Qanda 2023 Civ

BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
2023 Edition
DEAN VIVIANA MARTIN - PAGUIRIGAN

Dean, University of the East College of Law Manila
Chair of the 2020/2021 Panel of Experts on
Suggested Answers in Civil Law U.P. Law Center
Former Associate Dean, Far Eastern University Institute of Law
Former Court Attorney, Supreme Court oi the Philippines
Former State Prosecutor, Department of Justice
Professor of Law, University of the East, Far Eastern University,
University of Santo Tomas, Philippine Christian University‘,
University of Perpetual Help DALTA* (* on leave)
Bar Reviewer, Jurists Bar Review Center, Villasls Law Center, Legal
Edge, Academicus Bar Review, Philippine Christian University,
University of Santo Tomas Bar Review Center
MCLE Lecturer, Jurists Bar Review Center, Law innovations
Member, University of the Philippines Panel of Experts on
Suggested Answers to the Bar Examinations in Civil Law,
2013-present
AB Mass Communication, Far Eastern University — Cum Laude
Bachelor of Laws, Far Eastern University — Magna Cum Laude
Author, Notes and Cases on Succession
Philippines Copyright 2023
By
DEAN VIVIANA MARTIN PAGUIRIGAN
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
No portion of this handbook may be copied or reproduced in

book, pamphlets, outlines or notes, whether printed, typewrit
ten, mimeographed, machine copied, or in any other form, for
sale or distribution, without the written permission/consent of
the Author.
Any copy of this book without bearing the corresponding
Serial Number and original signature of the Author on this
page, either proceeds from an illegitimate source or is in
possession of one who has no authority to dispose thereof.
No. _____________
ISBN: 978-621-02-1971-5
Published and Printed by
CENTRAL BOOK SUPPLY, INC.

927 Quezon Avenue, Quezon City, Philippines
E-mail: info@central.com.ph
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
2009 BAR EXAMINATION

PART I
n o n u a a Q n Q o Q Q ¢ ¢ 00 .9
.10
u n Q o u a n a Q Q 00 .'|2
............... ..I6
PART ll
XI ................................................................. .. I7
XII ................................................................ .. 20
XIII ............................................................... .. 22
XIV. ........................................................ . I000: .23
XV. .............................................................. .. 25
XVI. ............................................................. .. 27
XVII. ............................................................ .. 29
XVIII. ........................................................... .. 30
IX. .............................................................. .. 31
XX ....................................................... . - .32¢ ¢ ¢ u ~ 00
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Q u u Q o o n o ¢ u Q u on | Q u n n ¢ u | Q Q Q Q Q u Q ¢ - ¢ u u u u Q Q 00
Q u u ¢ ¢ n a Q a Q Q a Q |u¢n-uuuu Q Q 00
n ¢ --Q- ~ ¢ Q - n ¢ - » o u o u u u u u u Q - In
o Q a n a ¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q u u u | n n - n n o o 00
Q ¢ ¢ - - Q Q Q ¢ p o o u u o o a u n n u u Q Q o on
Q Q Q u |nn--nnuo Q Q o a n n ¢ ¢ u u u in
Q n ---- n o Q ~ Q o o a a n Q ¢ Q Q Q Q . - --
|||--nn|nn Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ~ Q o o u o o 00
u n ¢ u --- Q ¢ ¢ n n n a a n ¢ Q Q n o u u u | In
Q a o ¢ - n o u u u o o on o n u u u u o o o o o o o o u o u u u o o Q n Q 00
XI ........................................... .. 53
XII .................................. .. 55
XIII ......................................... .. 57
XIV .................................... .. 59
XV ....................................... .. 60
XVI ........................................ .. 61

SET A
SET A n n n n ¢ n n o n n n n n o n n | a a o o o u u nu
SET B. ........... .. - . - - - - - - - - - - Q n ¢ q Q Q Q Q u o u u 00
I ............................................. .. I63
II. ........................................... .. 165
III. .......................................... .. 167
IV ........................................... .. I69
V ............................................ .. I70
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VI ................................................................. .. 173
VII ................................................................ .. 175
VIII ............................................................... .. 178
IX ................................................................. .. 179
X .................................................................. .. 180
2013 BAR EXAMINATION (MULTIPE CHOICE)

00000 183
185
187
189
191
194
197
199
200
202
(ESSAY QUESTIONS)
I. .................................................................. .. 205
II. ................................................................. .. 207
III. ................................................................ .. 208
IV ................................................................. .. 211
V .................................................................. .. 212
VI ................................................................. .. 214
VII .............................................................. .. 217
VIII ............................................................... .. 218
IX ................................................................. .. 220
X .................................................................. .. 222
V
TABLE or comems
XI ................................................................. .. 237
XII ................................................................ .. 237
XIII ............................................................... .. 239
XIV. ............................................................. .. 240
XV. .............................................................. .. 241
XVI. ............................................................. .. 242
XVII. ............................................................ .. 243
XVIII. ........................................................... .. 245
XIX. ............................................................. .. 246
XX. .............................................................. .. 246
XXI. ............................................................. .. 247
XXII. ........................................................... .. 248
XXIII ............................................................ .. 250
XXIV ............................................................ .. 250
XXV ............................................................. .. 252
XXVI ............................................................ .. 252
XXVII. .......................................................... .. 253
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
XXVIII. ................................... .. 254

XXIX. ..................................... .. 255
XXX. ...................................... .. 257

. - - - - - - - - . . - - - . - . - . - -- 259
-----.- . . - - - ¢ . ¢ - - - . . -- 261
- Q Q Q ¢ ¢ -- Q ¢ ¢ - - . . - . . ¢ ¢ .- 262
------- . . . - - - - - . - . - - .- 265
---- ¢ » » » ¢ ¢ ---~Q----- .- 266
- - - ¢ - ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ - ¢ | Q - Q - ¢ - - IO 268
........¢-------- Q Q . .- 270
-¢Q-~-¢-¢¢¢ Q Q - ¢ ~ Q -- Q .- 272
---------------. Q ¢ ¢ - -- 272
---- ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ~ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ---. -- 274
XI ................................................................. .. 276
XII ................................................................ .. 277
XIII ............................................................... .. 278
XIV. ............................................................. .. 280
XV. .............................................................. .. 282
XVI. ............................................................. .. 283
XVII. ............................................................ .. 285
XVIII. ..................................... .. 286
XIX. ............................................................. .. 286
XX ......................................... .. 288

I. .................................................................. .. 290
II. ................................................................. .. 291
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
------------------------ --
------------------------ --
------------------------ --
------------------------ --
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
XI ...................................... .. 304
XII .......................................... .. 306
XIII ......................................... .. 308
XIV. ....................................... .. 310
XV. .................................. .. 312
XVI ........................................ .. 314
XVII. ...................................... .. 316
XVIII. ........... .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
XIX. ....................................... .. 320
XX. ........................................ .. 321

------------- --
------------ - --
-- - - - - - - - - - - n --
------------- --
- - - - - - - - - - - - - --
VI ........................................... .. 334
VII .......................................... .. 335
VIII ......................................... .. 338
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- - - - ------- - - - - u -oa n n o o o - - ------------- -- - - - - - - - u o o u - - - - - - - - - on 340

- - - - -- - - - ---- - - -- .................... .. 341
.................... ..
- - o - - o o n o o - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 343
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- .................... ..
o c 344
XIII ......................................... .. 346
XIV. ....................................... .. 347
XV ......................................... .. 348
XVI ........................................ .. 349

.................... .. 353
----nnuu -ooo----- - - - -------ooooooo o -0 .................... .. 355
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 358
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 361
364
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- - - - ------------ - ------- - - - - - - - - - - - ---- 365
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 367
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 369
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 370
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 373
-
XI ........................................... .. 374
XII ..................................... .. 376
XIII ......................................... .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 378
XIV. ....................................... .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 380
XV. . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 382
o
XVI .......................................................... .. 383

XVII ..................................... .. 385
XVIII - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
o - 387
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
XIX ............................................... .. 389

XX ......................................... .. - an 391 a n n n n u Q Q n n o o o o u Q Q ~ ~

A.1 ......................................... .. n o o o a n Q Q Q o o Q Q Q o o o o u n no 393
A.2 ......................................... .. | ------ o Q u ¢ n a a ¢ o u n u n 00 396
A.3.. ~ u n o Q Q Q Q - ' - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - . . --
¢ ¢ ¢ Q Q Q n o u Q o o u u u u u u u u u a a Q Q u Q q » ¢ ¢ 397
A.4 ......................................... .. - - - - - - - . - . . IQ ¢ ¢ » ¢ Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 399
A.5 ......................................... .. - - - - - - - - - - . -- ¢ » » - ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 400
A.6 ......................................... .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 401
A.7 ............................................................... .. 403
A.8.. . - ----
n Q a a a u Q Q Q ¢ ¢ Q-- Q ¢ ¢ n n n n n n n n Q Q Q o Q a u ~ so 404
A.9 ............................................................... .. 405
A.10 ....................................... .. . . . . - - - - - - - . . . - - . - - - .- 406
B.11 ------- ¢ » - - - . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . - - .- - - ¢ - - - - - ~ - - - - ¢ - - - . - - .- 4
B.12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - . - - - - - - . - . - . .- - - . . - - . - - - . - - - - --
- Q ¢ » ¢ ¢ ~ » ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 410
B.13 - . . . - - - -
» » Q Q Q ---
¢ ---- - - - - - - . -- - - . - - - - . - - . . - -
¢ ¢ ¢¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ = ¢ ¢ - . .- ¢ ¢ » ¢ ¢ 411
B.14 - - - - - . . - . . . | . - - - - . - - - - - - - . . . - - | OI .................... .-
Q Q Q ¢ Q ¢ » » 412
B.15 - - - - - . - . - - - - . . . - - - - - - - . . - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
- ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 414
B.16 - - - . . . - . - - - - . . - - - - - - - - . . . . - - - . . - . . - - -- - - - - - - - - - - . - . - - - ll
- Q ~ ¢ Q ¢ ¢ 415
B.17 - - - - . . . - - - . . . - . . - - - - - - - - . . . - - - . . . . . - - - -- - - - - - . - - - - - . . - - II
» » ¢ Q » » 417
B.18 - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- .................... ..
- ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ » - 420
B.19 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - OI .................... ..
~ ¢ - 422
B.20 - - - - . . - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . - - . . . - - - . - . . . -- .................... ..
» » ¢ ¢ ¢ 424
X
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2020-2021 BAR EXAMINATION

. . . ¢ ¢ - - - - - - . » - ¢ - - . - . IO 426
a o o o o u n u n u n o o n n u n o n o n o o o u c o u o n 00 ----Q.--.¢.- Q Q ¢ ¢ - - - - -- 427
Q Q Q Q .--¢¢¢¢-¢- Q - - - - - 00 428
- ¢ - ¢ - - - ¢ - - . . . . - - . - - - - . . - - . - . . . . ¢ » - u » - - . - Q ¢ Q Q Q . . ¢ ¢ . - . ¢ ¢ . -- 429
. - . . . . - - - - - - - . - ¢ - - - - . . . - . ¢ . . . - - . . . -- - - - ~ - - - - - - . . . . - . . . . . on 430
. - - - - - - - - - - - » - ¢ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .- - - ¢ ¢ ¢ - - - - - . - . . - ¢ ¢ - - ¢ .- 431
432
. . - ¢ . . - - . . - ¢ - ¢ . . - - - . ¢ - - - - - - - - - - - - . IO - - - ¢ - - - - . - - ¢ ¢ ¢ - - ¢ - ¢ - .-
. --- |-- -
¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ - -- - - -
¢ ¢ ¢ -------..--. - ---
~ ¢ ¢ ~ ¢ 433 ¢ = ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ~ on ¢ ¢ » O0
9 ............................................ .. - - - - - . - . - - - - . - .- 434 Q Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
10 ................................................................ .. 436
1 1 ................................................................ .. 437
12 .......................................... .. 439

CIVIL LAW 1
¢ ¢ ¢ Q - ¢ . ¢ ¢ - - - ¢ - - . . » - - . - - - - - - - - - - » - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ¢ ¢ -- 441
---¢¢»Q»-¢.-¢--------------- ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 443
-- - | - ¢ --¢----¢..Q¢ Q Q -- .-
--. ¢ . - - - - - - . . - - - . - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - -- 444
Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ - ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
. . . . - . - - - - - - . . - . - - - - - - - - - - . . . - - - - -- - - - . - - -- ¢ --- - IO 446 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
----- --. ------ ------- - -

¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ »------- -. » = 447
¢ ~ ¢ Q O0
- -- ¢ Q Q Q on 448
o o un n n o n n n n u u u n u o o u o o Q u Q o Q
Q Q Q Q Q o n o o o Q Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ n n lo
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q u Q Q Q oo u a Q a 00 450 o o o a o o o o o u o o o n o o o Q
- . . . - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - .- 45
9 .................................................................. .. 45
10 .................................... .. 455
11 ....................................................... .. 456
12 ................................................................ .. 458
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
13 ................................................................ ..459
14 .......................................... H - - cu 460 n n n Q o u u u Q o Q Q n n Q ~ Q ¢
15 ................................................................ ..461
CHVH.LAVV2
¢ ¢ -.-------- . . . - - - - - -- 463
-- Q ¢ ¢ u n o o o u n o o o o o u o u u Q Q Q QQ Q on - - - - - - . | . » - - - - - - - - - . .- 465
Q Q a Q o o o o 00 Q Q Q ¢ ~ --¢¢--...- . - - - - IO 4
-¢-.--~¢¢¢----- -- ¢ ¢ . -- 469
u u a u o o n - u o o o cu u u o o u u n n o o o u o Q Q o o | a a on Q -Q-Q...¢¢-.-¢» Q ¢ - - - IO 471
-¢-- Q Q 473
. ¢ - n n n n - o u o o o o a o n o n Q Q Q 00 Q Q Q . - - - - - - - - - - . - ~ - - - --
.- - I0 - - - - - o - - - - - - . - - - -- 474
o o a u u n u u o Q Q Q » ¢ ¢ ¢ Q
. . - - - - - - - - - - - | - - -- 476 ¢ ¢ ¢ Q
9 ............................................ m - . - - - - - - - - | . . . . -- 476 ¢ » » ¢ Q
10 .......................................... m - - - - . | . . . . - - - . - . ll 478 ¢ ¢ ¢ Q
11 .......................................... m - - - . . - - . . . . - - - - -- 480 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
12 .......................................... N 482
———o0o———
x
PART I
I.
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is

true, or FALSE it the statement is false. Explain your
answer in not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
The doctrine of "processual presumption" al-
lows the court of the forum to presume that the fo-
reign law applicable to the case is the same as the
local or domestic law.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or

even it pleaded, is not proved as a tact, the
presumption is that foreign law is the same as
domestic law.
In reserva troncal, all reservatarios (reservees) in-
herit as a class and in equal shares regardless of their
proximity in degree to the prepositus.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
False. Under the law, not all resen/atarios will in-

herit as a class and in equal shares. The rules on
reserva troncal merely determine the group of
relatives who will qualify as reservatarios, but among
themselves, the law on intestate succession shall
govern. For instance, the direct descending line
l
2 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
excludes The dscending; direcT line excludes

The colldTerdl, dnd reservo dpplies only To The
legiTimoTe fdmily.
An ordl pc|rTnership is vdlid.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. Ldw ond jurisprudence boTh supporl ThdT

pdrlnership, ds o consensudl conTrdcT, Though noT in
wriTing, is volid, unless innmovdble properly or d redl
righT, is conTribuTed Therelo in which cose iT musT be
in d public insTrumenT, oThen/vise, iT is void (ArTicle
T771, i773, Civil Code).
An O|'Cl| promise of gudrdnly is valid and binding.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. The volidiTy of on ordl conTrdcT of guordnTy

should be disnguished from iTs enTorcedbiliTy. Even
on ordl conTrdcT is sTill binding upon The porTies.
However, being o speciol promise To dnswer Tor The
debT, deToulT, or miscdrridge of onoTher, The STo|TuTe
of Frouds requires iT To be in wriTing To be enforceoble
(ArTicle T403, pdr. (2)b).
A dead child can be legiTimdTed.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. The low provides ThdT legiTimoTion of chil-

dren who died before The celebrdTion of The mor-
ridge will beneTiT Their descenddnTs (ArTicle i8l,
Fdrnily Code). IT con be gleoned ThdT The low does
2009 BAR EXAMINATION 3
not require the child to still be alive at the time of

the marriage of his/her parents before legitimation
may take place.
Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and his son

Roberto both died in a re that gutted their home
while they were sleeping in their air-conditioned
rooms. Roberto's wife, Marilyn, and their two chil-
dren were spared because they were in the pro-
vince at the time. Dr. Lopez left an estate worth
P20M and a life insurance policy in the amount of
P1M with his three children one of whom is
Roberto as beneciaries.
Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her
children her husband’s share in the estate left by Dr.
Lopez, and her husband's share in the proceeds of
Dr. Lopez’s life insurance policy. Rule on the validity
of Marilyn’s claims with reasons. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As to Dr. Lopez‘ estate: Marilyn’s claim of her

husband's share in the estate left by Dr. Lopez is
without merit. If there is a doubt, as between two or
more persons who are called to succeed each
other, as to which of them died first, whoever
alleges the death of one prior to the other shall
prove the same and in the absence of proof, it shall
be presumed that persons died at the same time,
and there shall be no transmission of rights from one
to the other (Article 43, Civil Code). There being no
4 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
evidence To prove as To who among Them died

Tirsl, Dr. Lopez and his son RoberTo are presumed To
have died aT The some Time. RoberTo inheriTed
noThing from his TaTher which he could pdss To his
wife Marilyn. However, RoberTo‘s children may
inheriT from Dr. Lopez by righl of represenToTion and
shall receive l/3 shore of his esTaTe.
As To The proceeds of The insurance on The life of
Dr. Lopez: lvldrilyn is enTiTled To a share in The
proceeds of The insurance. This is so because The
presumpTions on survivorship under The Rules of Courl
shall apply. Under said rules, when Two persons perish
in The same calamiTy, such os wreck, baTTle, or
conTlagraTion, dnd iT is noT shown who died TirsT, and
There are no parTicular circumsTances from which iT
can be inferred, The survivorship is deTermined from
The probdloiliTies resuliing from The sTrengTh and The
age of The sexes. Dr. Lopez who was alreody 7O
years old is presumed To have died ahead of his son
RoberTo who is younger. Therefore, Roberlo‘s righT as
beneficidry become vesTed oT The Time of Dr. Lopez’
dealh which loecame pdrT of The former’s esToTe,
which esTaTe shall pdss on To his surviving heirs,
namely his wife, Marilyn and his children.
In December 2000, Michael and Anna, aer

obTaining a valid man'iage license, wenT To The Ofce
of The Mayor of Urbano, Bulacan, To gel married. The
Mayor was noT There, buT The Mayor's secretary asked
Michael and Anna and Their wifnesses To ll up and
sign The required marriage conlracf forms. The
secretary then told them to wait, and went out to look

tor the Mayor who was attending a wedding in a
neighboring municipality.
When the secretary caught up with the Mayor at
the wedding reception, she showed him the
marriage contract forms and told him that the couple
and their witnesses were waiting in his office. The
Mayor forthwith signed all the copies of the marriage
contract, gave them to the secretary who returned to
the Mayor’s ofce. She then gave copies of the
marriage contract to the parties, and told Michael
and Anna that they were already married. Thereafter,
the couple lived together as husband and wife, and
had three sons.
the marriage of Michael and Anna valid,
ls
voidable, or void? Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage is void. One of the formal requisites

under the Family Code is a marriage ceremony.
Moreover, the same law requires the consent of the
parties to be freely given in the presence of the
solemnizing officer. ln this case, there was no cere-
mony conducted. The mayor merely signed the
papers without the presence of the contracting
parties, Michael and Anna. Therefore, the marriage is
void for total absence of a formal requisite. (/vlorigo
v. People of the Philippines, GR. No. l45226 February
O6, 2004).
What is the status of the three children of
Michael and Anna? Explain your answer. (2%)
6 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The Three children of lvlichdel dnd Annd ore

illegiTimoTe, hdving been born ouTside of d vdlid
wedlock ds provided under ArTicle l65 of The Fo-
mily Code which sToTes ThdT children conceived
dnd born ouTside d volid mdrridge are illegiTimdTe,
unless oiherwise provided in This Code.
WhaT properTy regime governs The properes

acquired by The couple? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
On The dssumpTion ThdT The porTies ore noT suf-

fering from dny impedimenT To mdrry edch oTher, The
properiy regime ThdT will govern Them shdll be The
specidl co-ownership under Arlicle 147 of The Fdmily
Code. The ldw recognizes This specidl Type of co-
ownership when d mdn dnd Cl womdn who ore
cdpdciToTed To mdrry edch oTher live exclusively wiTh
edch oTher ds husband dnd wife, wiThouT The benefii
of mdrridge or under d void mdrridge. Since The
mdrridge belween The pdrTies is void for ToTdl
dbsence of d formdl requisiTe, The union shdll be
governed by ArTicle 147.
IV.
Harry married Wilma, a very wealThy woman.

