CELESTIAL, KENNETH JADE DELFIN

CIVIL LAW REVIEW I

1st Semester SY 2020
FINAL EXAM

This questionnaire consists of Part I twenty (20) items for Multiple

Choice Questions and Part II six (6) numbers for essay questions. Read
each question very carefully. Answer the Multiple Choice Questions in the
space provided after the last item. Answer clearly and concisely the essay
question.

Part I MCQ’s
1. Magdalene and Shantung Company entered into a contract of agency
before the consul general of the Philippines in Singapore. They stipulated
that Magdalene shall be the administrator of the real properties of
Shantung Company in the said country. By virtue of the said contract,
Magdalene sold the 1 hectare land of Shantung Company located in
Singapore to Mayhem Real Estate Corporation without any special power
of attorney. The said contract of sale was executed before the vice consul
of the Philippines in Singapore. Under the laws of Singapore, the sale of a
real property by an agent without a special power of attorney is valid.
Shantung Company filed a suit for the annulment of the contract of sale on
the ground that Magdalene has no authority to sell property. If you were the
judge, which of the following courses of action should you take?
a. Dismiss the action for annulment on the ground that the forms and
solemnities of contracts, wills and other public instruments shall be
governed by the law of the country in which they are executed.
b. Dismiss the action for annulment on the ground that the property subject
of the case is located in Singapore, thus the law of Singapore shall govern.
c. Grant the action for annulment on the ground that the forms and
solemnities of contracts, wills and other public instruments shall be
governed by the law of the country in which they are executed.
d. Grant the action for annulment on the ground that Shantung Company
did not authorized Magdalene to sell the property.

2. Which of the following is not included in the attributes of juridical

capacity?
a. Juridical Personality is inherent in every natural person, and therefore it
is not acquired
b. Juridical capacity is lost only through death
c. Juridical capacity can be limited or restricted
d. Juridical capacity cannot exist without capacity to act

3. Excited over there impending marriage, the parties overlooked the

expiration date of their marriage license but just the same the marriage was
solemnized two days after its expiration date. The marriage is:
a. Valid there being a marriage license validly obtained by the parties
b. Voidable there being a defect in the formal requisites.
c. Valid there being only an irregularity in the marriage license.
d. Void in the absence of a valid marriage license.

4. Noel and Liza were sweethearts. Liza became pregnant. Knowing that
Noel was preparing for the bar examinations, Miguel, a lawyer and cousin
of Liza threatened Noel with the filing of a complaint for immorality in the
Supreme Court, thus, preventing him from taking the examinations unless
he marries Liza. As a consequence of the threat, Noel married Liza. Can
the marriage be annulled on the ground of intimidation under Article 45 of
the Family Code?
a. Yes, because without the threat, Noel would not marry Liza.
b. Yes, because the threat, to enforce the claim of Liza, vitiates the consent
of Noel in contracting the marriage.
c. No, because the threat made by Miguel is just and legal.
d. No, because Miguel is not a party to the contract of marriage between
Liza and Noel.
5. In legal separation:
a. the aggrieved spouse may file the action within 5 years from the time of
the occurrence of the cause.
b. no trial shall be held without the 6-month cooling off period being
observed.
c. the spouses will be entitled to live separately upon the start of the trial.
d. the prosecuting attorney has to conduct his own investigation.

6. Three years after marriage, wife learned that husband is afflicted with
STD. Apparently, he has been afflicted even before the marriage but
concealed such fact. An action for annulment may be filed by the wife.
a. within five years after marriage.
b. anytime during the lifetime of the husband.
c. within five years upon knowledge of the STD.
d. anytime during the lifetime of the wife.

7. On March 3, 1995, wife delivered a child at which time the husband has
been harboring the suspicion of her unfaithfulness. He has since been
contemplating on impugning the legitimacy of the child until he met an
accident and died on March 27, 1996. The legitimacy of the child may be
impugned by:
a. his parents
b. his illegitimate child, if any
c. his brothers or sisters
d. his aunts or uncles

8. Specific guidelines have been laid down by the Supreme Court in the
interpretation and application of psychological incapacity as a ground for
annulment.
a. the incapacity must be proven to be existing at the time of the
celebration of the marriage.
b. the illness must be grave
c. the burden of proof must rest on the respondent.
d. the roots of the illness can be traced to the history of the subject

9. The following constitute the different circumstances or cases of fraud

which will serve as ground for the annulment of a marriage, except?
a. Non-disclosure of the previous conviction by final judgment of the other
party of a crime involving moral turpitude
b. Concealment of drug addiction of a sexually-transmissible disease,
regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage
c. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, homosexuality or
lesbianism existing at the time of marriage
d. Concealment by the wife or the husband of the fact of previous sexual
relations prior to the marriage

10. Which of the following is not a requisite for a valid donation propter
nuptias?
a. The donation must be made before the celebration of the marriage
b. The donation shall be automatically revoked in case of noncelebration of
the marriage
c. The donation must be made in consideration of the marriage
d. The donation must be made in favor of one or both of the future spouses
11. Amelia and Arsenio are married. Amelia went to the U.S to work as a
nurse in 2005. She left her two (2) children, Benjie and Cherry, 4years old
and 2 years old, respectively, with her parents, Danilo and Elenita. Later.
Because his parents-in-law, do not want to give his children to him,
Arsenio, through trickery, was able to get his children from their maternal
grandparents. Danilo and Elenita are claiming that they have a better right
to have custody over Benjie and Cherry since they are financially capable
of supporting the needs of the children.

