing separately all the v. Quiao, G.R. No. 176556, July 4, 2012)
properties of the conjugal partnership and the exclusive QUESTION NO. 226
properties of each spouse; b) amounts advanced by the
conjugal partnership in payments of personal debts and Abe is the owner of a farm which he leased to a
obligations of either spouse shall be credited to the married couple. When the couple failed to pay rent,
conjugal partnership as an asset thereof; c) each spouse Abe sued for payment of their rental arrears. The
shall be reimbursed for the use of his or her exclusive wife promptly moved to dismiss the complaint on
funds in the acquisition of property or for the value of grounds that her husband is already dead, and that
his or her exclusive property, the ownership of which therefore Abe’s claim must be filed in the
has been vested by law in the conjugal partnership; d) proceedings for the settlement of her husband’s
the debts and obligations of the conjugal partnership estate. May Abe sue the wife alone for collection of
shall be paid out of the conjugal assets. In case of a debt which is owed by the conjugal partnership?
insufficiency of said assets, the spouses shall be No. A creditor cannot sue the surviving spouse of a
solidarily liable for the unpaid balance with their deceased person in an ordinary proceeding for the
separate properties, in accordance with the provisions collection of a sum of money chargeable against the
of paragraph 2 of Article 121; e) whatever remains of conjugal partnership. The proper remedy is for the
the exclusive properties of the spouses shall thereafter creditor to file a claim in the settlement of the estate of
be delivered to each of them; f) unless the owner had the deceased spouse. This is so because upon the death
been indemnified from whatever source, the loss or of one spouse, the powers of administration of the
deterioration of movables used for the benefit of the surviving spouse ceases and are passed to the
family, belonging to either spouse, even due to administrator appointed by the court having
fortuitous event, shall be paid to said spouse from the jurisdiction over the settlement of estate proceedings.
conjugal funds, if any; and g)the net remainder of the For marriages governed by the rules on conjugal
conjugal partnership shall constitute the profits, which partnership of gains, an obligation entered into by the
shall be divided equally between husband and wife, spouses is chargeable against their conjugal partnership
unless a different proportion or division was agreed and it is the partnership which is primarily bound for its
upon in the marriage settlements or unless there has repayment. Thus, when the spouses are sued for the
been a voluntary waiver or forfeiture of such share as enforcement of an obligation entered into by them, they
provided in the Family Code. are joined in their capacity as representatives of the
c. Suppose that Article 102 of the Family Code conjugal partnership and not as independent debtors
(which is a provision under the regime of such that the concept of joint or solidary liability, as
absolute community of property) is to apply in between them, does not apply. (Alipio v. Court of
the instant case, is Amy entitled to receive Appeals, 341 SCRA 441 [2000])
anything from the absolute community? QUESTION NO. 227
If Abe and Amy have no separate properties, the Can there be an easement over another easement?
remaining properties of the couple are all part of the An easement over a usufruct? A usufruct over an
absolute community. And its market value at the time of easement?
the dissolution of the absolute community constitutes
the “market value at dissolution.” When Abe and Amy As to the first question: Yes, there can be an easement
were legally separated, all the properties which over another easement. Article 629 of the Civil Code
remained will be liable for the debts and obligations of provides that the owner of the servient estate must
the community. Such debts and obligations will be abstain from anything that will render the use of the
subtracted from the “market value at dissolution.” easement more inconvenient to the owner of the
What remains after the debts and obligations have been dominant estate. This is a negative easement which
paid from the total assets of the absolute community requires the owner of the servient estate not to impair
constitutes the net remainder or net asset. And from in any manner whatsoever the use of the easement
such net asset or net remainder of the couple’s (such as a right of way).
remaining properties, the market value at the time of
the marriage will be subtracted and the resulting As to the second question: No, there cannot be an
totality constitutes the “net profits.” Since Abe and Amy easement over a usufruct, but there can be an easement
have no separate properties, and nothing would be over a property held in usufruct.
returned to each of them, what will be divided equally As to the third question: No, there cannot be a usufruct
between them is simply the net profits. However, the over an easement, but a usufruct may be established in
trial court forfeited the half-share of Amy in favor of her a property burdened by an easement.
children. Thus, if Article 102 is used in the instant case
(which should not be the case), nothing is left to Amy QUESTION NO. 228
since both parties entered into their marriage without
In 1977, Amy donated to her sons (Art, Ben, and Cal)
bringing with them any property.
a parcel of land under the following conditions: a)
d. Given that Article 129 of the Family Code applies the donation shall be irrevocable; b) the land shall
to the liquidation of the conjugal assets of Abe remain in the possession of the donor during her
lifetime; c) the land shall not be sold or mortgaged
during the lifetime of the donor; and d) the action for recoveyance prescribes in ten years.
donation shall take effect only upon the donor’s Considering that the certificate of title in the name of
death. Amy’s sons accepted the donation in the Art covering the subject property was issued only in
same public instrument. 1977, the filing of the action in 1985 was well within the
ten-year prescriptive period.