Barely ve (5) years inTo The marriage, Wilma fell in
love wiTh Joseph. Thus, Wilma wenT To a small coun-
Try in Europe, became a naturalized cifizen of That
country, divorced Harry, and married Joseph. A
year thereafter, Wilma and Joseph returned and

established permanent residence in the Philippines.
the divorce obtained by Wilma from Harry re-
ls
cognized in the Philippines? Explain your answer.
(3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the divorce obtained by Wilma from Harry

is recognized as valid in the Philippines provided
that the appropriate petition for recognition of the
foreign judgment is filed. ln a case decided by the
Supreme Court, a former Filipino became a
naturalized citizen of a foreign country and
thereafter obtained divorce against the Filipino
spouse, such divorce is recognized under Philippine
law (Republic v. Orbecido, (427 SCRA ll4 [2005]).
In the instant case, Wilma was already a
naturalized citizen of a foreign country when she
obtained the divorce decree in accordance with
her national law. Therefore, the divorce is
considered valid in the Philippines because the
nationality principle applies only to Filipino citizens.
what legal
If Harry hires you as his lawyer,
recourse would you advise him to take? Why? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
will advise Harry to file a petition for the recog-

I
nition of the foreign divorce decree obtained by

Wilma. He may file a petition for declaratory relief
and move therein that Wilma was no longer a
8 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Filipino cifizen aT The Time she secured The divorce

and presenl evidence as The law of The foreign
counTry on divorce and jurisdiclion of The courl
which issued The divorce. will also advise him To
l
liauldafe Their properlies.

Harry Tells you Thal he has fallen in love wiTh
anofher woman, Elizabefh, and wanls To marry her
because, afler all, Wilma is already married To
Joseph. Can Harry legally marry Elizabefh? Explain.
(2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, he can marry Elizabefh. However, Harry

needs To have The foreign judgmenT recognized.
ArTicle 26 of The Family Code gives The Filipino
spouse The capacify To remarry if a divorce is validly
oblained abroad loy The alien spouse which ca-
paciTaTes The laTTer To remarry. ln Orbecido, The
Supreme Courf held ThaT The Filipino spouse is given
The capacily To remarry even if if was noT an
originally mixed marriage because Orbecido’s wife
was no longer a Filipino aT The Time she obTained The
divorce decree. In The given problem, Wilma
obTained divorce from Harry when fhe former was
already a foreigner. Therefore, Harry can validly
marry Elizabefh.
V.
Four children, namelyr. Alberto, Baldomero, Caridad,

and Dioscoro, were born to the spouses Conrado and
Clarita de la Costa. The children's birth certicates
were duly signed by Conrado, showing them to be
the couple's legitimate children.
Later, one Edilberto de la Cruz executed a no-
tarial document acknowledging Alberto and Baldo-
mero as his illegitimate children with Clarita. Edil-
berto died leaving substantial properties. In the
settlement of his estate, Alberto and Baldomero in-
tervened claiming shares as the deceased’s illegi-
timate children. The legitimate family of Edilberto
opposed the claim.
Are Alberto and Baldomero entitled to share in
the estate of Edilberto? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Alberto and Baldomero are not entitled to

any share of Edilberto‘s estate. The law considers
children born during a valid marriage as legitimate
(Article l<’>4, Family Code). Alberto and Baldomero
were born during the marriage ot their mother
Clarita to Conrado and as such, the law considers
them as the legitimate children of the spouses. Only
the husband Conrado may successfully impugn the
legitimacy of the child or children born to his wife
(Article 166, 170, Family Code). The facts show that
Conrado did not impugn the legitimacy of Alberto
and Baldomero. Hence, they continue to be the
legitimate children of Conrado and Clarita
10 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
noTwiThsTanding The execuTion of noTarial documenl

by Edilbeno. EdilberTo cannol impugn The legiTimacy
of AlberTo and Baldomero as he is noT The legal
husband of Clarila. There being no Tilialion belween
AlberTo and Baldomero as againsT EdilberTo, They
have no righT To inheriT Trom The laTTer. (De Jesus v.
EsTaTe of Juan Dizon, GR. No. 142877, 2 OcTober 2001)
VI.
On December 1, 2000, Dr. .luaniTo FuenTes

execuTed a holographic will, wherein he gave
noThing To his recognized illegiTimaTe son, Jay. Dr.
FuenTes lefl for The UniTed STaTes, passed The New
York medical licensure examinaTions, resided Therein,
and became a naTuralized American ciTizen. He died
in New York in 2007. The laws of New York do noT
recognize holographic wills or compulsory heirs.
Can The holographic will of Dr. FuenTes be
admiTTed To probate in The Philippines? Why or why
noT? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The holographic will ofDr. FuenTes can be

admiTTed To probaTe in The Philippines. The law
sTaTes ThaT, The will of an alien abroad produces
eTfecT in The Philippines if iT is execuTed in ac-
cordance wiTh The TormaliTies prescribed The law in
which he resides, or according To The TormaliTies
observed in his counTry or in accordance wiTh
Philippine law, or The law of The place where The will
was execuTed (ArTicle 816, ArTicle 17, Civil Code), if iT
2009 BAR EXAMINATION '|'l
is not otherwise controry to our public policy. In this

problem, Dr. Fuentes executed the hologrophic will
in the Philippines, thus, Philippine low shdll opply in
determining whether the formdlities prescribed by
low were complied with. Since Philippine low
recognizes the vdlidity of hologrophic will, Dr.
Fuentes’ will moy be odmitted to probote.
Assuming that the will is probated in the Philip-
pines, can Jay validly insist that he be given his
legitime? Why or why not? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Joy cdnnot volidly thot he be given

insist
his legitime. The notionol low of the testotor deter-
mines who his rightful heirs dre, in whot order they
succeed to the decedent, ds well os how much
shore they ore entitled to receive from the estote of
the decedsed, dnd whether they ore copdcitoted
to succeed from the decedent (Article ié, Article
i039, Civil Code). ln the instont cdse, Dr. Fuentes
wos Cl citizen of New York cit the time of his deoth,
thus, the lows of New York determine who ore
entitled to succeed to his estdte. Bdsed on the
tocts, the notiondl low of the decedent does not
recognize compulsory heirs, thus, Joy moy not insist
on the delivery of his legitime becoiuse Philippine
low does not dpply to the succession to the estote
of the citizen of d foreign country. (Bellis v. Bellis,
GR. No. L-236478, 6 June 1967)
12 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Vll
Ramon Mayaman died intestate, leaving a net

estate of Pi0,000,000.00. Determine how much each
heir will receive from the estate:
by his wife, three full-blood
If Ramon is survived
brothers, two half-brothers, and one nephew (the
son of a deceased full-blood brother)? Explain.
(3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Under the law of intestate succession, if the

spouse concurs with brothers and sisters of the de-
ceased, all of them shall inherit from the latter
(Article 995 & iOOi, Civil Code) In this case, the wife
shall receive one-halt of the estate while the
siblings of Ramon, including his nephew will inherit
the other half. His half-blood brothers will receive
one-half of what the full-blood brother gets. The
division of the estate shall be as follows:
Rannon’s wife shall receive one-halt of his
estate or the amount of P5,000,000.00;
His three full-blood brothers will receive Pl,OO0,000.00
each;
nephew, by right of representation of his
His
deceased full-blood brother, shall receive Pl,OOO,
000.00; and
The two halt-brothers shall each receive P500,000.00.
If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half-sisTer,

and Three nephews (sons of a deceased full-blood
broTher)? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The division of The esTaTe shall be as follows:

Ramon’s wife shall receive one-half of his
esTaTe or P5,000,000.00;
His Three nephews, represeniing Ramon‘s

predeceased Tull-blood broTher shall be enTiTled To
2/3 of P5,0000,000.00 (The oTher half of The esToTe)
based on The rule ThaT a full-blood broTher or sisTer
geTs double The share of a half-blood sibling of The
deceased (ArTicle T006, Civil Code). The Three
nephews who ihheriT by righi of represehTaTioh shall
receive Pl,lll,lll.lOeach; and
Ramon's half-sisTer shall receive l,666,666,é0.
VIII.
Jude owned a building which he had leased To

several TenanTs. WiThouT informing his TenanTs, Jude
sold The building To lldefonso. Thereafter, The laTTer
nolified all The TenanTs ThaT he is The new owner of
The building. lldefonso ordered The TenanTs To
vacaTe The premises wiThin Thirly (30) days from
noTice because he had ofher plans for The building.
The TenanTs refused To vacaTe, insisfing ThaT They will
only do so when The Term of Their lease shall have
expired. ls lldefonso bound To respecf The lease
conTracTs befween Jude and his TenanTs? Explain
your answer. (3%)
14 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, lldetonso isbound To respect The lease

contracts between Jude and his Tenants. As a rule,
contracts shall Take effect only between The
parties, Their assigns, or Their heirs, except in case
where The rights and obligations arising from The
contract are noT transmissible by Their nature, or by
stipulalion or by provision of law (Article T31 l, Civil
Code). While lldefonso is not a party To The
contract, he merely steps inTo The shoes of his
Transteror and his actual knowledge of The exis-
Tence of The lease puts him on notice That The Te-
nanls have an existing contractual right in The pro-
perty he purchased. Thus, he cannoT be considered
an innocent purchaser for value. Although The facts
are silent as To whether The lease conTracT was
registered and annotated on The Title of The
property, lldefonso, being not an innocent purchaser
for value is bound To respect The conTracT.
IX.
Before migrating to Canada in 1992, The

spouses Teodoro and Anita entrusted all Their legal
papers and documents to Their nephew, Atty. Tan.
Taking advantage of The situation, Atty. Tan forged
a deed of sale, making it appear that he had
bought The couple’s property in Quezon City. In
2000, he succeeded in obtaining a TCT over the
property in his name. Subsequently, Atty. Tan sold
the same property to Luis, who built an auto repair
shop on the property. In 2004, Luis registered the
2009 BAR EXAMINATION T5
deed of conveyance, and title over the property

was transferred in his name.
In 2006, the spouses Teodoro and Anita came
to the Philippines for a visit and discovered what
had happened to their property. They immediately
hire you as lawyer. What action or actions will you
institute in order to vindicate their rights? Explain
fully. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
ln view of the good faith of the buyer Luis, no

action can be taken by the spouses Teodoro and
Anita against him since at the time of the purchase,
the title has already been transferred in the name
of Atty. Tan. Luis had the right to rely on what is
written on the certificate of title in the absence of
any circumstance which would incite his suspicion
as to the defect in the title of the transferor.
Thus, as lawyer for the spouses, l will advise
Anita and Teodoro that theycan proceed against
Atty. Tan and tile civil, criminal, and administrative
cases against him for his fraudulent deed. A civil
action for recovery of damages may be led to
enable the spouses to recover not only the value of
their land but also damages against Atty. Tan. will
I
also advise my clients to initiate a criminal action

tor forgery or falsification against Atty. Tan and it
they may be minded to, they may also institute a
complaint for disbarment against him before the
Supreme Court for the imposition of appropriate
disciplinary sanctions for violation of his oath as a
lawyer and the Code of Professional Responsibility.
16 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
X.
Rommel’s private car, while being driven by

the regular family driver, Amado, hits a pedestrian
causing the latter’s death. Rommel is not in the car
when the incident happened.
ls Rommel liable for damages to the heirs of
the deceased? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Rommel may be held liable for damages

to the heirs of the deceased. Since Rommel was
not in the car when the accident happened, the
provisions of Article 2l8O in relation to Article 2i 76 of
the Civil Code shall apply (Article 2l84). The basis of
Rommel‘s liability is a quasi-delict which presumes
that as the employer of Amado, the latter‘s
negligence is attributable to Rommel in the
absence of proof that Rommel exercised the
diligence of a good father of the family in the
selection and supervision of his employee. Rommel’s
liability for the quasi-delict committed by his driver is
direct and primary. In the event that Amado was
sued criminally by the heirs of the victim and is found
guilty, Rommel’s liability is only subsidiary in that he
would only be liable to the heirs of the victim if the
convicted driver cannot satisfy the civil liability
adjudged in the criminal case.
Would your answer be the same if Rommel was
in the car at the time of the accident? Explain. (2%)
2009 BAR EXAMINATION I7
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, my answer will sTill be The same. The law

sTaTes ThaT in moTor vehicle mishaps, The owner is
solidarily liable wiTh his driver, if he was inside The
vehicle aT The Time of The incidenT and if he could
have prevenTed The accidenT by The use of due
diligence in supervising his driver. However, in This
siTuaTion, iT is incumbenT upon The vicTim To prove
ThaT The owner could have prevenTed The mishap
buT he failed To do so. (ArTicle 2184).
PART II
XI.
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if The sTaTemenT is

True, or FALSE if The sTaTemenT is false. Explain your
answer in noT more Than Two (2) senfences. (5%)
A clause in an arbiTraTion conTracT granTing one
ofThe parTies The power To choose more arbiTraTors
Than The oTher renders The arbiTraTion conTracT void.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. The Civil Code provides ThaT, any clause

giving one of The parTies The power To choose more
arbiTraTors Than The oTher is void and has no effecT.
(ArTicle 2045, Civil Code).
If There is no marriage seTTlemenT, The salary of
a "spouse" in an adulTerous marriage belongs To The
conjugal parTnership of gains.
18 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
False. The salary of a spouse in an adulferous

marriage shall belong To The exisfing conjugal
parfnership of gains, or The absolufe communiTy of
such married person wifh his or her lawful spouse.
The Family Code provides Thaf The properTy
relafions befween persons who are noT
capaciTaTed To marry each oTher shall be co-
ownership where The share of each parfy would
depend on whefher he or she had acfual maferial
confribufion in money, properTy, or indusfry. If one
of The parTies is married, his or her share in The co-
ownership shall accrue To The absolufe communiTy
of conjugal parfnership in exisfing in such valid
marriage. (Arficle T48, Family Code).
Acquisifive prescripfion of a negofive ease-
menf runs from The Time The owner of The dominanf
esTaTe forbids, in a noforized documenf, The owner
of The servienT esTaTe from execufing an ocf which
would be lawful wiThouT The easemenf.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. The law sTaTes Thaf The reckoning poinT for

The compufafion of The Ten year prescripfive period
in negafive easemenfs shall be from The day on
which The owner of The dominanf esTaTe forbade,
by an insfrumenf acknowledged before a nofary
public, The owner of The servienT esTaTe from
execufing an acf which would be lawful wiThouT
The easemenf (ArTicle 621, Civil Code).
The renunciation by a co-owner of his undivi-

ded share in the co-owned property in lieu of the
performance of his obligation to contribute to taxes
and expenses for the preservation of the property
constitutes dacion en pago.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
True. By dation in payment, property is aliena-

ted to the creditor in satisfaction of a debt in
money (Article 1245, Civil Code). A co-owner is
obliged lo pay money as his share in the expenses
and taxes on the property owned in common. By
renouncing so much of his undivided share in the
property in lieu of paying money to his co-owners
to cover expenses for preservation and taxes, the
renouncer is in effect alienating his property to his
co-owners in satisfaction of his money obligation.
(Article 488, Civil Code)
A person can dispose of his corpse through an
act inter vivos.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
False. An act inter vivos means it takes effect

during the lifetime or the person. Thus, a person
cannot dispose of his corpse which is to take effect
during his lifetime because before his death, there
is no corpse to speak of.
20 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
XII.
Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens

and employees of the U.S. State Department, got
married in the African state of Kenya where sterility
is a ground for annulment of marriage. Thereafter,
the spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in
Manila. On the first year of the spouses’ tour of duty
in the Philippines, Margarita led an annulment
case against Emmanuel before a Philippine court
on the ground of her husband's sterility at the time
of the celebration of the marriage.
Will the suit prosper? Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the suit will not prosper. The court should re-
fuse to assume jurisdiction on the ground of forum
non conveniens. Under the rule of forum non con-
veniens, a Philippine court or agency may assume
jurisdiction over the case if it chooses to do
so provided: (l) that the Philippine court is one to
which the parties may conveniently resort to; (2)
that the Philippine court is in a position to make an
intelligent decision as to the law and the facts; and
(3) that the Philippine court has or is likely to have
power to enforce its decision._The conditions are
unavailing in the case at bar (Manila Hotel Cor-
poration v. National Labor Relations Commission, GR.
No. 120077 October 13, 2000). It must be noted that
both parties are not citizens of the Philippines and
neither are they domiciled in the Philippines. The suit
They Tiled is one annulmenT of Their marriage

Tor
which is likewise noT governed by Philippine law.
Assuming ThaT The Philippine courT decides To
assume jurisdicTion over The case, The suiT will noT
prosper because being boTh American naTionals,
Their marriage, and iTs consequences as well as iTs
dissoluTion shall be governed by Their naTional law
and noT by The law of Kenya which MargariTa is
invoking as a ground for annulmenT of her
marriage. Hence, in The absence of proof as To The
grounds for annulmenT under U.S. law, iT is pre-
sumed To be no differeni from The law of The forum.
Since sTeriliTy is noT a ground Tor annulmenT under
Philippine law, The suiT shall noT prosper.
Assume Emmanuel and Margariia are boTh
Filipinos. Aer Their wedding in Kenya, They come
back and Take up residence in The Philippines. Can
Their marriage be annulled on The ground of
Emmanuel's sTeriliTy? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The marriage cannoT be annulled because

The Philippine law does noT provide sTeriliTy as one
of The grounds for annulmenT of marriage (ArTicle
45, Family Code). While The formal validiTy of Their
marriage shall be governed by The law of Kenya as
The place where iT was celebraTed, The incidenTs of
marriage as well as iTs Terminaiion or dissoluTion
shall be governed by Philippine law. Since sTeriliTy is
noT one of The grounds for annulmenT of marriage
under Philippine law, The marriage of Emmanuel
and iviargariTa cannoT be annulled.
22 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Xlll.
Rafael, a wealthy bachelor, led a petition for

the adoption of Dolly, a one-year old foundling who
had a severe heart ailment. During the pendency of
the adoption proceedings, Rafael died of natural
causes. The Ofce of the Solicitor General les a
motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the
case can no longer proceed because of the
petitioner's death.
Should the case be dismissed? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the case should not be dismissed provided

that no opposition has been led and the evidence
as to Rafael’s qualification as well as the trial custody
report have already been submitted before Rafael‘s
demise and the case is already submitted for
resolution. In which case, the court may grant the
petition despite Rafael’s demise. Otherwise, the
proceedings, upon his death should be dismissed
(Section l3, Republic Act 8552).
Will your answer be the same if it was Dolly
who died during the pendency of the adoption
proceedings? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
the adoptee who dies during the pendency

If it is
of the proceedings, the petition should be dismissed.
Death of the prospective adoptee terminates the
proceedings as adoption is for the best interest of
the adoptee and this purpose would no longer exist

if the latter dies during the pendency of the
proceedings. Furthermore, Section l3 of the
Domestic Adoption Act allows the continuation of
the proceedings, even if the adopter dies before
the issuance of the decree of adoption to protect
the interest of the odoptee.
XIV.
Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an illicit affair

with his secretary, Nanette, a 19-year old girl, and
begot a baby girl, Rona. Nanette sued Rodolfo for
damages: actual, for hospital and other medical
expenses in delivering the child by caesarean
section; moral, claiming that Rodolfo promised to
marry her, representing that he was single when, in
fact, he was not; and exemplary, to teach a lesson
to like-minded Lotharios.
Ifyou were the judge, would you award all the
claims of Nanette? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
If were the judge, will grant the prayer for actual

l l
damages in the form of medical expenses which are

properly substantiated by receipts. As the illegitimate
father of Rona, Rodolfo is obliged to shoulder the
medical expenses incurred by Nanette in giving birth
to Rona (Hermosisima v. Court of Appeals, GR. No. L-
14628 September 30, 1960).
On the issue of moral damages, will not grant

l
the claim of Nanette tor moral damages unless it is

24 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
shown Thof Rodolfo was guilfy of seducfion (ArTic|e

2219, Civil Code). Since The fdcfs cledrly sTdTe ThdT
The dffoir wos illiciT, ond Noneffe wds ocfudlly
working for Rodolfo, she could noT hove been
undwdre of The loTTer’s sTdTus. Per se, bredch of
promise To mdrry is noT on dcfiondble wrong
(Wdssmer v. Velez, G.R. No. L-20089, December 26,
1964), excepf if There is on dcf independenf of The
bredch of The promise which would wdrrdnf The
dwdrd of oTher ddmdges.
view of NdneTTe’s non-enTiTlemenT To mordl
In
ddmdges, will dlso refuse To gronT exemplory do-
I
mdges. Exempldry domdges cdnnof be recovered

ds d mdTTer or righT, The courT will decide wheTher
or noT They should be ddjudicdTed (ArTic|e 2233,
Civil Code).
Suppose Rodolfo lafer on acknowledges Rona
and gives her regular supporf, can he compel her
To use his surname? Why or why nof? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Rodolfo cdnnof compel Rono To use his

surname. The low does noT confer upon him sdid
righT simply because he is supporfing The child or
hos dcknowledged her. The low provides ThdT The
illegifimdfe child shdll use The surnome of The
mofher buT The child mdy use The surndme of The
foifher when The ldffer hos recognized him. (Repub-
lic AcT No. 9255). Ergo, since The choice belongs To
The child, Rodolfo cdnnof compel Rono To use
his surnome.
When Rona reaches seven (7) years old, she

tells Rodolfo that she prefers to live with him,
because he is better off nancially than Nanette. If
Rodolfo les an action for the custody of Rona,
alleging that he is Rona’s choice as custodial
parent, will the court grant Rodolfo’s petition? Why
or why not? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the court should not grant the petition.