Can the grandparents claim the children?

a. Yes, because the mother Amelia has transferred her parental authority
over the children in favor of the grandparents.
b. Yes, because the grandparents are more financially capable of providing
for the needs of the children.
c. No, because parental authority should be vested on the present parent,
Arsenio
d. No, because the children should be given back to their mother
considering that being both less than 7 years of age, their mother must
have custody over the children.

12. The following are modes of extinguishing usufruct except

a. Expiration of the period for which it was constituted.
b. Merger of the usufruct and ownership in the same person.
c. Total loss of the thing.
d. Bad use of the thing in usufruct.

13. The following are the requisites of the easement of right of way, except.
a. The property is surrounded by other estate
b. There must be no adequate outlet to a public highway
c. There must be indemnity.
d. That if there is outlet, it is not convenient to the dominant estate.

14. The following are the remedies against private nuisance, except,
a. A civil action
b. A prosecution under the penal code or any local ordinance.
c. Abatement without judicial proceedings.
d. None of the above.

15. Negative easement may be acquired by prescription through notarial

prohibition.
a. No, because it is non-apparent.
b. Yes, because notarial prohibition makes apparent what is nonapparent.
c. Yes, because it is provided for by law.
d. Yes, only after 10 years from service of notarial prohibition.
e. None of the above.

16. In case of roots of a neighboring tree intruded to the state of another,

the neighboring owner has the right to cut it off.
a. Yes, only after his demand for the cutting is ignored.
b. Yes, because he owns the roots that intruded at his property.
c. No, without permission from the owner of the tree
d. Yes, only after 10 years of prescription.

17. In like manner, Bad Faith is not presumed, why?

a. Yes, because bad faith is personal.
b. Yes, because bad faith could be inherited.
c. Yes, because ignorance of the law excuses no one.
d. Yes, because it should be proven in court.

18. A possessor in bad faith of a land is entitled for reimbursement as a

matter of right?
a. Yes, but only to useful expenses.
b. No to all kind of expenses, because he is in bad faith.
c. Yes, but only to luxury expenses.
d. Yes, but only to necessary expenses.

19. Easement is always a real right.

a. Yes, if the easement is for use another real property.
b. No, if the easement is for use of person only.
c. Yes, because it is enforceable against the world.
d. No, because it is a property use limitation.

20. A husband by chance discovered hidden treasures on the paraphernal

property of his wife who owns the discovered treasure.
a. The half pertaining to the husband (finder) belongs to the conjugal
partnership
b. The half pertaining to the wife (as owner) belongs to the conjugal
partnership
c. One half shall belong to the husband as finder and the other half shall
belong to the wife as owner of the property
d. a and b
ANSWER FOR MCQ’s

1.b 6.c 11.c 16.b

2.d 7.c 12.d 17.d
3.d 8.a 13.d 18.d
4.d 9.d 14.d 19.a
5.d 10.b 15.e 20.c

Part II Essay

I.
The marriage of H and W was annulled by the competent court. Upon
finality of the judgment of nullity. H began looking for his prospective
second mate. He fell in love with a sexy woman S who wanted to be
married as soon as possible. As a young lawyer, you were consulted by H:
(a) How soon can H be joined in lawful wedlock to his girlfriend S? Under
existing laws, are there certain requisites that must be complied with before
he can remarry? What advice would you give H? (5 pts.)
(b) Suppose that children were born from the union of H and W, what would
be the status of said children? Explain your answer. (5 pts.)
(c) If the subsequent marriage of H to S was contracted before compliance
with the statutory condition for its validity, what are the rights of the children
of the first marriage (H and W) and of the subsequent marriage (H and S)?
(5 pts.)

ANSWER:
(a) I will advice H, that he will still have to liquidate the property of the
previous marriage, give the presumptive legitime of the
compulsory heirs and have a judicial declaration of nullity of
 marriage. Then only after 300 days after the previous marriage H
can marry S.
(b) The children born from the union of H & W are legitimate. The law
state that children born in a valid marriage are legitimate. In the
case above, the marriage of H & W are valid therefore the status
of their children born from their union are legitimate.
(c) The children of the first marriage are entitled to support, use H
surname and to their legitime. The children of the second marriage
are entitled of support but cannot use the surname of H and
entitled of legitime being a illegitimate children of H.