Two years later, or in 1979, Amy sold the land to her c. Is the sale by Amy to Art a valid act of revocation
eldest son, Art. The sale resulted in the issuance of of the donation?
a certificate of title in the name of Art.
The sale to Art cannot be considered as a valid act of
In 1985, Ben and Cal brought an action to annul the revocation of the donation because a formal complaint
sale and for reconveyance of the property. Art to revoke the donation must be filed pursuant to Article
defended on the ground of prescription. He argued 764 of the Civil Code which speaks of an action that has
that more than four years have passed since the sale a prescriptive period of four years from the non-
and registration of the property and issuance of his compliance with the condition stated in the deed of
title. He insisted that an action for reconveyance of donation. The rule that there can be automatic
property on the ground of fraud must be filed revocation without benefit of a court action does not
within four years from the discovery of the fraud apply to the case at bar because the subject deed of
which is from the date of registration of the sale in donation is devoid of any provision providing for
1977; and that the same prescriptive period also automatic revocation in the event of non-compliance of
applies to an action predicated on a trust the condition violated. (Austria-Magat v. Court of
relationship that is rooted on fraud or breach of Appeals 375 [2002])
trust.
QUESTION NO. 229
a. Was the donation to Art, Ben and Cal inter vivos
Abe executes in favor of Amy a document
or mortis causa?
denominated as “Deed of Donation Inter Vivos”
involving a parcel of land. The deed of donation
The donation was inter vivos. The express irrevocability
contains a provision that it becomes effective only
of the donation is the distinctive standard that identifies
upon the death of the donor, and that in the event
the donation as inter vivos. The other provisions which
the donee should die before the donor, the donation
seemingly make the donation mortis causa do not go
shall be deemed automatically rescinded and of no
against the irrevocable character of the subject
further force and effect.
donation. The provisions which state that the donation
will only take effect upon the death of the donor and the Shortly after Abe’s death, his heirs promptly filed an
prohibition to alienate, encumber, dispose or sell the action seeking to annul the donation. They contend
property donated are provisions which should be that the donation is mortis causa and not inter vivos
harmonized with its irrevocability. Suffice it to say that and therefore void for failure to comply with the
these provisions are only necessary assurances that formalities of wills. Is the donation inter vivos or
during the donor’s lifetime, the latter would still enjoy mortis causa?
the right of possession over the property; but his naked
title has been passed on to the donees; and that upon The donation is mortis causa. In a donation mortis
the donor’s death, the donees would get all the right to causa, the right of disposition is not transferred to the
use and possess the same. donee while the donor is still alive. In determining
whether a donation is one of mortis causa, the following
Another indication that the donation is inter vivos is the
characteristics must be taken into account: a) it conveys
acceptance of the donation by the donees. An
no title or ownership to the transferee before the death
acceptance is a mark that the donation is inter vivos. On
of the transferor, or what amounts to the same thing; b)
the other hand, donations mortis causa, being in the
the transferor should retain the full or naked ownership
form of a will, are not required to be accepted by the
and control of the property while alive; c) before his
donees during the donor’s lifetime.
death, the transfer should be revocable by the
b. Has the action prescribed? transferor at will; and d) the transferor should be void if
the transferor should survive the transferee.
The action has not yet prescribed. When one’s property
is registered in another person’s name without the In the present case, the nature of the donation as mortis
former’s consent, an implied trust is created by law in causa is confirmed by the fact that the donation does
favor of the true owner. Article 1144 of the Civil Code not contain any clear provision that intends to pass
provides for a ten-year prescriptive period from the proprietary rights to Amy prior to Abe’s death. The
time the right of action accrues in case of a) a written phrase “to become effective upon the death of the
contract; b) an obligation created by law; and c) a donor” admits of no other interpretation but that Abe
judgment. Thus, an action for reconveyance prescribes did not transfer the ownership of the property to Amy
in ten years from the issuance of the title. It is only during his lifetime. Considering that the disputed
when fraud has been committed that the action will be donation is a donation mortis causa, the same partakes
barred after four years. of the nature of testamentary provisions and as such,
must be executed in accordance with the requisites on
However, the four-year prescriptive period is not solemnities of wills and testaments under the Civil
applicable to the instant case because there is no fraud. Code. (Maglasang v. Heirs of Cabatingan, G. R. No.