Article l76 of the Family Code gives sole parental
authority of an illegitimate child to the mother. The
father’s recognition of his illegitimate child may be
a good ground to order him to support the child
but not to award him custody over the child
(Briones v. Miguel, GR. No. l56343 October l8,
2004). Absent any compelling reasons to prove that
Nanette is unt as a mother, Rodolfo‘s petition must
be denied.
XV.
Sarah had a deposit in a savings account with

Filipino Universal Bank in the amount of ve million
pesos (P5,000,000.00). To buy a new car, she
obtained a loan from the same bank in the amount
of P1,200,000.00, payable in twelve monthly
installments. Sarah issued in favor of the bank post-
dated checks, each in the amount of P100,000.00,
to cover the twelve monthly installment payments.
On the third, fourth, and fth months, the corresponding
checks bounced.
26 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
The bank then declared the whole obligation

due, and proceeded to deduct the amount of one
million pesos (Pl,000,000.00) from Sarah's deposit
after notice to her that this is a form of compensation
allowed by law. ls the bank correct? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the bank was not correct in deducting the

full amount of Pl,OO0,000.00 in Sarah's deposit.
Compensation as mode of extinguishment of an
obligation requires that: l) both parties must be
mutually creditors and debtors to each other and
be bound principally; 2) that both debts must
consist in sum of money or it consumable, of the
same kind or quality; 3) that neither debt is held by
any retention or controversy commenced by third
persons, and communicated in due time to the
debtor; 3) that the debts are allowed by law; 4)
that both debts be due at the same time; and 5)
that both debts be liquidated and demandable.
Bank deposit is a contract of loan whereby the
depositor is the creditor and the bank is the debtor.
ln the given problem, since Sarah is also a debtor
with respect to her car loan, both are principal
debtors and creditors of each other, thus, the first
requisite is present.
Both obligations are due, demandable, and
liquidated but only up to the extent of P300, OOO. OO
covering the unpaid third, fourth, and fifth monthly
installments. The facts do not state that the
contract between the parties contains an accele-
ration clause, thus, the bank should not have con-
sidered the full amount of balance on the car loan

due and demandable. At most, the bank can only
deduct the amount of P300,000.00 from Sarah's
deposit corresponding to the three months amortization
she failed to pay by way of compensation.
XVI.
Marciano is the owner of a parcel of land

through which a river runs out into the sea. The land
had been brought under the Torrens System, and is
cultivated by Ulpiano and his family as farmworkers
therein. Over the years, the river has brought silt and
sediment from its sources up in the mountains and
forests so that gradually the land owned by Marciano
increased in area by three hectares. Ulpiano built
three huts on this additional area, where he and his
two married children live. On this same area,
Ulpiano and his family planted peanuts, monggo
beans and vegetables. Ulpiano also regularly paid
taxes on the land, as shown by tax declarations, for
over thirty years.
When Marciano learned of the increase in the
size of the land, he ordered Ulpiano to demolish the
huts, and demanded that he be paid his share in
the proceeds of the harvest. Marciano claims that
under the Civil Code, the alluvium belongs to him
as a registered riparian owner to whose land the
accretion attaches, and that his right is enforceable
against the whole world.
ls Marciano correct? Explain. (3%)
28 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Marciano is correcT. The law sTaTes ThaT “To

The owners of The lands adjoining The banks of The
rivers belong The accreTion which They gradually
receive from The efTecTs of The currenT of The
waTers.“ (ArTicle 457, Civil Code). This righT is en-
forceable againsT The whole world. In This case,
alThough Marciano's land is registered under
Torrens SysTem, and as riparian owner The accreTion
belongs To him, The addiTiona| area does noT
auTomaTically become parT of his TiTled properTy.
Hence, iT can be subjecT To acauisiTion by Third
persons Through acauisiiive prescripTion. However,
alThough Ulpiano and his children lived on The
addiTional area and consTrucTed sTrucTures Thereon,
They could noT have acquired iT by prescripTion
since Their possession was noT in The concepT of an
owner buT only in The concepT of a holder. The
TacTs are clear ThaT Ulpiano and his family pos-
sessed The land as farmworkers. Only possession in
The concepT of an owner can serve as a TiTle for
acquiring dominion (ArTicle 540, Civil Code). Thus,
acauisiiive prescripiion will noT lie in Their favor.
WhaT righTs, if any, does Ulpiano have against
Marciano? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Even Though Ulpiano is a possessor in bad faiTh

knowing fully well ThaT iT is Marciano who owns The
land, he is sTill enTiTled To The reimbursemenT of The
Taxes he has paid based on quasi-conTracT,
because These charges are properly for The

accounT of The owner. Ulpiano also has The righT
To recover The necessary expenses for The
preservafion of The land (ArTicle 546, Civil Code).
XVII.
Rosario obfained a loan of P100,000.00 from

Jennifer, and pledged her diamond ring. The
confracf signed by The parfies sfipulafed Thaf if
Rosario is unable To redeem The ring on due dafe,
she will execufe a documenf in favor of Jennifer
providing Thaf The ring shall aufomafically be
considered full paymenf of The loan.
ls The confracf valid? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The conTracT execufed by Rosario and

Jennifer is valid. The provision on pacTum commis-
sorium prohibiTs The crediTor fronn auTornaTically
appropriafing The Things given by way of pledge or
morlgage (ArTicle 2088, Civil Code). IT is The
auTomaTic appropriafion of The Thing pledged in
case The oiher parTy failed To pay The amounT due
Thai is prohibiled. In The given siTuaTion, There is no
auTomaTic appropriafion because Rosario has To
execuTe a documenT firsT in favor of Jennifer before
The laTTer could appropriafe The ring as full
paymenT for The loan. Thus, The conTracT is valid.
(Uy Tong & Kho Po Giok v. Courf of Appeals, GR.
No. 77465 May 21, i988).
30 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Will your answer to [a] be the same if the con-

tract stipulates that upon failure of Rosario to
redeem the ring on due date, Jennifer may im-
mediately sell the ring and appropriate the entire
proceeds thereof for herself as full payment of the
loan? Reasons. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, my answer will be different. As stated above,

automatic appropriation is prohibited by law. If
Jennifer is permitted to immediately sell the ring and
appropriate the proceeds without the formality of
public auction, tantamount to automatic appropriation
it is
of the thing pledged. Since the contract states that in
case Rosario fails to redeem the ring on due date,
Jennifer may immediately sell the ring and
appropriate the entire proceeds thereof of as full
payment of the loan, there is automatic appropriation
which is violative of the provision on pactum commis-
sorium and therefore, void.
XVIII.
The lfugao Arms is a condominium project in

Baguio City. A strong earthquake occurred which
left huge cracks in the outer walls of the building.
As a result, a number of condominium units were
rendered unt for use. May Edwin, owner of one of
the condominium units affected, legally sue for
partition by sale of the whole project? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Edwin may sue for partition by sdle of the

whole project provided the following conditions set
forth under Section 8(b) of Republic Act No. 4726
otherwise known ds “The Condominium Act“ are
present: l) The ddmdge or destruction to the project
has rendered one-half or more of the units therein
untenantdble; dnd 2) thdt condominium owners
holding in aggregate more thdn thirty percent
interest in the common areas are opposed to repdir
or restoration of the project.
IX.
In 1972, Luciano de la Cruz sold to Chua Chung

Chun, a Chinese citizen, a parcel of land in Binondo.
Chua died in 1990, leaving behind his wife and three
children, one of whom, Julian, is a naturalized
Filipino citizen. Six years after Chua’s death, the heirs
executed an extrajudicial settlement of estate, and
the parcel of land was allocated to Julian. In 2007,
Luciano led suit to recover the land he sold to
Chua, alleging that the sale was void because it
contravened the Constitution which prohibits the
sale of private lands to aliens. Julian moved to
dismiss the suit on grounds of pari delicto, laches,
and acquisitive prescription. Decide the case with
reasons. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The suit must be dismissed bdsed on the follo-

wing redsons: i) lt is true thdt under the Cons-
32 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
titution, save in cases of hereditary succession, no

private land shall be Transferred or conveyed ex-
cept to individuals, corporations, or associations
qualified To acquire or hold lands of The public
domain. However, even if a land is invalidly Trans-
ferred to an alien who subsequently becomes a
citizen or Transfers it to a citizen, the flaw in the
original Transaction is considered cured and The
title of The transferee is rendered valid (United
Church Board of World /viinistries v. Sebastian, No. L-
34672, March 30, 1988, 159 SCRA 446; Halili v. Court
of Appeals, 350 Phil. 906 (1998); Lee v. Republic, 418
Phil. 793 (2001).
In This case, Julian is a naturalized Filipino
citizen, Therefore The Transfer to him of The real pro-
perty cured The defect in The original transaction and
his title is considered valid. 2) lt was only after Thirty-
tive (35) years that Luciano commenced The suit,
Thus, laches and acauisitive prescription have
already set in due To the tact that Chua and his heirs
possessed The subject property in concept of an
owner; and 3) As regards to pari delicto being one of
The issues raised by Julian, The same is without merit
because it is not one of The grounds for a motion to
dismiss under The Rules of Court.
XX.
If Ligaya, a Filipino citizen residing in The United

States, les a petition for change of name before
the District Court of New York, what law shall apply?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The law of New York shall apply. The change of

name neither affects the status nor the legal
capacity of a person under the nationality principle.
However, even if Ligaya obtains a judgment granting
her petition, The same is limited in its application as
The foreign court has no jurisdiction over the registry
records office or custodian here in the Philippines. A
state may not use adjudicatory or compulsory
methods within the territory of another state.
American citizen residing in the
If Henry, an
Philippines, les a petition for change of name
before a Philippine court, what law shall apply?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The Philippine law shall apply. The nationality

principle covers legal capacity and status of a
person and not a change of name. However, only
Henry‘s Philippine records shall be affected be-
cause Philippine forum cannot acquire jurisdiction
over US agencies.
I.
True or False.
Under Article 26 of the Family Code, when a

foreign spouse divorces his/her Filipino spouse, the
latter may re-marry by proving only that the foreign
spouse has obtained a divorce against her or him
abroad. (1%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
False. It not enough that the Filipino spouse

is
proves that the alien spouse has obtained a divorce
against him, he must also show that the divorce
decree capacitates the alien spouse to remarry
(Article 26, Family Code). ln addition, the Filipino
spouse must have the foreign judgment recognized
by the Philippine courts.
X, a widower, died leaving a will stating that
the house and lot where he lived cannot be parti-
tioned for as long as the youngest of his four
children desires to stay there. As coheirs and co-
owners, the other three may demand partition any-
time. (1%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
False. The law allows the testator to prohibit

partition of his estate for a period not exceeding
twenty years (Article 494 & Article i083, Civil Code).
34
Hence, the three co-owners may only ask for

partition after the lapse of 20 years from the death
ofX.
ll.
Multiple choice.
A had a 4-storey building which was construc-

ted by Engineer B. After ve years, the building
developed cracks and its stairway eventually gave
way and collapsed, resulting to injuries to some
lessees. Who should the lessees sue for damages?
(1%)
1) A, the owner
2) B, the engineer
3) both A 8. B
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. 3 - Both A and B.
Under the law, the lessee may proceed against

A for breach of contract because the latter, as
lessor, is obliged to make all necessary repairs on
the property leased (Article i654, Civil Code) and
as the proprietor of the building, A shall also be
responsible for the damages resulting from its total
or partial collapse it it is due to lack of necessary
repairs (Article 2l9O, Civil Code). The lessees may
also proceed against B for tort liability. The law
states that engineer or architect who drew up the
36 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
plans and specificaTions Tor a building is liable for

damages if wifhin fiffeen (15) years from The
complefion of The sTrucTure, The same should
collapse by reason of a defecf in Those plans and
specificafions or due To The defecfs in The ground
(ArTicle 1723, Arlicle 2192, Civil Code).
O, owner of A, learning ThaT Japanese sol-

LoT
diers may have buried gold and oTher Treasures aT
The adjoining vacanT LoT B belonging To spouses X 8.
Y, excavaTed in LoT B where she succeeded in
unearfhing gold and precious sTones. How will The
Treasures found by O be divided? (1%)
1) 100% To O as nder
2) 50% To O and 50% To The spouses X and Y
3) 50% To O and 50% To The sTaTe
4) None of The above
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. 4 — None of The above.

In general, The Treasure belongs To The owner
of The land where iT is found. The only excepfion is
ThaT when sonneone discovers The hidden Treasure
by chance, The laTTer is enTiTled To The one—half
Thereof shall belong To The owner of The land and
The oTher half nnay be given To The finder. O, as
finder is noT enTiTled To a share because The law
requires ThaT The Treasure musf be found by chance
(ArTicle 438, Civil Code). The Tacfs clearly sTaTe ThaT
O was aware ThaT The Treasure was buried in LoT B

belonging To X and Y. The oTher reason why O is
noT enTiTled To a share in The Treasure is she is a
rnere Trespasser.
A execufed a Deed of DonaTion in favor of B, a
bachelor, covering a parcel of land valued aT P1
million. B was, however, ouT of The counTry aT The
Time. For The donaon To be valid. (1%)
1) B may e-mail A accepTing The donaTion.
2) The donalion may be accepTed by B's

faTher wiTh whom he lives.
3) B can accepT The donaTion anyTime conve-
nienT To him.
4) B’s moTher who has a general power of
aTTorney may accepT The donaTion for him.
5) None of The above is sufcienT To make B’s
accepTance valid.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. 5 None of The above

— is sufficienf To make
B’s accepTance valid.
No. l is false since The donaTion covers an inn-

movable properry and The law requires Thar The
accepTance of The donee musT be in a public
insTrumenT. An e-mail is noT considered a public
insTrumenT.
No. 2 false since B's faTher
is is noT auThorized To
receive The donaTion.
38 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
No. 3 is also false because under The law, The

donee musi accepT donaTlon during The liTeTirne of
The donor. Thus, if B if accepTs The donaTion aT a
Time convenienT To him which happens To be aTTer
The donor's deaTh, The accepiance shall noT be
valid (ArTicle 746, Civil Code).
No. 4 is likewise false. The law is expliciT ThaT The
person accepTing on behalf of The donee musT be
armed wiTh a special power of aTTorney Tor ThaT
purpose. In This case, The moTher has only general
power of aTTorney.
A execuTed a 5-page noTaria| will before a
noTary public and Three wiTnesses. All of Them
signed each and every page of The will.
One of The wiTnesses was B, The faTher of one of
The legaTees To The will. WhaT is The effecT of B being
a wiTness To The will? (1%)
T) The will is invalidafed
2) The will is valid and effecfive
3) The legacy given To B’s child is noT valid
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. 3 — The legacy given To B’s child is invalid.

Under The law, The validiTy of The will is noT
afTecTed by The legacy given in favor of The son of
an aTTesTing wiTness To The will. However, The said
legacy is void (ArTicle 823, Civil Code) because an
aTTesTing wiTness or his spouse, parenT, or child is
disqualified To become a legafee or devisee by

reason The possible undue influence which The
affesflng wifness may exercise upon The Tesfafor. The
excepfion is if There are more Than Three wifnesses To
The will and one of Them was insfifufed as a legafee
or devisee, such legacy or devise is valid.
Define, Enumerafe or Explain. (2% each)

WhaT is The difference befween "guaranfy" and
"sureTyship"?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The differences befween guaranfy and sureTy-

shlp are as follows:
The liabilify of The guaranfor is only secondary,
whereas, in surefyship, if is primary;
In guaranfy, The guaranfor is enTlTled To The be-
neflf of excussion, whereas, The surefy in nof en-
Tifled To The beneflf of excussion;
The guaranTor's underfaking is To pay if The
principal debfor cannof pay; whereas, in sureTy-
ship, The underfaking of The surefy is To pay if The
principal debfor does noT pay;
The guaranfor insures The solvency of The prin-
cipal debfor, whereas, The surefy insures The debft
Liabilify in guaranfy depends upon an inde-
pendenf agreernenf To pay The obligafions of The
principal if he fails To do so, whereas, in surefyship,
The surefy assumes llabilify as a regular parfy; and
40 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
ln guaranty, the creditor may not proceed

against the guarantor directly because his liability is
subsidiarily; whereas, in a suretyship, the creditor
may proceed against the surety without prior ac-
tion against the principal debtor because the
surety’s liability is solidarily with the principal debtor.
Define quasi tort. Who are the persons liable
under quasi torts and what are the defenses
available to them?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Quasi-tort means a tort for which a non-perpet-

rator is held liable. In a auasi tort, a person who did
not actually commit a wrong is anyway held liable.
For instance, a master will be held liable for a tort
committed by a servant under the principle of
vicarious liability. Under quasi tort, the liability is
fixed on the presumption that some legal duty
exists that cannot be classified strictly as a personal
duty or as a contractual duty, but rather as some
other kind of duty recognizable by the law. ln this
jurisdiction, it is equivalent to the vicarious liability of
persons for whom one is responsible under Article
2180 of the Civil Code. Like the father or mother ot
a child who is below 2i year of age; employers for
acts committed by their employees within the
scope of their assigned tasks; the school, its admi-
nistrators or teachers for act of a minor under their
supervision, instruction, and custody; and the State
when acting through a special agent. These
persons may raise The defense of due diligence of

a good fafher of a family To escape liabilify or Thai
The proximaTe cause of The loss or The injury is The
negligence of The plainfiff.
Give aT |easT Two reasons why a courf may
assume jurisdicon over a conf|icT of laws case.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Comify Theory - Comify is The courTesy one

jurisdicfion gives by enforcing The laws of anofher
jurisdicfion. Comify is granfed ouT of respecf, defe-
rence, or friendship, rafher Than as an obligafion.
Comify specifically refers To legal reciprocify, The
principle Thaf one jurisdicfion will exfend cerfain
courfesies To ofher nafions, or ofher jurisdicfions
wifhin The same nafion.
STaTuTe Theory - There a domesfic law which
is
confers upon The local courls The power To assume
jurisdicfion.
IV.
Spouses B and G begoT Two offsprings. Albeif

They had serious personality differences, The spouses
conTinued To live under one roof. B begoT a son
by anofher woman. G also begoT a daughTer by
anoTher man.
If G gives The surname of B To her daughTer by
anofher man, whaT can B do To proTecT Their le-
giTimaTe children's inTeresTs? Explain. (5%)
42 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B can file can an acTion To impugn The legiTi-

macy of G‘s daughTer by anoTher man. As a rule, a
child born during The marriage of The spouses is
legiTimaTe. Even if The child of G was born during
her marriage To B, iT will noT preclude The laTTer from
impugning The child‘s legilimacy on The ground
ThaT ThaT was physically impossible Tor him To
iT
have sexual inTercourse wiTh G wiThin The period of

cohcepTion of The child, or Tor biological reasons,
he could noT have been The TaTher of The child.
DNA Tesl is recognized under Philippine jurisdicTion.
If B proves ThaT The child is noT his, Then his
legiTimaTe children’s inTeresTs may be proTecTed. In
The same acTion, B can also pray Tor The correcTion
of enTries in The birTh cerTiTicaTe of G's daughTer.
Ifacquiesces To The use of his surname by
B
G’s daughTer by anoTher man, whaT is/are The
consequence/s? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
lf acauiesces To The use of his surname by G's