II.
In 2017, Maris, a Filipino citizen, married her boss Johnson, an
American citizen. In Tokyo, in a wedding ceremony celebrated according to
Japanese laws. One year later, Johnson returned to his native Nevada, and
he validly obtained in that state an absolute divorce from his wife Maris.
After Maris received the final judgment of divorce, she married her
childhood sweetheart Pedro, also a Filipino citizen, in a religious ceremony
in Cebu City, celebrated according to the formalities of Philippine law.
Pedro later left for the United States and became naturalized as American
citizen. Maris followed Pedro to the United States, and after a serious
quarrel, Maris filed a suit and obtained a divorce decree issued by the court
in the state of Maryland. Maris then returned to the Philippines and in a civil
ceremony celebrated in Cebu City according to the formalities of Philippine
law, she married her former classmate Vincent likewise a Filipino citizen.
a) Was the marriage of Maris and Pedro valid when celebrated? Is
their marriage still valid existing now? Reasons. (5 pts.)
b) Was the marriage of Maris and Vincent valid when celebrated? Is
their marriage still validly existing now? Reasons. (5pts.)
c) At this point in time, who is the lawful husband of Maris? Reasons.
(5 pts.)
ANSWER:
a) Yes. The law state that divorce obtained by an alien in his country
which capacitate him to remarry. The Filipino spouse can also
remarry. In the case above the divorce obtained by Johnson in
Nevada capacitate Maris to marry Pedro.
Yes, their marriage is validly existing because the divorce
obtained by Maris in Maryland is not valid.
b) No. the marriage of Maris and Vincent is void ab initio being a
bigamous marriage which against public policy. No. their marriage
is not validly existing because there is no marriage to speak of.
c) The lawful husband of Maris is Pedro. Because their marriage is
not yet dissolved by the divorce obtained by Maris in Nevada.

III.
A is possessor in good faith of land and he has constructed various
useful improvements thereon. Later, the real owner appears and wants to
get back the property. A asks for reimbursement of the useful expenses,
but the owner does not give him the amount, so A continues in the
premises. After 5 months, the owner wants to give A the refund asked, but
at the same time, he claims rental for the use of the premises. ISSUE: Is A
obliged to pay rent for the 5-month period? (5 pts)

ANSWER:
Yes. The law state that a possessor in good faith who construct on
the land of another shall pay the rent if the owner would choose not to
appropriate the property. In the case above, the owner is correct in claiming
the rental for the use of the premise.

IV.
The owner of a diamond ring entrusted same to Clarita Sison for the
latter to sell upon promise of a commission. Instead of selling, Clarita
pledged the ring with a pawnshop. As soon as he learned of the pledge, the
owner tried to get back the ring from the pawnshop owner, but the latter
refused. ISSUE: Can the owner successfully get back the ring? If so, does
the owner have to pay the pawnshop owner the amount borrowed by
Clarita? (5 pts)

ANSWER:

Yes. Because the law state that an owner of a movable property who
was deprived of has right of action to recover the movable. In the case
above, the owner of the diamond ring is deprived of his property. Thus, the
latter has the right to recover it.
The owner does not have to pay the pawnshop because the pledge is
void and the one who pledge is not the owner of the thing pledge.

V.
A father donated a parcel of land to his son X on November 3, 2010. But X
did not take possession of the land. Then the father donated the same land
to another son Y on November 26, 2010, who took possession
immediately, not knowing that it had previously been given to X. Later, on
June 10, 2013, with full knowledge of the donation to Y, X registered his
title (by donation) to the land. An action was brought by Y to:
a.)cancel the donation to X;
b.)to cancel the registration by X;
c.) and to have himself (Y) declared the owner. Will the action
prosper? (5 pts each)

ANSWER:
With respect to the donation the action will prosper because donation
shall be accepted by the donee. In the case above the X did not accept the
donation from his father.
 With respect to the registration of property the action will prosper
because X is not in possession of the property and he did not receive the
donated property.

Y can declare that he is the owner of the property because by tilling

the land he impliedly accept the donation given by their father. Further, he
can registered it to the registry of property.

VI.
During his marriage to his first wife, a man had a son and two
grandchildren. When the wife died, he married again, and with the second
wife, he had a son. When the man died, a parcel of land owned by him was
inherited by his son (in the second wife) and the second wife (half, half)
thru intestate succession. After a while, the son of the second marriage
died and his half-share in the land was inherited by his mother (his father’s
second wife) by operation of law. After the mother’s death, can the son and
the grandchildren of the first marriage get the land? (5 pts)

ANSWER:
Yes with respect to the son of the first marriage. The law state that
when an ascendant who inherits from his descendant any property which
the latter acquired by gratuitous title from another ascendant is obliged to
reserve it as he may have acquired it by operation of law for the benefit of
relatives who is in the third degree which the property came. In the case
above, the second wife inherited the said land from his son her decendant
who inherited the land from his father (another ascendant) by gratuitous
title. Thus, the land shall be given to the son of first marriage.
With respect to the grandchildren they cannot inherit the property
because of the presence of the son of the first marriage. Nearest exclude
the farthest.