The records do not show that Amy, the donor, and Art, 131953, June 5, 2002)
the donee, ever intended to defraud Ben and Cal with
respect to the sale and ownership of the subject QUESTION NO. 230
property. On the other hand, the sale was grounded
What are some of the prescriptive periods under
upon their honest but erroneous interpretation of the
our laws?
deed of donation that it is mortis causa, not inter vivos,
and that the donor still had the right to sell or dispose of The following are some of the prescriptive periods
the donated property and to revoke the donation. under our laws:
There being no fraud, the trust relationship between the
donor and the donees, including the buyer Art, the 40 days
Redhibitory action based on defects of animals. (Art. All other actions whose periods are not fixed by law
1577, CC) (Art. 1149, Civil Code)
6 months 6 years
Action for reduction of price or breach of sale of real Action upon an oral contract (Art. 1145, C )
estate. (Arts. 1543 and 1539, CC)
Action upon a quasi-contract (Art. 1146, CC )
Action for reduction of price against hidden defects of
8 years
thing sold. (Art. 1571, CC)
Action for recovery of movable (replevin) if possessor
1 year
is in bad faith (Art. 1132, par 2. and Art. 1140, CC)
Action to impugn child’s legitimacy, if husband resides
10 years
in the same place. (Art. 170, FC)
Action for recovery of possession of immovables (accion
Action for revocation of donation for acts of ingratitude.
publiciana) if real right is lost (Arts. 555 and 1134, CC)
(Art. 769, CC)
Action for recovery of ownership of immovables
Action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer. (Art.
(reivindicatoria) if in good faith (Art. 1134, CC)
1147, CC)
Action upon a mortgage contract (Art. 1142, CC)
Action for defamation. (Art. 1147, CC)
Action upon a written contract (Art. 1144, CC)
Action for rescission or for damages if immovable sold
is encumbered with non-apparent burden. (Art. 1560, Action upon an obligation created by law (Art. 1144, CC)
CC)
Action upon a judgment to enforce warranty against
Action for warranty of solvency in assignment of eviction in partition (Art. 1094, CC)
credits. (Art. 1629, CC)
30 years
Action for loss or damage to goods under COGSA
Action for recovery of ownership of immovables
2 years
(reivindicatoria), if in bad faith (Art. 1141, CC)
Action to impugn child’s legitimacy, if husband is in the
Lifetime
Philippines but not residing in the same place (Art. 170,
par. 2. FC) Action for annulment of marriage based on insanity
(Art. 47, par. 2, FC)
3 years
Action for declaration of nullity of marriage (Art. 39, FC)
Action to impugn child’s legitimacy, if husband is
abroad or outside the Philippines (Art.170, FC) Action to claim legitimacy (lifetime of child) (Art. 173,
FC)
4 years
Action to claim illegitimacy (lifetime of child; If by other
Action for revocation or reduction of donation based on means, only during lifetime of parent) (Art. 175, par. 2,
supervening birth, reappearance of a child or adoption. FC)
(Art. 763, CC) Action for legal support
Action for revocation of donation due to non-fulfilment Action for reduction of donation due to failure of donor
of condition. (Art. 764, CC) to reserve property for his support and support of
Action for recovery of movable (replevin) if possessor is others (during lifetime of donor or relatives) (Art. 750,
in good faith (Art. 1132, CC) CC)

Action upon an injury to rights of plaintiff (Art. 1146, No prescription

CC) Action to declare a contract as inexistent or void.
Action upon a quasi-delict (Art. 1146, CC) Action to recover movable possessed thru a crime (no
Action for rescission of rescissible contracts (Art. 1389, prescription in favor of offender)
CC) Action to demand a right of way under Article 649, Civil
Action to annul voidable contracts on the ground of Code
vitiated consent (Art. 1391, CC) Action to demand partition in co-ownership or to
Action for rescission of partition of decedent’s estate on enforce an express trust
account of lesion (Art. 1100, CC)
Action to probate a will
5 years
Action to enforce a moral right (P.D. No. 49)
Action for legal separation (Art. 57, FC)
Action to recover possession of registered land under
Action for annulment of marriage, except on the ground the Land Registration Act by registered owner or
of insanity (Art. 47, FC) hereditary successors.

Action to claim legitimacy or illegitimacy if child dies

during minority or in a state of insanity (Art. 173, FC) -END-
Action to impugn legitimacy (Art. 182, FC)
Action for declaration of incapacity of an heir (Art. 1040,
CC)
Action for warranty of solvency of debtor if credit is
assigned to a co-heir during partition (Art. 1095, CC)