B
daughTer by anoTher man and does noT file any
acTion To impugn The child's legiTimacy wiThin The
prescripve period seT forTh by law, Then The child is
conclusively presumed as The legiTimaTe daughTer
of B and G. Ergo, The child is enTiTled To all The righTs
of a legiTimaTe child like The righT To supporT and To
succeed boTh B and G.
V.
G led on July 8, 2000 a petition for declaration

of nullity of her marriage to B. During the pendency
of the case, the couple entered into a compromise
agreement to dissolve their absolute community of
property. B ceded his right to their house and lot
and all his shares in two business rms to G and
their two children, aged 18 and 19.
also opened a bank account in the amount
B
of P3 million in the name of the two children to
answer for their educational expenses until they
nish their college degrees.
undertook to shoulder the day -
For her part, G
to-day living expenses and upkeep of the children.
The Court approved the spouses’ agreement on
September 8, 2000.
Suppose the business firms suffered reverses,
rendering G unable to support herself and the chil-
dren. Can G still ask for support pendente lite from
B? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, G can still ask tor support pendente

lite from B.The law ordains support between the
husband and the wife during the subsistence of
their marriage. The children are likewise entitled
to support from both of their parents. Since the
compromise between the parties on the dissolution
of their properties was done while the case tor
44 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
nullity was still pending, the marriage has not yet

been dissolved and therefore, G is still entitled to
support from B since their marriage is still subsisting.
Suppose in late 2004 the two children had
squandered the P3 million fund for their education
before they could obtain their college degrees,
can they ask for more support from B? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the children are still entitled to support. The

law states that the support for schooling or training for
some profession, trade or vocation is ordained even
beyond the age of majority or until they have finished
or completed their education. in this case, the
children having squandered the money does not
extinguish their parents obligation to support them.
Vl.
Gigolo entered into an agreement with Majorette

for her to carry in her womb his baby via in vitro
fertilization. Gigolo undertook to underwrite Majorette’s
pre-natal expenses as well as those attendant to
her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay Majorette
P2 million and, in return, she would give custody of
the baby to him.
After Majoretle gives birth and delivers the
baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2 million,
she engages your services as her lawyer to regain
custody of the baby.
What legal action can you le on behalf of
Majorette? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As her ldwyer, will Tile d pefifion for hdbeos cor-

l
pus To recover The child from Gigolo. Under The low,

illegifimdfe children shdll be under The pdrenfol
duThoriTy of The moTher (ArTicle 176, Fdmily Code). ln
This cose, The bdby is illegifimofe hoving been born
oufside of wedlock. Gigolo is wiThouT ony righT To
hove cusfody of The boby even on The ossumpfion
ThoT he hod recognized The child, hence his
wifhholding of The cusfody To lvldjoreffe is
considered on illegol confinemenf for which hobeos
corpus is The dppropriofe remedy. Therefore,
lv‘ldrjoreTTe is enfifled To The cusTody of The bdby.
Can Gigolo demand from Mujorefle The refurn

of The P2 million if he refurns The baby? Explain.
(2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Gigolo cdnnoT demond from lvldjoreffe The

reTurn of The P2 million. The low does noT provide
porfies who ore in pdri delicTo To obfoin ony relief,
Thus, They sholl be leTT where They ore. Hdving
enfered info on illiciT dgreemenf, Gigolo cdnnoT
recover whdf he hos pdid. In oddifion, The presenf
case is considered OS child Trafficking punishoible
under Republic AcT No. 7610 ofherwise known ds
The AnTi-Child Abuse Low which provides ThoT ony
person who sholl engdge in Trdding dnd deoling
wifh children including, buT noT limiTed To, The dcf of
buying dnd selling of o child for money, or for ony
46 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
oTher consideroTion, or borTer, sholl suffer The pendlTy

of reclusion Ternporol To reclusion |oerpeTuo.
Who of The Two can exercise parental outhorily
over The child? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
MorjoreTTe is enTiTled To exercise poirenlol

duThoriTy ond cusTody over The illegirndle child
becoluse The low confers upon The moTher sole
porenTol ouThoriTy ond cuslody over The illegiTimoTe
child. The only woy Gigolo con geT cusTody of The
child is if he con prove ThoT MorjoreTTe is unTiT To
hove cuslody.
ls The child enTiTled To supporT and inheriTanc:e
from Gigolo? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The child is enTiTled To The supporl dnd

inheriionce from Gigolo becouse Cl child, olThough
illegiiimole buT recognized sholl be enTiTled To
suppori ois well os successionol righTs from boih of
iTs pdrenTs. Gigolo volunTo|rily recognized The child,
Thus, The loTTer is righTTully enTiTled To be supporTed
by Gigolo ond To geT his legiTirne upon The loTTer‘s
oleoilh which is one—hcllT of The legiTime of oi
legiTimdTe child.
Vll.
G and B were married on July 3, 1989. On

March 4, 2001, the marriage, which bore no off-
spring, was declared void ab initio under Article 36
of the Family Code. At the time of the dissolution of
the marriage, the couple possessed the following
properties:
A house and lot acquired by B on August 3, 1988,
one third (1/3) of the purchase price (representing
down payment) of which he paid; one third (1/3) was
paid by G on February 14, 1990 out of a cash gift
given to her by her parents on her graduation on
April 6, 1989; and the balance was paid out of the
spouses’ joint income; and an apartment unit
donated to B by an uncle on June 19, 1987.
Who owns the foregoing properties? Explain.
(5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The house and lot shall be co-owned by B and

G. Since the marriage was declared void and
there appears to be no impediment between the
parties, the property relation that shall govern the
union of B and G shall be the special co-ownership
rule in Article 147 of the Family Code.
However, since the house and lot was
acquired by B before his marriage to G and before
their cohabitation, it cannot be deemed part of
the special co-ownership rule in Article 147 but by
the ordinary rules on co-ownership where the share
48 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
of each co-owner shall be proporTional To Their

respecTive inleresls in The properTy owned in
common. (Arlicle 485, Civil Code) Since The shares
of boTh B and G in The price of The house and loT
had been idenlified wiTh parTiculariTy, ThaT will be
The exTenT of Their share in The properTy.
The aparTmenT uniT which B received by way of

donaiion from his uncle shall be exclusively owned
by B because The Tacls clearly sTaTe ThaT he
acquired The same by graTuiTous TiTle before Their
cohabiTaTion or union. The aparTmenT, noT having
been acquired Through B or G's wage, work, or
indusTry shall noT form parT of Their co-ownership.
If G and B had married on July 3, 1987 and Their

marriage was dissolved in 2007, who owns The
properties? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
If Themarriage beTween G and B was

celebraTed in i987 and The house and loT was
acquired by Them in i988, The ownership of The
properTy shall be governed by The rules in Arlicle l47
of The Family Code. Arlicle l47 will apply even if The
marriage was celebraTed before The eTTecTiviTy of
The Family Code because The sanne law iTself
provides ThaT iT may given reTroacTive efTecT
provided Thal no vesled righTs would be impaired.
(Republic v. Bobiles GR. No. 92326, 24 Januar i992)
ln The case menlioned, since The properTy was
acquired in 1988 when The Family Code was
already in force, iT could noT be said ThaT B and G
had acquired a vesTed righT To bar The applicaTion

of The rules in ArTicle 147 of The Family Code. Hence,
The house and loT shall be co-owned by B and GTO
The exTenT They have proven Their respecTive shares
in The price of The house and IoT.
The aparTmenT uniT, however, having been
acquired by donaTion by B prior To his union wiTh G
shall belong exclusively To him since iT was noT
acquired by TheirjoinT efforls, work, or indusTry.
Vlll.
Spouses Rex and Lea bore Two children now

aged 14 and 8. During The subsisTence of Their
marriage, Rex begoT a child by anoTher woman. He
is now 10 years of age.
On Lea's discovery of Rex's faThering a child by

anoTher woman, she led a peTiTion for legal
separaon which was granTed.
Rex now wanTs To adopT his illegiTimaTe child.
Whose consenT is needed for Rex’s adopon of
his illegiTimaTe child? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The Domesc Aaoprion ACT of i998 requires Tor

The validiTyof The adopTion, ThaT The consenT of The
spouse of The adopTer, The legiTimaTe child or
children of The adopTer over i0 years of age; The
consenT of The illegiTimaTe child of The adopTer, iO
years of age or over if living wiTh The adopTer; The
50 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
consenT of The biological parenT of The child, if

known; and lasTly The consenT of The adopfee.
Hence, before Rex may validly adopT his illegifirnale
child he musl secure:
The consenT of his i4-year old legilimale child;
The consenT of l0-year old illegiTimaTe child To
be adopTed; and
The consenT of The biological mofher of The
illegifimale child.
Since There was a decree of legal separaTion
granTed by The courT prior To The decision of Rex To
adopf his illegiTirnaTe child, Rex need noT secure
The consenT of his wife, Lea.
If There was no legal separation, can Rex sll

adopT his illegifimaie child? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Rex can sTill adopT his illegiTimaTe child pro-

vided ThaT in addiTion To The oTher persons required
consenT above sTaTed, his lawful spouse, gives her
consenT as well. Since There was no legal
separafion, The aforesaid law requires The consenT
of The lawful spouse (Secfion 7 and 8, Republic AcT
No. 8552).
201 O BAR EXAMINATION 51
IX.
Eighteen-year old Filipina Patrice had a daughter

out of wedlock whom she named Laurie. At 26,
Patrice married American citizen John who brought
her to live with him in the United States of America.
John at once signied his willingness to adopt Laurie.
Can John le the petition for adoption? If yes,
what are the requirements? If no, why? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, John cannot file the petition for adoption

alone. The Domestic Adoption Act of i998 requires,
among others, that the husband and wife shall
adopt jointly except in the following cases: l) if one
spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate son/daughter
of the other; or 2) if one spouse seeks to adopt his/
her own illegitimate son/ daughter: Provided,
However, that the other spouse has signified his/her
consent thereto; or 3) if the spouses are legally
separated from each other.
None of the exceptions are present in the
given problem because John seeks to adopt the il-
legitimate daughter of Patrice. Also, Laurie is not
John's daughter and third, Patrice and John are
not legally separated from each other. Therefore,
John cannot file the petition without joining Patrice
as petitioner.
52 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
X.
In T997, Band G started living together without

the benefit of marriage. The relationship produced
one offspring, Venus. The couple acquired a
residential lot in Paraaque. After four (4) years or in
2001, G having completed her 4-year college degree
as a fulltime student, she and B contracted marriage
without a license.
The marriage of B and G was, two years later,
declared null and void due to the absence of a
marriage license.
lf you were the judge who declared the nullity
of the marriage, to whom would you award the lot?
Explain briefly. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Asthe judge, will award the lot to both B and

l
G because their properties are governed by special

co-ownership since their marriage was declared null
and void not by reason of an impediment but
because of the absence of a marriage license. ln
such a case, the law presumes that they both
contributed equally to the acquisition of the lot
absence of any proof to the contrary. There being
no proof of the value or amount of contribution, B
and G co-owns the lot in equal shares.
Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or legitimated?
ls
Explain briefly. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Venus is illegiTimaTe having been conceived

and born ouTside of a valid marriage. Allhough iT
may appear ThaT Venus was legiTimaTed by The
subsequenT marriage of B and G afTer four years of
cohabiTaTion, The supposed legiTimaTion, however,
became ineffecTual because of The subseo|uenT
declaraTion of nuIliTy of The marriage beTween B
and G due To The ToTal absence of a formal
reauisiTe which is The marriage license. NoTe ThaT B
and G did noT comply wiTh The reauisiTe number of
years of cohabiTaTion for Them To be exempT from
The license reauiremenT. Hence, Their marriage is
void which renders Venus illegiTimaTe. In addiTion,
legilimalion shall only Take place by The subsequenT
valid marriage of The parTies. The marriage being
void, \/enus was noT legiTimaTed.
XI.
The spouses PeTer and Paula had Three (3)

children. Paula laTer obTained a judgmenf of nulliTy
of marriage. Their absoluTe communily of properTy
having been dissolved, They delivered PT million To
each of Their 3 children as Their presumpve legiTimes.
PeTer lafer re-married and had Two (2) children
by his second wife Marie. PeTer and Marie, having
successfully engaged in business, acquired real
properlies. PeTer |aTer died inTesTaTe.
Who are PeTer's legal heirs and how will his
be divided among Them? (5%)
esTaTe
54 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The legal heirs of PeTer are all of his children

wiTh Paula and his children in his subseauenT
marriage wiTh Marie. Marie is likewise a legal heir of
PeTer being The legal spouse aT The Time of his deaTh.
If The marriage beTween PeTer and Paula was

declared void under ArTicle 36 or ArTicle 53 of The
Family Code, all Their Three children shall be
deemed legiTimaTe des|oiTe The subseaueni dec-
laraTion of nulliTy of Their marriage. Thus, The esTaTe
of PeTer shall be divided by Them equally in The
following manner:
The Three children by TirsT marriage shall geT
l/6Th of The esTaTe Tor each;
The Two children by second marriage shall also
geT T/6Th of The esTaTe Tor each; and
The surviving spouse, Marie, shall geT The
remaining l/éTh of The esTaTe.
On The oTher hand, if The marriage was dec-
lared void based on oTher grounds like lack of mar-
riage license, or absence of a marriage ceremony,
or The facT Thai iT was a bigamous marriage, The
Three children oT TirsT marriage shall be considered
illegiTirnaTe, Thus They gel‘ half Of whOT The
legiTimaTe child geTs. The children of The second
marriage being legiTimaTe shall receive one-half of
PeTer‘s esTaTe as Their legiTime. The esTaTe shall be
divided as follows:
The Two legiTimaTe children by second mar-
riage shall each geT ‘A of The esTaTe;
The surviving spouse, Marie also geTs ‘A of The

esTaTe; and
The Three children by TirsT marriage geTs The
oTher remaining ‘A of The esTaTe which They shall
divide equally such ThaT each of Them shall receive
l/T2 of esTaTe.
WhaT is The effecT of The receipT by PeTer’s 3

children by his rsT marriage of Their presumpTive
legiTimes on Their righT To inheriT following PeTer’s
deaTh? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The law provides ThaT, presumpTive legiTimes

shall be collaTed To The deceased’s esTaTe for
proper deTerminaTion of legiTimes. ln The given
scenario, only The one-half porTion of The presump-
Tive legiTimes received by The Three children of The
firsT marriage shall be collaTed To PeTer’s esTaTe
because The oTher half is collaTed To The esTaTe of
The former wife, Paula. Said legiTimes shall be
impuTed as an advance on Their respecTive
inheriTance from PeTer’s esTaTe.
XII.
On May 5, 1989, 16-year old Rozanno, who was

issued a sTudenT permiT, drove To school wiTh a car,
a gi from his parenTs. On even daTe, as his class
was scheduled To go on a eld Trip, his Teacher
requesTed him To accommodaTe in his car, as he
did, four (4) of his classmaTes because The van
56 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
rented by the school was too crowded. On the way

to a museum which the students were scheduled to
visit, Rozanno made a wrong maneuver, causing a
collision with a jeepney. One of his classmates died.
He and the three (3) others were badly injured.
Who is liable for the death of Rozanno's class-
mate and the injuries suffered by Rozanno and his 3
other classmates? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The school, its administrators and teachers shall

be liable for the resulting death and injuries
sustained by Rozanno and his classmates. Under
the Family Code, the foregoing persons shall be
liable tor the acts of the minor under special pa-
rental authority and responsibility that they exercise
over him. This authority applies to all activities,
whether inside or outside the premises of the
school. ln this case, Rozanno was still a minor when
he drove the car at the time ot the incident (Article
218, Family Code). The field trip on such occasion
was an authorized activity, and thus, the provision
applies. Moreover, if Rozanno’s parents were
negligent, they shall be principally liable, otherwise,
they are subsidlarlly liable. (Article 2l9, Family Code)
How about the damage to the jeepney?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As regards to the damage of the jeepney, it is

submitted that the school and its administrators
and Teachers shall still be liable for the damage to

the jeepney because even it Rozanno was the one
driving the vehicle, he was considered under The
supervision, instruction and custody of The school at
The Time of The unfortunate incident and hence,
They shall be liable for The damage caused by The
negligence of The minor including that of The
jeepney. There being negligence on The part of
Rozanno which was The immediate and proximate
cause of The damage to The jeepney, and being
under parental authority of The school, The latter
shall be principally and solidarily liable tor The
resulting damage.
Under The same facts, except The date of
occurrence of The incident, This Time in mid-1994,
what would be your answer? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Under such circumstances, Rozanno would

have been 2i years old at the time of the acci-
dent. Such being the case, the occurrence shall be
governed by The provisions of the Civil Code on
auasi-delict. Hence, not being under the parental
authority of either The school or his parents,
Rozanno shall be personally liable for all The
consequences which resulted from the accident.
Xlll.
Franz was the owner of Lot E which was

-
surrounded by four (4) lots one of which Lot C — he
also owned. He promised Ava that if she bought Lot E,
he would give her a right of way in Lot C.
58 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Convinced, Ava bought Lot E and, as promised,

Franz gave her a right of way in Lot C.
Ava cultivated Lot E and used the right of way
granted by Franz.
Ava later found gainful employment abroad. On
her return after more than 10 years, the right of way
was no longer available to her because Franz had in
the meantime sold Lot C to Julia who had it fenced.
Does Ava have a right to demand from Julia
the activation of her right of way? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Ava has the right to demand from Julia

the activation of her right of way. The facts did not
state that Ava totally ceased to used the ease-
ment of right of way through her assigns, or
administrator. It cannot be assumed that there was
extinguishment of the easement by non-user for ten
years. Furthermore, as a real right, an easement of
right of way attaches to the estate to which it
belongs. Therefore, Ava has the right to demand
the activation of her right to the easement.
Assuming Ava opts to demand a right of way
from any of the owners of Lots A, B, and D, can she
do that? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Ava can do the same provided that,

either the Lots of A, B, and D provides for an ade-
quate outlet to public highway. If there are several
properties on which the easement may be estab-

lished, the estate which shall provide the shortest
distance from the dominant estate to a public
highway and would cause least prejudice to the
servient estate shall be chosen. Thus, Ava has to
prove that these two requisites concur in one
estate but it not, the criterion of least prejudice shall
prevail over the shortest distance. Ava must likewise
pay the proper indemnity.
XIV.
Primo owns a pet iguana which he keeps in a

man-made pond enclosed by a fence situated in
his residential lot. A typhoon knocked down the
fence of the pond and the iguana crawled out of
the gate of Primo’s residence. N, a neighbor who
was passing by, started throwing stones at the
iguana, drawing the iguana to move toward him. N,
panicked and ran but tripped on something and
suffered a broken leg.
ls anyone liable for N’s injuries? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No one should be held liable for N’s injuries. As

a rule, the possessor of an animal or whoever may
make use of the same is responsible tor the
damage which it may cause, although it may es-
cape or be lost, save when the damage should
come from force majeure or from the fault of the
person who has suffered the damage. (Article 2183,
Civil Code) ln the instant case, the pet iguana
escaped not because of Primo’s negligence but
60 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
because of The Typhoon which knocked down The

fence. Also, Nwas also aT faulT since The facTs sTaTe
ThaT he sTarTed Throwing sTones aT The iguana
which caused iT To move Towards him. Therefore,
no one is liable.
XV.
A, B, and C enTered inTo a parlnership To operaTe

a resTauranT business. When The resTauranT had
gone pasT break-even sTage and sTarTed To garner
considerable proTs, C died. A and B conlinued The
business wiThouT dissolving The parTnership. They in
facT opened a branch of The resTauranT, incurring
obligalions in The process. CrediTors sTarTed demanding
for The paymenT of Their obligaTions.
Who are liable for The seTTlemenT of The parT-
nership’s obligaTions? Explain? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A and B, The Two remaining parTners are liable

for The parTnership obligaTions. The law provides
ThaT, where The dissoluTion is caused by deaTh or
insolvency of a parTner, each parTner is liable To his
co-parTners for his share of any liabiliTy creaTed by
any parTner acTing for The parTnership as if The
parTnership has noT been dissolved (ArTicle i833,
Civil Code). When a parTner dies and There was no
proper seTTlemenT of his/ her accounT beTween his
esTaTe and The person conlinuing The business, his
legal represenTaTive may have The value of his
inTeresT al The daTe of The dissoluTion ascerTained To
receive as an ordinary creditor an amount equivalent

to the value of his interest in the partnership. ln this
case, no settlement on C's account was made, thus,
when A and B continued the business, they shall
be held accountable for the obligations (Article
1841, Civil Code).
What are the creditors’ recourse/s? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The creditors may tile a collection suit against

A, B, and the estate of C for the settlement of the
obligations. The law provides that all partners
including industrial ones shall be liable pro rata with
all their property after all the partnership assets
have been exhausted for the contracts which may
have been entered into the name and tor the
account ot the partnership (Article i816, Civil
Code). C's estate may also be held liable because
under the law the individual property of a
deceased partner shall be liable for all obligations
of the partnership incurred while he was a partner
subject however, to the prior payment of his
separate debts (Article 1835). In addition, the
creditors may go after the private properties of A
and B it there are no sufficient tunds.
XVI.
X was the owner of an unregistered parcel of

land in Cabanatuan City. As she was abroad, she
advised her sister Y via overseas call to sell the land
and sign a contract of sale on her behalf.
62 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Y thus sold the land to Bi on March 31, 2001

and executed a deed of absolute sale on behalf of
X. B1 fully paid the purchase price.
B2, unaware of the sale of the land to Bl,
signied to Y his interest to buy it but asked Y tor her
authority from X. Without informing X that she had
sold the land to Bi, Y sought X for a written authority
to sell.
X e-mailed Y an authority to sell the land. Y
thereafter sold the land on May 1, 2001 to B2 on
monthly installment basis for two years, the rst
installment to be paid at the end of May 2001.
Who between Bl and B2 has a better right over
the land? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B2 has better right over the land. The rule on

double sale applies to a situation where the same
property is validly sold to different vendees. In the
case at bar, the first sale is void (Fudot v. Cattleya
Land lnc., GR. No. l7lOO8 September l3, 2007).
The law states that when a sale of real property or
any interest therein is through an agent, the
authority of the latter shall be in writing (Article
1874, Civil Code). ln the given case, the first sale to
Bl was void because the authority given by X to Y
at the time of the sale was not in writing. Hence,
the case is not covered by law on double sale. On
the other hand, there was a written authority in
favor of Y to sell the property, thus, the sale is valid,
therefore B2 has a better right.
SET A
(1) When does a declaration of absence of a

missing person take effect?
(A) Immediately from the issuance of the
declaration of absence.
(B) 3 months after the publication of the
declaration of absence.
(C) 6 months alter the publication of the declaration
of absence.
(D) l5 days from the issuance of the declaration
of absence.
(2) The authority that school administrators
exercise over school children under their supervi-
sion, instruction, or custody is called
(A) legal parental authority.
(B) substitute parental authority.
(C) ordinary parental authority.
(D) special parental authoritg
(3) Can future inheritance be the subject of a
contract of sale?
(A) No, since it will put the predecessor at the
risk ot harm from a tempted buyer, contrary to
public policy.
63
64 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(B) Yes, since The death of The decedent is

certain To occur.
(C) No, since the seller owns no inheritance
while his predecessor lives.
(D) Yes, buT on The conclilion Thal The arnounl
of The inheritance can only be ascertained after
The obligations of The esTaTe have been paid.
(4) Upon The proposal of a Third person, a new

debtor substituted The original debtor without The
Iatter’s consent. The creditor accepted The subs-
titution. Later, however, The new debtor became
insolvent and defaulted in his obligation. What is
The effect of The new debTor’s default upon The
original debtor?
(A) The oriqinal debtor is freed of liability since
novation Took place and This relieved him of his
obligation.
original debtor shall pay or perform The
(B) The
obligation new debTor.
wiTh recourse To The
(C) The original debtor remains liable since he

gave no consent To The subsTiTuTion.
(D) The original debTor shall pay or perform 50%

of The obligation To avoicl unjusT enrichnnenT on
his parT.
(5) Lennie bought a business class ticket from

Alta Airlines. As she checked in, The manager
downgraded her to economy on The ground that a
Congressman had to be accommodated in The
business class. Lennie suffered The discomfort and
embarrassment of the downgrade. She sued The
airlines for quasi-delict but Alta Airlines countered

that, since her travel was governed by a contract
between them, no quasi-delict could arise. ls the
airline correct?
(A) No, the breach of contract may in fact be
tortious as when it is tainted as in this case with
arbitrariness, qross bad faith, and malice.
(B) No, denying Lennie the comfort and amen-
ities of the business class as provided in the ticket is
a tortious act.
(C) Yes, since the facts show a breach of
contract, not a quasi-delict.
(D) Yes, since quasi-delict presupposes the
absence of a pre-existing contractual relation bet-
ween the parties.
(6) Which of the following is an indispensable
requirement in an action for "quieting of title" invol-
ving real property? The plaintiff must
(A) be in actual possession of the property.
(B) be the registered owner of the property.
IC) have Ieqal or equitable title to the propertg
(D) be the beneficial owner of the property.
(7) X and Y were to marry in 3 months. Meantime,
to express his affection, X donated a house and lot
to Y, which donation X wrote in a letter to Y. Y wrote
back, accepting the donation and took possession
of the property. Before the wedding, however, Y
suddenly died of heart attack. Can Y's heirs get
the property?
66 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(A) No, since the marriage did not take place.

since all the requisites ot a donation ot
(B) Yes,
an immovable are present.
(C) No, since the donation and its acceptance
are not in a public instrument.
(D) Yes, since X freely donated the property to
Y who became its owner.
(8) Rene and Lily got married after a brief

courtship. After one month, Lily discovered that
while Rene presented himself as a macho man he
was actually gay. He would not go to bed with her.
He kept obscene magazines of nude men and
always sought the company of handsome boys.
What legal remedy does Lily have?
(A) She can file an action for annulment of
marriage on qround of fraud.
can seek a declaration of nullity of the
(B) She
marriage based on Rene’s psychological incapacity.
(C) Shecan go abroad and file for divorce in
a country that can grant it.
(D) She has none since she had the opportu-
nity to examine the goods and freely entered into
the marriage.
(9) Lucio executed a simple deed of donation
of P50 million on time deposit with a bank in favor
of A, B, C, D, and E, without indicating the share of
each donee. All the donees accepted the donaon in
writing. A, one of the donees, died. Will B, C, D, and
E get A's share in the money?
(A) Yes, a<:creTion will auTomaTica|ly apply To

The joinT-donees in equal shares.
(B) Yes, since The aonor’s inTenTion is To give

The whole of P50 million To The joinT donees in equal
shares.
(C) No, A"s share will reverT To The donor
because accreTion applies only if The joinT-donees
are spouses.
(D) No, A's share qoes To his heirs since The
donafion did nof provide for reversion To donor.
(10) Raul, Esfer, and Rufus inheriTed a 10-hecfare
land from Their fafher. Before The land could be
parfifioned, however, Raul sold his herediTary righf
To Raffy, a sTranger To The family, for P5 million. Do
EsTer and Rufus have a remedy for keeping The land
wifhin Their family?
(A) Yes, They may be subroqafed To Raffy's
riqhf by reimbursinq To him wifhin The required Time
whaf he Qdid Raul.
(B) Yes, They may be subrogaied To Raffy's
righT provided They buy him ouT before he regisTers
The sale.
(C) No, They can be subrogaTed To Raffy's righT

only wiTh his conTormiTy.
(D) No, since There was no impedimenT To Raul
selling his inheriTance To a sTranger.
68 BAR Q 8- A
CIVIL LAW
(1 1)When one exercises a right recognized by

law, knowing that he thereby causes an injustice to
another, the latter is entitled to recover damages.
This is known as the principle of
(A) res ipsa loquitur.
(B) damnum absque injuria.

(C) vicarious liability.
(D) abuse of rights.
(12) Which of the following is NOT a basis for
rendering a disinheritance defective or imperfect?
(A) its cause comes from the quilt of a spouse
in a legal separation case, the innocent-spouse
having died.
(B) The truth of its cause is denied and not
sufficiently proved by evidence.
(C) Its cause is not authorized by the law.
(D) lts cause is not specified.
(13) Manuel came to Manila and married
Marianne. Unknown to Marianne, Manuel had been
previously convicted in Palawan of theft and served
time for it. After Marianne learned of his previous
conviction, she stopped living with him. Con Marianne
seek the annulment of the marriage based on
Manuel's nondisclosure of his previous crime?
(A) No, since the assumption is that marriage
forgives all past wrongs.
Q) Yes, since the non-disclosure of that crime

is the equivalent of fraud, which is a qround for
annulment.
(C) No, in case of doubt, the law must be
construed to presen/e the institution of marriage.
(D) No, since Manuel already served the pe-
nalty for his crime.
(14) Arthur and Helen, both Filipinos, got
married and had 2 children. Arthur later worked in
Rome where he acquired Italian citizenship. He got Cl
divorce from Helen in Rome but, on returning to the
Philippines, he realized his mistake, asked forgiveness
of his wife, and resumed living with her. They had 2
more children. What is the status of their 4 children?
(A) The children born before the divorce are
legitimate but those born after it are not since
Arthur qot the divorce when he had ceased to be
a Filipino.
The divorce rendered illegitimate the children
(B)
born before it since the marriage that begot them
had been nullified.
(C) The children born before and after the
divorce are all legitimate since Philippine law does
not recognize divorce.
the children are legitimate since they
(D) All
were born of the same father and mother.
(15) Who can make a donation?
(A) All persons who can enter into contracts
and dispose of their propertg
70 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(B) All persons who are of legal age and suffer

from no civil interdiction.
(C) All persons who can make a last will ancl
testament.
(D) All persons, whether natural or artificial,
who own property.
(16) The liability of the partners, including in-
dustrial partners for partnership contracts entered
into in its name and for its account, when all part-
nership assets have been exhausted is
(A) Pro-rata.
(B) Joint.
(C) Solidary.
(D) Voluntary.
(17) When can a missing person who left
someone to administer his property be declared
an absentee by the court? When he has been
missing for
(A) 2 years from the receipt ot the last news
about him.
(B) 7 years from the receipt of the last news
about him.
(C) l0 years from the receipt of the last news
about him.
(D) 5 years from the receipt of the last news
about him.
2O'|'l BAR EXAMINATION 71
(18) Which of the following claims against the

debtor enjoys preference over the others with respect
to his specic immovable property and real rights?
(A) Unpaid price of real property sold, upon
the immovable property.
(B) Mortgage credits recorded in the registry of
property, upon the mortgaged real estate.
(C) Taxes due, upon the land or building.
(D) Expenses for the preservation and im-
provement of property, when the law authorizes
reimbursement, upon the preserved or improved
immovable.
(19) When bilateral contracts are vitiated with
vices of consent, they are rendered
(A) rescissible.
(B) void.
(C) unenforceable.
(D) voidable.
(20) An agent, authorized by a special power of
attorney to sell a land belonging to the principal
succeeded in selling the same to a buyer according
to the instructions given the agent. The agent
executed the deed of absolute sale on behalf of his
principal two days after the principal died, an event
that neither the agent nor the buyer knew at the
time of the sale. What is the standing of the sale?
(A) \/oidable.
(B) Valid.
72 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(C) Void.
(D) Unenforceable.
(21) Spouses A and B leased a piece of land
belonging to B's parents for 25 years. The spouses
built their house on it worth P300,000.00. Subse-
quently, in a case that C led against A and B, the
court found the latter liable to C for P200, 000. 00.
When the sheriff was attaching their house for the
satisfaction of the judgment, A and B claimed that it
was exempt from execution, being a family home.
ls this claim correct?
(A) Yes, because while B's parents own the

land, they agreed to have their daughter build her
family home on it.
(B) No, because there is no judicial declaration
that it is a family home.
(C) No, since the land does not belonq to A
and B, it cannot qualify as a family home.
(D) Yes, because the A and B's family actually

lives in that house.
(22) Solomon sold his coconut plantation to
Aragon, Inc. for P100 million, payable in installments
of P10 million per month with 6% interest per annum.
Solomon married Lorna after 5 months and they
chose conjugal partnership of gains to govern their
properly relations. When they married, Aragon had
an unpaid balance of P50 million plus interest in
Solomon’s favor. To whom will Aragon's monthly
payments go after the marriage?
(A) The principal shall go to the conjugal

partnership but the interests to Solomon.
(B) Both principal ancl interests shall go to
Solomon since they are his exclusive properties.
(C) Both principal and interests shall go to the
conjugal partnership since these become clue after
the marriage.
(D) The principal shall qo to Solomon but the
interests to the coniuqal partnership.
(23) X and Y, although not suffering from any
impediment, cohabited as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage. Following the birth
of their child, the couple got married. A year after,
however, the court annulled the marriage and
issued a decree of annulment. What is the present
status of the child?
(A) Legitimated.
(B) Illegitimate.
(C) Natural child.
(D) Legitimate.
(24) When A and B married, they chose conjugal
partnership of gains to govern their property relations.
Aer 3 years, B succeeded in getting her marriage
to A annulled on ground of the latter's psychological
incapacity. What liquidation procedure will they
follow in disposing of their assets?
(A) They will follow the rule governing the
liauiaation of a conjugal partnership of gains where
74 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
the party who acted in bad faith forfeits his share in

the net profits.
(B) Since the marriage has been declared
void, the rule tor liquidation of absolute community
of property shall be followed.
{Cl The liquidation of a co-ownership applies
since the annulment brouqht their property relation
under the chapter on property reqimes without
marriage.
(D) The law on liauidation of partnerships applies.
(25) X and Y agreed verbally before their mar-
riage (a) on the paternity of the illegitimate child of Y
and (b) on the economic regime that will govern X
and Y's property relations. ls the verbal agreement
valid?
{A) No, because a marriaqe settlement to be
valid should be in writinq;
(B) Yes, since ante-nuptial agreements need
not be in writing.
(C) No, because a marriage settlement cannot

include an agreement on the paternity of an
illegitimate child.
(D) Yes, since even if it is not a valid marriage
settlement, it is a valid verbal contract.
(26) Spouses X and Y have a minor daughter, Z,
who needs support for her education. Both X and Y,
who are financially distressed, could not give the
needed support to Z. As it happens, Z’s other
relatives are nancially capable of giving that

support. From whom may Z rst rightfully demand
support? From her
(A) grandfather.
(B) brother.
(C) uncle.
(D) first cousin.
(27) Fidel, a Filipino with fair complexion, mar-

ried Gloria. Before the marriage, Gloria confessed
to Fidel that she was two-month pregnant with the
child of a black African who had left the country for
good. When the child was born, Fidel could not
accept it being too black in complexion. What is
the status of the child?
(A) Illegitimate, because Gloria confessed that
the child is not Fidel’s.
(B) Illegitimate, because by the color of its skin,
the child could not possibly be that of Fidel.
(C)Leqitimate, because the child was born
within a valid marriaqe.
(D) Legitimate, because Fidel agreed to treat
the child as his own after Gloria told him who the
father was.
(28) The husband's acts of forcibly ejecting his
wife without just cause from the conjugal dwelling
and refusing to take her back constitutes
(A) desertion.
76 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(B) recrimination.
(C) constructive abandonment.
(D) de facto separation.
(29) In his will, the testator designated X as a
legatee to receive P2 million for the purpose of
buying an ambulance that the residents of his
Barangay can use. What kind of institution is this?
(A) a fideicomissary institution.
(B) a modal institution.

(C) a conditional institution.
(D) a collective institution.
(30) X insured himself for P5 million, designating
Y, hiswife, as his sole beneficiary. The designation
was irrevocable. A few years later, X had their
marriage annulled in court on the ground that Y
had an existing prior marriage. X subsequently
died, ls Y entitled to the insurance benefits?
(A) Yes, sincethe insurance was not depen-
dent on the marriage.
(B) Yes, since her designation as beneficiary
was irrevocable.
(C) No, X 's designation of Y is revoked by
gperation of law upon the annulment of their ma-
rriaqe based on Y's fault.
(D) Yes, since without judicial revocation, X’s
designation of Y remains valid and binding.
(31) May a spouse freely donate communal or

conjugal properly without the consent of the other?
(A) Absolutely not, since the spouses co-own
such properly.
(B) Yes, for properties that the family may
spare, regardless of value.
(C) Yes, provided the donation is moderate
and intended for charity or family reioicinq
(D) Yes, in a donation mortis causa that the
donor may still revoke in his lifetime.
(32) The decedent died intestate leaving an
estate of P10 million. He left the following heirs: a)
Marlon, a legitimate child and b) Cecilia, the legal
spouse. Divide the estate.
(A) Marlon gets l/4 and Cecilia gets 3/4.
(B) Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia l/3.
(C) Marlon qets l/2 and Cecilia qets l/2.

(D) Ivlarlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia l/4.
(33) Contracts take effect only between the
parties or their assigns and heirs, except where the
rights and obligations arising from the contract are
not transmissible by their nature, by stipulation, or
by provision of law. In the latter case, the assigns or
the heirs are not bound by the contracts. This is
known as the principle of
(A) Relativity of contracts.
(B) Freedom to stipulate.
78 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(C) Mutuality of contracts.
(D) Obligatory torce of contracts.

(34) A buyer ordered 5,000 apples from the seller
at P20 per apple. The seller delivered 6,000 apples.
What are the rights and obligations of the buyer?
(A) He can accept all 6,000 apples and pay the
seller at P20 per apple.
(B) He can accept all 6,000 apples and pay a
lesser price for the l,000 excess apples.
(C) He can keep the 6,000 apples without
paying for the 1,000 excess since the seller deli-
vered them anyway.
(D) He can cancel the whole transaction since
the seller violated the terms of their agreement.
(35) Lino entered into a contract to sell with
Ramon, undertaking to convey to the latter one of
the five lots he owns, without specifying which lot it
was, for the price of P1 million. Later, the parties
could not agree which of ve lots he owned Lino
undertook to sell to Ramon. What is the standing of
the contract?
(A) Unenforceable.
(B) \/oiaable.
(C) Rescissible.
(D) Void.
(36) Knowing that the car had a hidden crack

in the engine, X sold it to Y without informing the
latter about it. In any event, the deed of sale
expressly stipulated that X was not liable for hidden
defects. Does Y have the right to demand from X a
reimbursement of what he spent to repair the
engine plus damages?
(A) Yes. X is liable whether or not he was aware
of the hidden defect.
(B) Yes, since the defect was not hidden; X
knew of it but he acted in bad faith in not disclosinq
the fact to Y.
(C) No, because Y is in estoppel, having
changed engine without prior demand.
(D) No, because Y waived the warranty
against hidden defects.
(37) Acme Cannery produced sardines in cans
known as "Sards." Mylene bought a can of Sards
from a store, ate it, and suffered from poisoning
caused by a noxious substance found in the
sardines. Mylene led a case for damages against
Acme. Which of the following defenses will hold?
(A) The expiry date of the "$ards" was clearly
printed on its can, still the store sold and Mylene
bought it.
(B)Mylene must have detected the noxious
substance in the sardines by smell, yet she still ate it.
(C) Acme had no transaction with Mylene;
she bought the "Sards“ from a store, not directly
from Acme.
80 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Acme enjoys the presumption of safeness

(D)
of its canning procedure and Mylene has not
overcome such presumption.
(38) Fernando executed a will, prohibiting his
wife Marina from remarrying after his death, at the
pain of the legacy of P100 Million in her favor
becoming a nullity. But a year after Fernando’s death,
Marina was so overwhelmed with love that she
married another man. ls she entitled to the legacy, the
amount of which is well within the capacity of the
disposable free portion of Fernando's estate?
(A) Yes, since the prohibition against remarrying
is absolute, it is deemed not written.
because the prohibition is inhuman
(B) Yes,
and oppressive ancl violates Marina’s rights as a
tree woman.
(C) No, because the nullity of the prohibition
also nullities the legacy.
(D) No, since such prohibition is authorized by
law and is not repressive; she could remarry but
must qive up the moneL
(39) X, the owner, constituted a 10-year usu-
fruct on his land as well as on the building standing
on it in Y's favor. After flood totally destroyed the
building 5 years later, X told Y that an act of God
terminated the usufruct and that he should vacate
the land. ls X, the owner of the land, correct?
(A) No, since the building was destroyed
through no fault of Y.
(Q) No, since Y still has the riqht to use the land
and the materials left on it.
(C) Yes, since Y cannot use the land without
the building.
(D) Yes, since the destruction of the building
without the X's fault terminated the usutruct.
(40) In gratitude, the groom’s parents made a
donation of a property in writing to the bride's
parents shortly before their children's wedding. The
donation was accepted. What is the nature of
the donation?
{A} It is an ordinary donation since it was not
given to the bride or qroom.
(B) It is donation propter nuptias since it was
given with the marriage in mind.
(C) It an indirect donation propter nuptias
is
since the bride would eventually inherit the pro-
perty from her parents.
(D) It is a remuneratory donation.
(41) X and Y, both Filipinos, were married and

resided in Spain although they intend to return to
the Philippines at some future time. They have not
executed any marriage settlements. What law go-
verns their property relations?
(A) They may choose between Spanish law
and Philippine law.
_(B) Philippine Iaw since they are both Filipinos.
82 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(C) No regime of property relations will apply

to them.
(D) Spanish law since they live in Spain.
(42) Birth detennines personality. Death extinguishes
it. Under what circumstances may the personality of
a deceased person continue to exist?
(A) In case of re-appearance of a missing
person presumed dead.
(B) In protecting the works of a deceased
under intellectual property laws.
(C) In case of declaration of presumptive
death of a missing spouse.
(D) ln the settlement of the estate of a de-
ceased Qerson.
(43) Six tenants sued X, the landowner, for
willfully denying them water for their farms, which
water happened to flow from land under X’s
control, his intention being to force them to leave
his properties. ls X liable for his act and why?
(A) No, because the tenants must be content
with waiting for rainfall for their farms.
(B) No, since X owns both the land and
the water.
(C) Yes, because the tenants‘ farms have the
natural right of access to water wherever it is located.
(D) Yes, since X willfully caused iniury to his
tenants contrary to morals, qood customs or public
policy.
(44) Illegitimate brothers and sisters, whether of

full or half-blood, are bound to support each other,
EXCEPT when
(A) the brother or sister who needs support
lives in another place.
(B) such brothers and sisters are not recognized
by their father.
(C) the brother or sister in need stops schooling
without valid reason.
(D) the need for sugport of a brother or sister,_
already of aqe, is due to the latter's fault.
(45) Virgilio owned a bare and simple swim-
ming pool in his garden. MB, a 7-year old child, sur-
reptitiously entered the garden and merrily romped
around the ledges of the pool. He accidentally
tripped, fell into the pool, and drowned. MB's parents
sued Virgilio for damages arising from their child's
death, premised on the principle of "attractive
nuisance". ls Virgilio liable for the death of MB?
(A) No, the child was 7 years old and knew the
dangers that the pool offered.
(B) Yes, being an attractive nuisance, Virgilio
had the duty to prevent children from coming near it.
_(C) No, since the pool was bare and had no
enticing or allurinq qadqets, floats, or devices in it
that would attract a 7-year old child.
(D) Yes, since Virgilio did not cover the swim-
ming pool while not in use to prevent children from
falling into it.
84 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(46) The term of a 5-year lease contract

between X the lessor and Y the lessee, where rents
were paid from month to month, came to an end.
Still, Y continued using the property with X’s consent.
In such a case, it is understood that they impliedly
renewed the lease
(A) from month to month under the same
conditions as to the rest.
(B) under the same terms and conditions as
before.
(C) under the same terms except the rent
which they or the court must fix.
only a year, with the rent raised by iO%
(D) for
pursuant the rental control law.
to
(47) Rex, a philanthropist, donated a valuable
lot to the municipality on the condition that it will
build a public school on such lot within 2 years from
its acceptance of the donation. The municipality
properly accepted the donation but did not yet
build the public school after 2 years. Can Rex
revoke the donation?
(A) Yes, since the donation is subiect to a
resolutory condition which was not fulfilled.
(B) No, but Rex is entitled to recover the value
of the land from the municipality.
(C) No, the transfer of ownership has been
completed.
(D) Yes, the donation is not deemed made
until the suspensive condition has been fulfilled.
(48) Illegitimate children, those not recognized

by their biological fathers, shall use the surname
of their
(A) biological father subject to no condition.
(B) mother or biological father, at the mother‘s
discretion.
(C) mother.
(D)biological father unless he judicially
opposesit.
(49) Asiong borrowed Pl million from a bank,
secured by a mortgage on his land. Without his
consent, his friend Boyong paid the whole loan.
Since Asiong beneted from the payment, can
Boyong compel the bank to subrogate him in its
right as mortgagee of Asiong's land?
(A) No, but the bank can foreclose and pay
Boyong back.
{B) No, since Boyonq paid for Asionq's loan
without his approval.
(C) Yes, since a change of creditor took place
by novation with the bank’s consent.
(D) Yes, since it is but right that Boyong be able
to get back his money and, if not, to foreclose the
mortgage in the manner of the bank.
(50) Congress passed a law imposing taxes on
income earned out of a particular activity that was
not previously taxed. The law, however, taxed
incomes already earned within the scal year when
the law took effect. ls the law valid?
86 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(A) No, because laws are intended to be

prospective, not retroactive.
No, the law is arbitrary in that it Taxes
(B)
income that has already been spent.
(C) Yes, since tax laws are the lifeblood of the
nation.
(D) Yes, tax laws are an exception; they can
be qiven retroactive effect.
(51) Rudolf borrowed P1 million from Rodrigo
and Fernando who acted as solidary creditors.
When the loan matured, Rodrigo wrote a letter to
Rudolf, demanding payment of the loan directly to
him. Before Rudolf could comply, Fernando went to
see him personally to collect and he paid him. Did
Rudolf make a valid payment?
(A) No, since Rudolf should have split the pay-
ment between Rodrigo and Fernando.
(B) No, since Rodrigo, the other solidary cre-
ditor, already made a prior demand for payment
from Rudolf.
(C) Yes, since the payment covers the whole
obligation.
(D) Yes, since Fernando was a solidary creditor,
payment to him extinguished the obligation.
(52) What happens to the property regimes that
were subsisting under the New Civil Code when the
Family Code took effect?
(A) The oriqinal property reqimes are immu-

Table and remain effeclive.
(B) Those enjoying specific regimes under The
New Civil Code may adopl The regime of absoluie
communily of properTy under The Family Code.
(C) Those Thdl married under The New Civil
Code buT did noT choose any of ils regimes shall
now be governed by The regime of absoluie com-
munily of properTy.
(D) They are superseded by The Family Code
which has reTroacTive effecl.
(53) The TesTaTor execuled a will following The
formaliTies required by The law on succession with-
out designaTing any heir. The only TesTamenTary
disposiTion in The will is The recognifion of The
TesTaTor's il|egiTimaTe child wiTh a popular acTress. ls
The will valid?
(A) Yes, since in recognizing his illegiTimdTe
child, The TesTdTor has made him his heir.
No, becduse The non-designdTion of heirs
(B)
defeaTs The purpose of Cl will.
(C) No, The will comes To life only when The
proper heirs are insTiTuTed.
(D) Yes, The recoqnifion of an illeqilimafe heir
is an ample reason for a will.
(54) A lefT B, his wife, in The Philippines To work
in EgypT buT died in Thal counTry aer a year's
88 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
continuous stay. Two months after A’s death, B

gave birth to a child, claiming it is A’s child. Who
can assail the legitimacy of the child?
(A) A's other heirs apart from B.
(B) TheState which has interest in the welfare

of overseas contract workers.
(C) Any one who is outraged by B‘s claim.
(D) No one since A died.
(55) QR and TS who had a marriage license re-
quested a newly appointed Judge in Manila to
marry them on the beach of Boracay. Since the
Judge maintained Boracay as his residence, he
agreed. The sponsors were all public officials. What
is the status of the marriage?
(A) Valid, since the improper venue is merely an

irregularity; all the elements of a valid marriaqe are
present.
(B) \/oid, because the couple did not get local
permit fora beach wedding.
(C) \/oidable, because the Judge acted be-
yond his territorial jurisdiction and is administratively
liable for the same.
(D) void, because the Judge did not solem-
nize the marriage within the premises of his court.
(56) X and Y, Filipinos, got mam'ed in Los Angeles,
USA, using a marriage license issued by the Philippine
consul in Los Angeles, acting as Civil Registrar. X and
Y did not know that they were rst cousins because

their mothers, who were sisters, were separated when
they were quite young. Since X did not want to
continue with the relation when he heard of it, he left
Y, came to the Philippines and married Z. Can X be
held liable for bigamy?
(A) No since X's marriage to Y is void ab initio
or did not exist.
(B) No since X acted
good faith, conscious
in
that public policy did not approve of marriage
between first cousins.
{Cl Yes since he married Z without first securinq
a iudicial declaration of nullity of his marriage to Y.
(D) Yes since his first marriage to Y in Los
Angeles is valid.
Note: There is no correct answer. Our penal
laws are territorial, meaning, for the crime to be
punishable it must be committed within the
Philippine territory.
Since the first marriage was celebrated in the
U.S., Xcannot be held liable for bigamy.
(57) Allan bought Billy's property through Carlos,
an agent empowered with a special power of
attorney (SPA) to sell the same. When Allan was
ready to pay as scheduled, Billy called, directing
Allan to pay directly to him. On learning of this,
Carlos, Billy's agent, told Allan to pay through him
as his SPA provided and to protect his commission.
Faced with two claimants, Allan consigned the
90 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
payment in court. Billy protested, contending that

the consignation is ineffective since no tender of
payment was made to him. ls he correct?
(A) No, since consiqnation without tender of
payment is allowed in the face of the conflictinq
claims on the plaintiff.
(B) Yes, as owner of the property sold, Billy can
demand payment directly to himself.
(C) Yes, since Allan made no announcement
of the tender.
tender of payment
(D) Yes, a is required for a
valid consignation.
(58) X sold Y 100 sacks of rice that Y was to
pick up from X’s rice mill on a particular date. Y did
not, however, appear on the agreed date to take
delivery of the rice. After one week, X automati-
cally rescinded the sale without notarial notice to Y.
ls the rescission valid?
{A} Yes, automatic rescission is allowed since,_
havinq the character of movables and consumables‘
rice can easily deteriorate.
(B) No, the buyer is entitled to a customary 30-
day extension of his obligation to take delivery of
the goods.
(C) No, since there was no express agreement
regarding autornatic rescission.
(D) No, the seller should first determine that Y
was not justified in tailing to appear.
(59) The wife led a case of legal separation

against her husband on the ground of sexual indelity
without previously exerting earnest efforts to come to
a compromise with him. The judge dismissed the
case for having been led without complying with a
condition precedent. ls the dismissal proper?
(A) No, efforts at a compromise will only dee-
pen the wife's anguish.
{B) No, since Ieqal separation like validity of
marriaqe is not subiect to compromise aqreement
for Qurgoses of filing.
(C) Yes, to avoid a family feud that is hurtful to
everyone.
(D) Yes, since the dispute could have been
settled with the parties agreeing to legal separation.
(60) An Australian living in the Philippines acquired
shares of stock worth P10 million in food ma-
nufacturing companies. He died in Manila, leaving
a legal wife and a child in Australia and a live-in
partner with whom he had two children in Manila.
He also left a will, done according to Philippine
laws, leaving all his properties to his live-in partner
and their children. What law will govern the validity
of the disposition in the will?
(A) Australia law since his legal wife and legitimate
child are Australians and domiciled in Australia.
(B) Australian law since the intrinsic validity of
the provisions of a will is qoverned by the dece-
dent's national law.
92 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(C) Philippine law since the decedent died

in Manila and he executed his will according to
such law.
(D) Philippine law since the decedent's proper-
ties are in the Philippines.
(61) X bought a land from Y, paying him cash.
Since they were friends, they did not execute any
document of sale. After 7 years, the heirs of X asked
Y to execute a deed of absolute sale to formalize
the verbal sale to their father. Unwilling to do so, X’s
heirs led an action for specic perfor-mance
against Y. Will their action prosper?
(A) No, after more than 6 years, the action to
enforce the verbal aqreement has already elapsed.
(B) No, since the sale cannot under the Statute
of Frauds be enforced.
(C) Yes, since X bought the land and paid Y
for it.
(D) Yes, after full paynnent, the action became
innprescriptible.
(62) A court declared Ricardo, an old bache-
lor, an absentee and appointed Cicero administra-
tor of his property. After a year, it was discovered
that Ricardo had died abroad. What is the effect
of the fact of his death on the administration of
his property?
(A) With Ricardo no longer an absentee but a
deceased person, Cicero will cease to be ad-
ministrator of his properties.
Q) The administration shall be qiven by the

court havinq_iurisdiction over the intestate procee-
dinqs to a new administrator whom it will appoint.
(C) Cicero automatically becomes adminis-
trator of Ricardo's estate until judicially relieved.
(D) Cicero’s allenations of Ricardo's property
will be set aside.
(63) Baldo, a rejected suitor, intimidated Judy
into marrying him. While she wanted to question the
validity of their marriage two years after the intimi-
dation ceased, Judy decided in the meantime to
freely cohabit with Baldo. After more than 5 years
following their wedding, Judy wants to le a case for
annulment of marriage against Baldo on ground of
lack of consent. Will her action prosper?
(A) Yes, the action for annulment is impresciiptible.
(B) No, since the marriaqe was merely voi-
dable and Judy ratified it by freely cohabitinq with
Baldo after the force and intimidation had ceased .
(C) No, since the action prescribed 5 years from
the date of the celebration of the marriage.
(D) Yes,because the marriage was celebrated
without Judy's consent freely given.
(64) ls the wife who leaves her husband without
just cause entitled to support?
(A) No, because the wife must always be
submissive and respectful to the husband.
94 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(B) Yes. The marriage not having been dissolved,

the husband continues to have an obligation to
support his wife.
(C) No, because in leavinq the coniuqal home
without iust cause, she forfeits her riqht to sugport.
the right to receive support
(D) Yes, since is not
subject to any condition.
(65) In the order of intestate succession where
the decedent is legitimate, who is the last intestate
heirs or heir who will inherit if all heirs in the higher
level are disqualied or unable to inherit?
(A) Nephews and nieces.
(B) Brothers and sisters.
(C) State.
Other collateral relatives up to the 5th
(D)
degree consanguinity.
of
(66) Roy and Carlos both undertook a contract
to deliver to Sam in Manila a boat docked in Subic.
Before they could deliver it, however, the boat sank
in a storm. The contract provides that fortuitous
event shall not exempt Roy and Carlos from their
obligation. Owing to the loss of the motor boat,
such obligation is deemed converted into one of
indemnity for damages. ls the liability of Roy and
Carlos joint or solidary?
(A) Neither solidary nor joint since they cannot
waive the defense of fortuitous event to which they
are entitled.
(B) Solidary orjoint upon the discretion of Sam.
(C) Solidary since Roy and Carlos tailed to

perform their obligation to deliver the motor boat.
(D) Joint since the conversion of their liability to
one of indemnity for damaqes made it ioint.
(67) Joanne married James, a person with no
known relatives. Through James‘ hard work, he and
his wife Joanne prospered. When James died, his
estate alone amounted to P100 million. If, in his will,
James designates Joanne as his only heir, what will
be the free portion of his estate.
{Al Joanne qets all; estate has no free portion left.
(B) Joanne gets l/2; the other halt is tree portion.
ifC) Joanne gets l/3; the remaining 2/3 is tree
portion.
i[D) Joanne gets l/4; the remaining 3/4 is free
portion.
(68) A warranty inherent in a contract of sale,
whether or not mentioned in it, is known as the
iA) warranty on quality.
ifB) warranty against hidden detects.
(C) warranty aqainst eviction.
(D) warranty in merchantability.
(69) The doctrine of stare decisis prescribes ad-
herence to precedents in order to promote the stability
of the law. But the doctrine can be abandoned
(A) When adherence to it would result in the
Government’s loss of its case.
96 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(B) When the application of the doctrine would

cause great prejudice to a foreign national.
(C) When necessary to pronnote the passage
of a new law.
(D) When the precedent has ceased to be
beneficial and useful.
(70) Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been sweet-
hearts for 5 years. While working in a European country
where the execution of joint wills are allowed, the
two of them executed a joint holographic will where
they named each other as sole heir of the other in
case either of them dies. Unfortunately, Ric died a
year later. Can Josie have the joint will successfully
probated in the Philippines?
(A) Yes, in the highest interest of comity of na-
tions and to honor the wishes of the deceased.
(B) No, since Philigpine law prohibits the exe-
cution of ioint wills and such law is binding on Ric
and Josie even abroad.
(C) Yes, since they executed their joint will out
of mutual love and care, values that the generally
accepted principles of international law accepts.
(D) Yes, since it is valid in the country where it
was executed, applying the principle of "lex loci
celebrationis."
(71) ML inherited from his father P5 million in
legitime but he waived it in a public instrument in
favor of his sister QY who accepted the waiver in
writing. But as it happened, ML borrowed P6 million
from PF before the waiver. PF objected to the

waiver and filed an action for its rescission on the
ground that he had the right to ML’s P5 million le-
gitime as partial settlement of what ML owed him
since ML has proved to be insolvent. Does PF, as
creditor, have the right to rescind the waiver?
because the waiver in favor of his sister
(A) No,
QY amounts to a donation and she already ac-
cepted it.
(B) Yes, because the waiver is preiudicial to

the interest of a third person whose interest is re-
cognized by law.
(C) No, PF must wait for ML to become solvent
and, thereafter, sue him for the unpaid loan.
(D) Yes, because a legitime cannot be waived
in favor of a specific heir; it must be divided among
all the other heirs.
(72) While engaged to be married, Arnold and
Josephine agreed in a public instrument to adopt
out the economic regime of absolute community
of property. Arnold acknowledged in the same
instrument that Josephine’s daughter Mary, is his
illegitimate child. But Josephine died before the
marriage could take place. Does the marriage
settlement have any signicance?
(A) None, since the instrument containing the
marriage settlement is essentially void for con-
taining an unrelated matter.
{B} Yes, insofar as Arnold acknowledqed Mary
as his illeqitimate child.
98 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(C) None, since the marriage did not take place.

they acquired properties while living
(D) Yes, if
together as husband and wife.
(73) Joseph, a 17-year old Filipino, married
Jenny, a 21-year old American in Illinois, USA,
where the marriage was valid. Their parents gave
full consent to the marriage of their children. After
three years, Joseph filed a petition in the USA to
promptly divorce Jenny and this was granted.
When Joseph turned 25 years, he returned to the
Philippines and married Leonora. What is the status
of this second marriage?
(A) Void, because he did not cause the iudicial
issuance of declaration of the nullity of his first
marriage to Jenny before marrying Leonora.
(B) Valid, because Joseph's marriage to Jenny
is void, he being only l7 years ot age when he
married her.
(C) Valid, because his marriage to Leonora has
all the elements of a valid marriage.
(D)Void, because Joseph is still considered
married to Jenny since the Philippines does not
recognize divorce.
(74) T died intestate, leaving an estate of
P9,000,000. He left as heirs three legitimate children,
namely, A, B, and C. A has two children, D and E.
Before he died, A irrevocably repudiated his
inheritance from T in a public instrument led with
the court. How much, if any, will D and E, as A's
children, get from T's estate?
(A) Each of D and E will get Pl,500,000 by right

of representation since their father repudiated his
inheritance.
(B) Each of D and get P2,225,000
E will
because they will inherit from the estate equally
with B and C.
(C)D and will qet none because of the
E
repudiation; "B" and "C" will qet A's share by riqht of
accretion.
(D) Each and E will get P2,000,000 be-
of D
of
cause the law gives them some advantage due to
the demise
(75) No decree of legal separation can be issued
(A) unless the children‘s welfare is attended
to first.
(B) without prior efforts at reconciliation shown
to be futile.
(C) unless the court first directs mediation of
the parties.
(D) without prior investigation conducted by a
public prosecutor.
(76) X, who was abroad, phoned his brother, Y,
authorizing him to sell X's parcel of land in Pasay. X
sent the title to Y by courier service. Acting for his
brother, Y executed a notarized deed of absolute
sale of the land to Z after receiving payment. What
is the status of the sale?
100 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(A) \/alid, since a notarized deed of absolute

sale covered the transaction and full payment was
made.
(Q) Void, since X should have authorized aqent
Y in writinq to sell the land.
(C) Valid, since Y was truly his brother X‘s

agent and entrusted with the title needed to effect
the sale.
(D) Valid, since the buyer could file an action
to compel X to execute a deed of sale.
(77) In a true pacto de retro sale, the title and
ownership of the properly sold are immediately
vested in the vendee a retro subject only to the
resolutory condition of repurchase by the vendor a
retro within the stipulated period. This is known as
(A) equitable mortgage.
(B) conventional redemption.
(C) legal redemption.
lD) equity of redemption.
(78) A natural obligation under the New Civil
Code of the Philippines is one which
(A) the obligor has a moral obligation to do,
otherwise entitling the obligee to damages.
(B) refers to an obligation in writing to do or not
to do.
(C) the obligee may enforce through the court
if violated by the obligor.
(D) cannot be iudicially enforced but autho-

rizes the obliqee to retain the obIiqor’s payment or
performance.
(79) The husband assumed sole administration
of the family's mango plantation since his wife
worked abroad. Subsequently, without his wife’s
knowledge, the husband entered into an antichrec
transaction with a company, giving it possession
and management of the plantation with power to
harvest and sell the fruits and to apply the
proceeds to the payment of a loan he got. What is
the standing of the contract?
(A) it is void in the absence of the wife's consent.
(B) It is void absent an authorization from the
court.
(C) The transaction is void and can neither be
ratified by the wife nor authorized by the court.
by the
(D) It is considered a continuing offer
parties,_perfected only upon the wife’s acceptance
or the court's authorization.
(80) When the donor gives donations without
reserving sufficient funds for his support or for the
support of his dependents, his donations are
(A) Rescissible, since it results in economic lesion
ot more than 25% of the value of his properties.
(B) Voidable, since his consent to the donation
is vitiated by mindless kindness.
(C) Void, since it amounts to wanton expen-
diture beyond his means.
102 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
{Di Reducible to the extent that the donations

impaired the support due to himself and his dependents.
(81) Anne owed Bessy Pl million due on October
T, 2011 but failed to pay her on due date. Bessy sent
a demand letter to Anne giving her 5 days from
receipt within which to pay. Two days after receipt of
the letter, Anne personally offered to pay Bessy in
manager's check but the latter refused to accept the
same. The 5 days lapsed. May Anne’s obligation be
considered extinguished?
(A) Yes, since Bessy's refusal of the manager's
check, which is presumed funded, amounts to a
satisfaction of the obligation.
(B) No, since tender of payment even in cash,_
if refused, will not discharqe the obliqation without
proper consiqnation in court.
(C) Yes, since Anne tendered payment of the
full amount due.
(D) No, since a manager's check is not
considered legal tender in the Philippines.
(82) The residents of a subdivision have been
using an open strip of land as passage to the high-
way for over 30 years. The owner of that land de-
cided, however, to close it in preparation for buil-
ding his house on it. The residents protested, clai-
ming that they became owners of the land through
acquisitive prescription, having been in possession
of the same in the concept of owners, publicly,
peacefully, and continuously for more than 30
years. ls this claim correct?
(A) No, the residents have not been in conti-

nuous possession of the land since they merely
passed throuqh it in qoinq to the hiqhway,
(B)No, the owner did not abandon his right to
the property; he merely tolerated his neighbors’ use
of it for passage.
residents of the subdivision
(C) Yes, have
become owners by acauisitive prescription.
(D) Yes, community ownership by prescription
prevails over private claims.
(83) The owner of a thing cannot use it in a way
that will injure the right of a third person. Thus, every
building or land is subject to the easement which
prohibits its proprietor or possessor from committing
nuisance like noise, jarring, offensive odor, and
smoke. This principle is known as
(A) Jus vindicandi.
{B) Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas.
(C) Jus dispondendi.
(D) Jus abutendi.
(84) Janice and Jennifer are sisters. Janice sued
Jennifer and Laura, Jennifer’s business partner for
recovery of property with damages. The complaint
did not allege that Janice exerted earnest efforts to
come to a compromise with the defendants and
that such efforts failed. The judge dismissed the
complaint outright for failure to comply with a
condition precedent. ls the dismissal in order?
104 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(A) No, since Laura is a stranger to the sisters,_

Janice has no moral obliqation to settle with her.
since court should promote amicable
(B) Yes,
settlement among relatives.
(C) Yes, since members of The same family, as
parties to The suit, are required To exert earnest efforts
To settle their disputes before coming To court.
family council, which would ordi-
(D) No, The
narily mediate dispute, has been eliminated
The
under The Family Code.
(85) X borrowed money from a bank, secured
by a mortgage on The land of Y, his close friend.
When The loan matured, Y offered to pay The bank
but it refused since Y was not The borrower. ls The
bank's action correct?
(A) Yes, since X, The True borrower, did not give
his consent to Y’s otter To pay.
(B) No, since anybody can discharge X's ob-

ligation To his benefit.
(C) No, since Y, The owner of The collateral, has
an interest in the payment of the obliqation.
(D) Yes, since it was X who has an obligation To
the bank.
(86) The right of a mortgagor in a judicial fore-
closure to redeem the mortgaged property after his
default in the performance of the conditions of the
mortgage but before the sale of the moitgaged
property or conrmation of the sale by the court, is
known as:
(A) accion publiciana.

(B) equity of redemption.
(C) pacto de retro.
(D) right of redemption.
(87) When does the regime of conjugal part-
nership of gains begin to exist?
(A) At the moment the parties take and dec-
lare each other as husband and wife before of-
ficiating ofcer.
(B) At the time the spouses acquire properties
through joint efforts.
(C) On the date the future spouses executed
their marriage settlements because this is the
starting point of their marital relationship.
(D) On the date agreed upon by the future
spouses intheir marriage settlements since their
agreement the law between them.
is
(88) Josie, 18, married Dante, 25, without her

parents‘ knowledge and consent, and lived with
him. After a year, Josie returned to her parents’
home, complained of the unbearable battering she
was getting from Dante, and expressed a desire to
have her marriage with him annulled. Who may
bring the action?
(A) Dante.
(B) Her parents.

(C) Josie herself.
106 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(D) The State.

(89) X, a married man, cohabited with Y, an
unmarried woman. Their relation bore them BB, a
baby boy. Subsequently, after X became a widower,
he married Y. Was BB legitimated by that marriage?
(A) Yes, since his parents are now lawfully married.
(B) Yes, since he is an innocent party and the
marriage rectified the wrong done him.
(C) No, since once illegitimate, a child shall
always remain illegitimate.
{D) No, since his parents were not qualified to
marry each other when he was conceived.
(90) The presence of a vice of consent vitiates
the consent of a party in a contract and this renders
the contract
(A) Rescissible.
(B) Unenforceable.
(C) Voidable.
(D) Void.
(91) Can common-law spouses donate proper-
ties of substantial value to one another?
{A) No, they are only allowed to qive moderate
gifts to each other durinq family reioicinq;
(B) No, they cannot give anything of value to
each other to prevent placing their legitimate
relatives at a disadvantage.
(C) Yes, unlike the case of legally married

spouses, such donations are not prohibited.
(D) Yes, as long as they leave sufficient pro-
perly for themselves and for their dependents.
(92) X owed Y Pi.5 million. In his will, X gave Y
legacy of P1 million but the will provided that this
legacy is to be set off against the P1.5 million X owed
Y. After the set off, X still owed Y P500,000. Can Y still
collect this amount?
{A} Yes, because the designation of Y as Ieqatee
created a new and separate iuridical relationship
between them, that of testator-leqatee.
depends upon the discretion of the pro-
(B) It
bate court it a claim is filed in the testate proceedings.
(C) No, because the intention of the testator in

giving the legacy is to abrogate his entire
obligation to Y.
(D) No, because X had no instruction in his will
to deliver more than the legacy of Pl million to Y.
(93) Josie owned a lot worth P5 million prior to
her marriage to Rey. Subsequently, their conjugal
partnership spent P3 million for the construction of a
house on the lot. The construction resulted in an
increase in the value of the house and lot to P9
million. Who owns the house and the lot?
(A) Josie and the conjugal partnership of gains
will own both on a 50-50 basis.
108 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(B) Josie will own both since the value of the

house and the increase in the property's value is
less than her lot’s value; but she is to reimburse
coniuqal partnership expenses.
(C) Josie still owns the lot, it being her exclusive
property, but the house belongs to the conjugal
partnership.
(D) The houseand lot shall both belong to the
conjugal partnership, with Josie entitled to re-
imbursement for the value of the lot.
(94) An action for reconveyance of a regis-
tered piece of land may be brought against the
owner appearing on the title based on a claim that
the latter merely holds such title in trust for the
plaintiff. The action prescribes, however, within 10
years from the registration of the deed or the date
of the issuance of the certicate of title of the
property as long as the trust had not been re-
pudiated. What is the exception to this 10-year
prescriptive period?
(A) When the plaintiff had no notice of the
deed or the issuance of the certificate of title.
(B) When the title holder concealed the
matter from the plaintiff.
(C) When fortuitous circumstances prevented
the plaintiff from filing the case sooner.
_(D) When the plaintiff is in possession of the property_.
(95) Conrad and Linda, both 20 years old,

applied for a marriage license, making it appear
that they were over 25. They married without their
parents’ knowledge before an unsuspecting judge.
After the couple has been in cohabitation for 6
years, Linda's parents led an action to annul the
marriage on ground of lack of parental consent.
Will the case prosper?
(A) No, since only the couple can question the
validity of their marriaqe after they became 2i of
aqg; their cohabitation also convalidated the
marriage.
(B) No, since Linda’s parents made no alle-
gations that earnest efforts have been made to
come to a compromise with Conrad and Linda
and which efforts tailed.
(C) Yes, since the marriage voidable, the couple
is
being below 2i years of age when they married.
(D) Yes, since Linda‘s parents never gave their
consent to the marriage.
(96) Pepito executed a will that he and 3
attesting witnesses signed following the formalities
of law, except that the Notary Public failed to
come. Two days later, the Notary Public notarized
the will in his law ofce where all signatories to the
will acknowledged that the testator signed the
will in the presence of the witnesses and that the
latter themselves signed the will in the presence
of the testator and of one another. Was the will
validly notarized?
110 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(A) No, since it was not notarized on the oc-

casion when the signatories affixed their signatures
on the will.
(B) Yes, since the Notary Public has to be
present only when the siqnatories acknowledqed
the acts required of them in relation to the will.
(C) Yes, but the detect in the mere notariza-
tion of the will is not fatal to its execution.
(D) No, sincethe notary public did not require
the signatories to sign their respective attestations
again.
(97) Venecio and Ester lived as common-law
spouses since both have been married to other
persons from whom they had been separated in fact
for several years. Hardworking and bright, each
earned incomes from their respective professions
and enterprises. What is the nature of their incomes?
(A) Conjugal since they earned the same
while living as husband and wife.
(B) Separate since their property relations with
their leqal spouses are still subsisting;
(C) Co-ownership since they agreed to work
tor their mutual benefit.
(D) Communal since they earned the same as
common-law spouses.
(98) What is the prescriptive period for ling an
action for revocation of a donation based on acts
of ingratitude of the donee?
2O'l'| BAR EXAMINATION 111
(A) 5 years from the perfection of the donation.

@) l year from the perfection of the donation.
(C) 4 years from the perfection of the donation.
(D) Such action does not prescribe.
(99) Before Karen married Karl, she inherited P5
million from her deceased mother which amount
she brought into the marriage. She later used part
of the money to buy a new Mercedes Benz in her
name, which Karen and her husband used as a
family car. ls the car a conjugal or Karen’s
exclusive property?
(A) It conjugal property since the spouses use
is
it as o family cor.
(B) It is Karen’s exclusive property since it is in
her name.
(C) It is conjugal property having been bought
during the marriage.
(D) It is Karen's exclusive property since she
bouaht it with her own moneg
(100) Because of X's gross negligence, Y
suffered injuries that resulted in the abortion of the
foetus she carried. Y sued X for, among other da-
mages, P1 million for the death of a family member.
ls Y entitled to indemnity for the death of the foetus
she carried?
the foetus is already regarded as a
(A) Yes, since
child from conception, though unborn.
112 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(B) No, since X's would not hove known that

the accident would result in Y‘s abortion.
(C) No, since birth determines personality, the
accident did not result in the death of 0 person.
(D) Yes, since the mother believed in her heart
that she lost ct child.
1) Which of the following is NOT included in

the attributes of juridical capacity?
capacity is inherent in every natural

all Juridical
person, and therefore it is not acquired.
b Juridical capacity is lost only through death.
l
c Juridical capacity
l is the tness to be the
subject of legal relations.
d) Juridical capacity cannot exist without capacity
to act.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - Juridical capacity cannot exist without ca-

pacity to act.
2) Which of the following is NOT a restriction
on one's capacity to act?
a) Minority
b) Marriage
c) Deaf-mute
d) Civil interdiction
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No correct answer.
H3
114 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
[Notez While mdrridge is not mentioned in Ar-

ticles 38 & 39 ds one of the circumstances which
restricts, modifies, or limits d person's copdcity to
act, it is submitted thdt mdrridge should be sub-
sumed in the term "family relations" which limits o
person‘s cdpocity to dct under Article 39
3) attribute or incident of a case deter-

This
mine whether it is a conflict-of-laws case or one
covered by domestic law.
a) Cause of action
b) Foreign element
c) Jurisdiction
d) Forum non conveniens
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - Foreign element
4) The capacity of an heir to succeed shall be

governed by the:
aji national law of the decedent’s heirs
law of the country where the decedent was
b]|
a resident at the time of his death
c) national law of the person who died
d) law of the country where the properties of
the decedent are located.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - National law of the person who cliea.
5) Atty. BUKO, a Filipino, executed a will while

he was in Spain. The attestation clause of the said
will does not contain Buko's signature. It is valid un-
der Spanish law. At its probate in Manila, it is being
opposed on the ground that the attestation clause
does not contain BUKO’s signature. ls the opposition
correct? Choose the best answer.
a) Yes, because it is a fatal detect.

b) Yes, the will is not valid under Philippine law.
c) No, attestation clause is not an act of the
testator.
d) No, the governing law is Spanish law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — No, attestation clause is not an act of the

testator
6) Ramon, a Filipino, executed a will in Manila,
where he left his house and located in BP Homes
Paraaque in favor of his Filipino son, Ramgen.
Ramon‘s other children RJ and Ramona, both Turkish
nationals, are disputing the bequest to Ramgen. They
plotted to kill Ramgen. Ramon learned of the plot,
so he tore his will in two pieces out of anger. Which
statement is most accurate?
a) The mere act of Ramon Sr. is immaterial
because the will is still readable.
116 BARQ&A
CIVIL LAW
b) The mere act of tearing the will amounts to

revocation.
c) The tearing of the will may amount to revo-
cation if coupled with intent of revoking it.
d) The act of tearing the will is material.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - The tearing of the will may amount to

revocation if coupled with intent of revoking it.
7)Even if the applicable law is a foreign law,
a court in the Philippines may be constrained to
apply Philippine law under any of the following ins-
tances, except:
a) when the foreign law, judgment or contract
is contrary to a sound and important public policy
of the forum;
b) when the property subject of the case is
located outside of the Philippines;
c) when the foreign law or judgment is penal
in nature;
d) when the foreign law is procedural in nature.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - when the property subject of the case is lo-

cated outside of the Philippines; and, c - when the
foreign law orjudgment is penal in nature.
Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over
properties located outside its jurisdiction; As a rule,
penal law applies domestically pursuant to the

principle of territoriality.
8) If a will is executed by a testator who was
born a Filipino citizen but became naturalized
Japanese citizen at the time of his death, what law
will govern its testamentary provisions if the will is
executed in China and the property being
disposed is located in Indonesia?
a) Chinese law
b) Philippine law
c) Indonesia law
d) Japanese law
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Japanese law
The national law of the decedent shall govern
his/her testamentary provisions.
9) A Japanese national and a Filipino national
entered into a contract for services in Thailand. The
services will be rendered in Singapore. In case of
breach, what law will govern?
a) Thailand law
b) Philippine law
c) Singapore law
d) Japanese law
118 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — Singapore law. (Lex loci actus)
10) Pedro (Filipino) and his wife Jane (American)
executed a joint will in Canada, where such joint
will is valid. In case the joint will is probated in
Japan, what law will govern the formalities of the
joint will‘?
a) American law
b) Philippine law
c) Canadian law
d) Japanese law
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — Canadian law
ll)A French national revokes his will in Japan
where he is domiciled. He then changed his
domicile to the Philippines where he died. The re-
vocation of his will in Japan is valid under
Japanese law but invalid under Philippine law. The
affected heir is a Malaysian national residing in the
Philippines. What law will apply?
a) Japanese law
b) Philippine law
c) French law
d) Malaysian law
2012 BAR EXAMINATION ‘I 19
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — Japanese low (Article 829, Civil Code)

12) In the absence of contrary stipulation in a
marriage settlement, property relations of Filipino
spouses shall be governed by
a) Philippine laws
b) Law of the place where the spouses reside
c) Law of the place where the properties are
situated
d) Law of the place where they were married.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — Philippine lows
13) The will of a Filipino executed in a foreign

country
a) cannot be probated in the Philippines;
b) may be probated in the Philippines provided
that properties in the estate are located in the
Philippines;
c) cannot be probated before the death of the
testator;
d) may be probated in the Philippines provi-
ded it was executed in accordance with the laws
of the place where the will was executed.
120 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - mdy be probdted in the Philippines provi-

ded it wds executed in dccorddnce with the ldws
of the pldce where the will vvds executed. (Article
815 and 17, Civil Code)
14) Pedro (Filipino) and Bill (American) entered

into a contract in Australia, whereby it was agreed
that Pedro will build a commercial building for Bill
in the Philippines, and in payment for the
construction, Bill will transfer and convey his cattle
ranch located in Japan in favor of Pedro. In case
Pedro performs his obligation, but Bill fails or refuses
to pay, what law will govern?
a) American law
b) Philippine law
c) Australian law
d) Japanese law
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Jdpdnese low
(Facts for item numbers 15-18)
In 1989, Chqrice (Filipino) and Justine (Ameri-
can), were married in the Philippines. ln 1990, they
separated and Justine went to Las Vegas where he
obtained a divorce in the same year. He then
married another Filipina, Lea, in Canada on January
1, 1992. They had lwo (2) sons, James and John
(who were both born in 1992). In 1993, after failing
to hear from Justine, Charice married Bugoy (a

Filipino), by whom she had a daughter, Regine. In
2009, Regine married James (son of Justine with
Lea) in California, where such marriage is valid.
15) What is the current status of the marriage of

Charice and Justine under Philippine laws?
a) Valid
b) Void
c) Voidable
d) Dissolved
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Dissolved
16) What is the status of the marriage between
Justine and Lea under Philippine laws?
a) Valid
b) Void
c) Voidable
d) Unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a—VmM
[Note: Justin is a US citizen. Divorce under US
law is valid. Thus, the marriage he contracted with
Led is vd|id.]
122 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW

Charice and Bugoy under Philippine laws?
a) Valid
b) Void
c) Voidable
d) Unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a—VmU
[Notez Since the marriage between Charice
and Justine is considered dissolved by a valid di-
vorce obtained by Justine, the subsequent mar-
riage between Charice and Bugoy is va|id.]
Regine and James under Philippine laws?
a) Valid
b) Void
c) Voidable
d) Unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — Valid
19) Ricky and Princess were sweethearts. Prin-
cess became pregnant. Knowing that Ricky is pre-
paring for the examinations, Marforth, a lawyer and
cousin of Princess, threatened Ricky with the ling
of a complaint for immorality in the Supreme Court,

thus preventing him from taking examinations unless
he marries Princess. As a consequence of the threat,
Ricky married Princess. Can the marriage be
annulled on the ground of intimidation under Article
45 of the Family Code? Choose the best answer.
a) Yes, because without the threat, Ricky

would not have married Princess.
b) Yes, because the threat to enforce the
claim of Princess vitiates the consent of Ricky in
contracting the marriage.
c) No, because the threat made by Marforth is
just and legal.
d) No, because Marforth is not a parly to the
contract of marriage between Princess and Ricky.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - No, because the threat made by Marforth is

just and legal.
20) Audrey, single, bought a parcel of land in

Malolos City from Franco for P lMillion. A contract
was executed between them which already vested
upon Audrey full ownership of the property,
although payable in monthly installments for a
period of four (4) years. One (1) year after the exe-
cution of the contract, Audrey got married to Arnel.
They executed a marriage settlement whereby
they agreed that their properties shall be governed
by the regime of conjugal partnership of gains.
124 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Thereafter, subsequent installments were paid from

the conjugal partnership funds. ls the land conjugal
or paraphernal?
a) The land is conjugal because the installments
were paid from the conjugal partnership funds.
b) The land is paraphernal because ownership
thereof was acquired before the marriage.
c) The land is both conjugal and paraphernal
funds of installments were paid from both the personal
funds of Audrey and the conjugal partnership funds.
d) The land is paraphernal because it was Aud-
rey who purchased the same.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - The /and is paraphernal because ownership

thereof was acquired before the marriage.
2i)Ernesto donated a mobile phone worth
P32,000 to Hubert orally and delivered the unit
to Hubert who accepted. Which statement is most
accurate?
a) The donation is void and Ernesto may get
mobile phone back.
b) The donation is void but Ernesto cannot get
the mobile phone back.
c) The donation is voidable and may be anulled.
d) The donation is valid.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - The donation is void ancl Ernesto may get

mobile phone back.
22) Agay, a Filipino citizen and Topacio, an
Australian citizen, got married in the consular office
of the Philippines in Australia. According to the laws
of Australia, a marriage solemnized by a consular
official is valid, provided that such marriage is
celebrated in accordance with the laws of such
consular official. Under Philippine law, what is the
status of the marriage of Agay and Topacio?
Choose the best answer.
a) Void, because the consular official only has
authority to solemnize marriages between Filipinos.
b) Valid, because according to the laws of
Australia, such consular ofcial has authority to
celebrate the marriage.
c) Voidable, because there is an irregularity in
the authority of the consular official to solemnize
marriages.
d) Valid, because such marriage is recognized
place where it was celebrated.
as valid in the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - Void, because the consular official only has

authority to solemnize marriages between Filipinos.
126 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
23) Separation of property between spouses

during the marriage may take place only:
a) By agreement of the spouses.
b) If one of the spouses has given ground for
legal separation.
c) Upon order of the court.
d) It one spouse has abandoned the other.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - Upon order of the court.

24) The husband may impugn the legitimacy of
his child but not on the ground that:
a) the wife is suspected of indelity.

b) the husband had a serious illness that
prevented him from engaging in sexual intercourse.
c) they were living apart.
d) he is physically incapable of sexual intercourse.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d the wife
— is suspected of infidelity.
25) A marriage is void if:
a) solemnized with a marriage license issued

without complying with the required 10-day posting.
b) solemnized by a minister whom the parties
believe to have the authority.
2012 BAR EXAMINATION ‘I27
c) between parties both 23 years of age but

without parental advice.
d) none of the above
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
cl — None of the obove.

26) In legal separation, which is not correct?
a) The aggrieved spouse may le the action

within ve (5) years from the time of the occurrence
of the cause.
b) No trial shall be held without the 6-month
cooling oft period being observed.
c) The spouses will be entitled to live sepa-
rately upon the start of the trial.
d) The prosecuting attorney has to conduct his
own investigation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - The prosecuting attorney hos to conduct his

own investigotion.
27) A husband by chance discovered hidden
treasure on the pqraphernal property of his wife.
Who owns the discovered treasure?
a) The half pertaining to the husband (nder)

belongs to the conjugal partnership.
b) The half pertaining to the wife (as owner)
belongs to the conjugal partnership.
128 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
c) One half shall belong to the husband as

nder and the other half shall belong to the wife as
owner of the property.
d)aandb
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d) 0 and b
28) Which of the following marriages is void for
reasons of public policy?
a) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the
full or half blood.
b) Between step-parents and step children.
c) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law.
d) b and c
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
cl) b and c
29) The following constitute the different cir-
cumstances or case of fraud which will serve as
ground for the annulment of a marriage, except?
a) Non-disclosure of the previous conviction by
nal judgment of the other party of a crime
involving moral turpitude.
b) Concealment of a sexually-transmissible
disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the time
of the marriage.
c) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual al-

coholism, homosexuality or lesbianism existing at
the time of marriage.
d) Concealment by the wife or the husband of
the fact of sexual relations prior to the marriage.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Concealment by the wife or the husband of

the fact of sexual relations prior to the marriage.
30) Which of the following is not a requisite for
a valid donation propter nuptias?
a) The donation must be made before the
celebration of the marriage.
b) The donation shall be automatically revoked
in case of non-celebration of the marriage.
c) The donation must be made in considera-
tion the marriage.
of
d) The donation must be made in favor of one
or both of the future spouses.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - The donation shall be automatically revoked

in case of non-celebration of the marriage.
31) Who are illegitimate children?
a) Children conceived or born outside a valid

marriage.
130 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
b) Children born under a valid marriage, which

was later declared void because of the psychological
incapacity of either or both of the spouses.
c) Children conceived and born outside a
valid marriage.
d) Children born under a valid marriage, but
the parents later obtained a legal separation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - Children conceived dhd born outside d vd-

/id mdrridge.
32) An illegitimate child may use the surname

of his father when his liation is established in any of
the following instances, except:
a) Filiation has been recognized by the father
through the record of birth appearing in the civil
register.
b) Admission of liation by the father in a
public document.
c) Private handwritten instrument is made by
the father acknowledging his liation.
d) Affidavit by the mother stating the name of
his true father.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Affidavit by the mother stdtihg the ndrne of

his true father.
33) Under RA 8043, an adopter is required to be

at least years old and years older than the
child to be adopted at the time of the
application unless the adopter is the parent by
nature of the child.
a) 30 and 15
b)27andi6
c)50and10
d)18andl5
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b) 27 and I6
34) Under RA 8043, a child qualied to be
adopted is any person below years old.
a) 18
b) 21
c) 15
d) 16
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - l5
35) Which of the following DOES NOT result in
permanent termination of parental authority?
a) Death of the parents.
b) Death of the child.
c) Emancipation of the child.
132 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
d) Conviction of the parents of a crime which

carries with it the penalty of civil interdiction.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a Conviction of the parents of a crime which

-
carries with it the penalty of civil interdiction.
36) The court, in an action led for the purpose,
may suspend parental authority if the parent or the
person exercising parental authority commits any
of the following acts, except:
a) Treats the child with excessive harshness or cruelly.
b) Gives the child corrupting orders, counsel or
example.
c) Compels the child to take up a course in
college against his/her will.
d) Subjects the child or allows him to be
subjected to acts of lasciviousness.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - Compels the child to lake up a course in

college against his/her will.
37) Which of the following statements is wrong?
a) The possessor in bad faith shall reimburse
the fruits received and those which the legitimate
possessor could have received.
b) The possessor in bad faith has right of reim-
bursement for necessary expenses and those for the
production, gathering and preservation of the fruits.
c) The possessor in bad faith is not entitled to a

refund of ornamental expenses.
d) The possessor in bad faith is entitled to a re-
fund of useful expenses.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - The possessor in bad faith is entitled to a re-

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

such expenses have been incurred, provided that
the thing suffers no injury thereby, and that the lawful
possessor does not prefer to retain them.
134 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
39) The following are the limitations on the right

of ownership imposed by the owner himself, except
a) Will/Succession
b) Mortgage
c) Pledge
d) Lease
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
0 — Will/Succession
40) A plenary action for the recovery of the
possession of real estate, upon mere allegation
and proof of a better right thereto, and without
allegation of proof of title. This action can only be
brought after the expiration of one (1) year. What
action is being referred to?
a) Accion publiciana
b) Accion reinvindicatoria
c) Accion interdictal
d) Quieting of Title
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c1 — Accion publiciana
41) Action to recover real property based on
ownership. Here, the object is the recovery of the
dominion over the property as owner. What action
is being referred to?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b — Accion reinvindicatoria
42) A summary action to recover physical or
material possession only and must be brought
within one (1) year from the time the cause of
action arises. What action is being referred to?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — Accion interdictal
43) The following things are property of public
dominion, except:
a) ports and bridges constructed by the State.
b) vehicles and weapons of the Armed Forces
of the Philippines.
c) rivers.
d) lands reclaimed by the state from the sea.
136 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
There is no correct onswer.

[Notez All The choices stated are properties of
public dominion because even if vehicles dnd
wedpons of The Armed Forces are not for public
use, they ore still property of public dominion as
they ore intended Tor some public service. (See
Article 420, Civil Code)]
44) Which of The following statements is wrong?
a) patrimonial property of The state, when no

longer intended for public use or for public service,
shall become property of public dominion.
b) all property of The State, which is not of
public dominion, is patrimonial properly.
c) The property of provinces, cities and munici-
palities is divided into properly for public use and
patrimonial property.
d) Properly is either of public dominion or of
private ownership.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
o potrimoniol property of The sTdTe, when no

-
longer intended for public use or for public service,
shall become property of public dominion.
45) The following cannot ask for The reduction
of inofficious donation, except:
a) Creditors of the deceased
b) Devisees or legatees
c) Compulsory heirs of the donor

d) The surviving spouse of the donee.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - Compulsory heirs of the donor

46) Donation is perfected from the moment --
a) the donee accepts the donation.

b) the donor executes the deed of donation.
c) the donor knows of the donee's accep-
tance even if the latter has not received the copy
of the deed of donation.
d) the donee conrms that the donor has
learned the former’s acceptance.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - the donor knows of the donee's accep-

tance even if the Iotter hos not received the copy
of the deed of dondtion.
47) The following are the elements of an obli-
gation, except:
a) Juridical/Legal Tie
b) Active subject
c) Passive subject
d) Consideration
138 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Consideration
48) It is a conduct that may consist of giving,
doing, or not doing something.
a) Obligation
b) Juridical necessity
c) Prestation
d) Contract
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - prestation
49) It is a juridical relation arising from lawful,
voluntary, and unilateral acts based on the prin-
ciple that no one should unjustly enrich himself at
the expense of another.
a) Quasi-contract
b) Quasi-delict
c) Contract
d) Delict
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
O — Quasi Contract
50) The following are the elements of quasi-
delict, except:
a) Act or omission
b) Fault/negligence
c) Damage/injury
d) Pre-existing contract
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
cl — Pre-existing contract
51) A debtor is liable for damages in case of
delay if he is guilty of any of the following, except:
a) default (mora)
b) mistake
c) negligence (culpa)
d) breach through contravention of the tenor
thereof
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - mistake
52) This term refers to a delay on the part of both
the debtor and creditor in reciprocal obligations.
a) Mora accipiendi
b) Mora solvendi
c) Compensatio morae
d) Solutio indebiti
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — Compensafio morae
140 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
53) The following are the requisites of mora

solvendi, except:
a) Obligation pertains to the debtor and is
determinate, due, demandable, and liquidated.
b) Obligation was performed on its maturity date.
c) There is judicial or extrajudicial demand by
the creditor.
d) Failure of the debtor to comply with such demand.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - Obligation was performed on its maturity date.

54) lt is an intentional evasion of the faithful
performance of the obligation.
a) Negligence
b) Fraud
c) Delay
d) Mistake
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - Fraud
55) The following are the requisites of fortuitous
event, except:
a) Cause is independent of the will of the debtor.
b) The event is unforeseeable/unavoidable.
c) Occurrence renders it absolutely impos-
sible for the debtor to fulll his obligation in a nor-
mal manner; impossibility must be absolute not

partial, otherwise not force majeure.
d) Debtor contributed to the aggravation of
the injury to the creditor.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Debtor contributed to the aggravation of

the injury to the creditor.
56) A debtor may still be held liable for loss or

damages even if it was caused by a fortuitous
event in any of the following instances, except:
a) The debtor is guilty of dolo, malice or bad
faith, has promised the same thing to two or more
persons who do not have the same interest.
b) The debtor contributed to the loss.
c) The thing to be delivered is generic.
d) The creditor is guilty of fraud, negligence or
delay or if he contravened the tenor of the obligation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - The thing to be delivered is generic.

57) Buko, Fermin and Toti bound themselves
solidarity to pay Ayee the amount ofP5,000.00.
Suppose Buko paid the obligation, what is his right
as against his co-debtors?
a) Buko can ask for reimbursement from Fermin
and Toti.
142 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
b) Buko can sue Fermin and Toti for damages.

c) Buko can sue for rescission.
d) Buko can claim a refund from Ayee.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — Buko can ask for reimbursement from

Fermin and Toti.
58) Buko, Fermin and Toti bound themselves so-
lidarily to pay Ayee the sum of P 10,000.00. When the
obligation became due and demandable, Ayee
sued Buko for the payment of the P 10,000.00. Buko
moved to dismiss on the ground that there was failure
to implead Fermin and Toti who are indispensable
parties. Will the motion to dismiss prosper? Why?
a) Yes, because Fermin and Toti should have
been impleaded as their obligation is solidary.
b) No, because the creditor may proceed
against any one of the solidary debtors or some or
all of them simultaneously.
c) No, because a motion to dismiss is a pro-
hibited pleading.
d) Yes, because Fermin and Toti should also
pay their share of the obligation.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - No, because the creditor may proceed

against any one of the solidary debtors or some or
all of them simultaneously.
59) Buko, Fermin and Toti are solidarily debtors

of Ayee. Twelve (12) years after the obligation
became due and demandable, Buko paid Ayee
and later on asked for reimbursement of Fermin's
and Toti's shares. Is Buko correct? Why?
a) No, because the obligation has already
prescribed.
b) Yes, because the obligation is solidary.
c) No, because in solidary obligation any one of
the solidary debtors can pay the entire debt.
d) Yes, because Fermin and Toti will be unduly
enriched at the expense of Buko.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - because the obligation has already prescribed.

60) Buko, Fermin and Toti are solidary debtors
under a loan obligation of P 300,000.00 which has
fallen due. The creditor has, however, condoned
Fermin's entire share in the debt. Since Toti has
become insolvent, the creditor makes a demand
on Buko to pay the debt. How much, if any, may
Buko be compelled to pay?
<1) P 200.000.00
b) P 300,000.00
¢) P 100,000.00
d) P 150,000.00
144 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - P 200.000.00
61) Dina bought a car from Jai and delivered a

check in payment of the same. Has Dina paid the
obligation? Why?
a) No, not yet. The delivery of promissory notes
payable to order, or bills of exchange or other
mercantile documents shall produce the effect of
payment only when they have been cashed, or
when through the fault of the creditor they have
been impaired.
b) Yes, because a check is a valid legal tender
of payment.
c) It depends. If the check is a manager's
check or cashier's check it will produce the effect
of payment. If it’s an ordinary check, no payment.
d) Yes, because a check is as good as cash.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - No, not yet. The delivery of promissory notes

payable to order, or bills of exchange or other mercantile
documents shall produce the effect of payment only
when they have been cashed, or when through the fault
of the creditor they have been impaired.
62) The following are the requisites of legal
compensation, except:
a) That each of the obligors is bound princi-
pally and that he be the same time a principal
creditor of the other.
b) That both debts consist in a sum of money,

or if the things due are consumable, they be the
same kind, and also of the same quality if the latter
has been stated.
c) That the two (2) debts are not yet due.
d) That they be liquidated and demandable.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - That the two (2) debts are not yet due.

63) Which of the following statements is correct?
a) All contracts are perfected by mere consent.

b) All contracts are perfected by delivery of
the object.
c) All contracts are required to be in writing.
d) All contracts are required to have a valid
consideration.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - All contracts are required to nave a valid

consideration.
64) It is a principle which holds that parties are
bound not only by what has been expressly pro-
vided for in the contract but also to the natural
consequences that flow out of such agreement.
a) Obligatory force of contracts
b) Mutuality of contracts
146 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
c) Autonomy of contracts
d) Relativity of contracts
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
0 - Obligatory force of contracts

65) It is a principle which holds that contracts
must be binding to both parties and its validity and
eftectivity can never be left to the will of one of
the parties.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - Mutuality of contracts
66) It refers to the rule that a contract is binding
not only between parties but extends to the heirs,
successors in interest, and assignees of the par-
ties, provided that the contract involved transmissible
rights by their nature, or by stipulation or by law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Relativity of contracts
67) It is rule which holds that the freedom of the
parties to contract includes the freedom to stipulate,
provided the stipulations are not contrary to law,
morals, good customs, public order or public policy.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — Autonomy of contracts
68) The following are the ways by which inno-
minate contracts are regulated, except:
a) By the stipulation of the parties.
b) By the general principles of quasi-contracts
and delicts
c) By the rules governing the most analogous
nominate contracts.
d) By the customs of the place.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - By the general principles of quasi-contracts

oncl delicts
148 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
69) An offer becomes ineffective on any of the

following grounds, except:
a) Death, civil interdiction, insanily/ insolvency
of either party before acceptance is conveyed.
b) Acceptance of the offer by the offeree.
c) Qualied/conditional acceptance of the
offer, which becomes counter-offer.
d) Subject matter becomes illegal/impossible
before acceptance is communicated.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
letter b - Acceptance of the offer by the offeree.

70) Which of the following statements is correct?
a) Offers in interrelated contracts are perfec-

ted upon consent.
b) Offers in interrelated contracts require a
single acceptance.
c) Business advertisements are denite offers
that require specific acceptance.
d) Advertisements for Bidders are only invita-
tions to make proposals and the advertiser is not
bound to accept the highest/lowest bidder, unless
it appears otherwise.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Advertisements for bidders are only invita-

tions to make proposals and the advertiser is not
bound to accept the highest//owest bidder, unless

it appears otherwise.
71) The following are solemn contracts (Con-

tracts which must appear in writing), except:
a) Donations of real estate or of movables if
the value exceeds P 5,000.00.
b) Stipulation to pay interest in loans.
c) Sale of land through an agent (authority
must be in writing).
d) Construction contract of a building.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Construction contract of d building

72) The following are rescissible contracts, except
a) Entered into by guardian whenever ward
suffers damage more than ‘/4 of value of property.
b) Agreed upon in representation of absen-
tees, if absentee suffers lesion by more than ‘/4 of
value of property.
c) Contracts where fraud is committed on cre-
ditor (accionpauliana).
d) Contracts entered into by minors.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — contract entered into by minors

150 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
73) The following are the requisites before a

contract entered into in fraud of creditors may be
rescinded, except:
a) There must be credit existing prior to the ce-
lebration of the contract.
b) There must be fraud, or at least, the intent to
commit fraud to the prejudice of the creditor
seeking rescission.
c) The creditor cannot in any legal manner
collect his credit (subsidiary character of rescission)
d) The object of the contract must be legally in
the possession of a 3rd person in good faith.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — The object of the contract must be legally in

the possession of a 3rd person in good faith.
74) The following are the characteristics of a
voidable contract, except:
a) Effective until set aside.
b) May be assailed/attacked only in an action
for that purpose.
c) Can be conrmed or ratied.
d) Can be assailed only by either pay.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — Can be assailed only by either party.

75) The following are void contracts, except:
a) Pactum commissorium
b) Pactum de non alienando
c) Pactum leonina
d) Pacto de retro
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Pacto cle retro

76) The borrower in a contract of loan or
mutuum must pay interest to the lender.
a) If there is an agreement in writing to the effect.
b) As a matter of course.
c) If the amount borrowed is very large.
d) If the lender so demands at the maturity date.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
0 - If there is an agreement in writing to the effect.

77) The liability of the school, its administrators
and teachers, or the individual, entity or institution
engaged in child care over the minor child or
damage caused by the acts or omissions of the
unemancipated minor while under their super-
vision, instruction or custody shall be:
a) Joint and subsidiary
b) Principal and solidary
T52 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
c) Principal and joint

d) Subsidiary and solidary.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b — Principal and so/iclory

78) The creditor has the right to the fruits of the
thing from the time:
a) the thing is delivered.
b) the obligation to deliver the things arises.
c) the contract is perfected.
d) the fruits are delivered.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b — the obligation to deliver the thing arises.

79) If one of the parties to the contract is
without juridical capacity, the contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - void
80) When both parties to the contract are
minors, the contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - Unenforceable
81) When the consent of one of the parties was
vitiated, the contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a - V0/dable
82) An obligation which is based on equity and
natural law is known as:
a) pure
b) quasi-contract
c) civil
d) natural
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
letter d - Natural
154 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
83) Consent was given by one in representa-

tion of another but without authority. The contract is:
a) voidable
b) rescissible
c) void
d) unenforceable
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
letter cl — unenforceable
84) Michael Fermin, without the authority of
Pascual Lacas, owner of a car, sold the same car in
the name of Mr. Lacas to Atty. Buko. The contract
between Atty. Buko and Mr. Lacas is
a) void because of the absence of consent
from the owner, Mr. Lacas.
b) valid because all of the essential requisites
of a contract are present.
c) unenforceable because Michael Fermin
had no authority but he sold the car in the name of
Mr. Lacas, the owner.
d) rescissible because the contract caused
lesion to Atty. Buko.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c - unenforceable because Michael Fermin had
no authority but he sold the car in the name of /vlr.
Lacas, the owner.
85) Which of the following contracts is void?

a) An oral sale of a parcel of land.
b) A sale of land by an agent in a public instru-
ment where his authority from the principal is oral.
c) A donation of a wrist watch worth P 4,500.00.
d) A relatively simulated contract.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - A sale of lana by an agent in a public instru-

ment where his authority from the principal is oral.
86) Which of the following expresses a correct
principle of law? Choose the best answer.
a) Failure to disclose facts when there is a duty
to reveal them, does not constitute fraud.
b) Violence or intimidation does not render a
contract annullable if employed not by a contrac-
ting party but by a third person.
c) A threat to enforce one’s claim through
competent authority, if the claim is legal or just,
does not vitiate consent.
d) Absolute simulation of a contract always
or void contract.
results in
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
cl - Absolute simulation of a contract always

results in a void contract.
156 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
87) Aligada orally offered to sell his two-hec-

tare rice land to Balane for PTO Million. The offer
was orally accepted. By agreement, the land was
to be delivered (through execution of a notarized
Deed of Sale) and the price was to be paid exactly
one-month from their oral agreement. Which
statement is most accurate?
a) If Aligada refuses to deliver the land on the
agreed date despite payment by Balane, the latter
may not successfully sue Aligada because the
contract is oral.
b) If Aligada refused to deliver the land, Balane
may successfully sue for fulllment of the obligation
even if he has not tendered payment of the
purchase price.
c) The contract between the parties is rescissible.
d) The contract between the parties is subject
to ratification by the parties.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - The contract between the parties is subject

to ratification by the parties.
88) Which of the following statements is wrong?
a) Creditors are protected in cases of contracts
intended to defraud them.
b) Contracts take effect only between the
parties, their assign and heirs, except in case where
the rights and obligations arising from the contract
are not transmissible by their nature, or by stipulation

or by provision of law.
c) If a contract should contain some stipulation
in favor of a third person, he may demand its tul-
llment provided he communicated his accep-
tance to the obligor before its revocation.
d) In contracts creating real rights, third per-
sons who come into possession of the object of the
contract are not bound thereby.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d - In contracts creating real rights, third per-

sons who come into possession of the object of the
contract are not bound thereby.
the statement - Any third person who induces
another to violate his contract:
a) shall be liable for damages only if he is a
party to the same contract.
b) shall be liable for damages to the other
contracting party.
c) shall not be liable for damages to the other
contracting party.
d) shall not be liable for damages if the parties
are in pari delicto.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b- shall be liable for damages to the other con-

tracting party.
‘I58 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
90) The requisites of succession cre as follows, except:

a) Death of decedent
b) Transmissible estate
c) Existence and capacity of successor, desig-
nated by decedent or law
d) Payment of Taxes
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
cl — payment of taxes
9T)The characteristics of succession are as
follows, except:
a) It is a legal contract.
b) Only property, rights and obligations to the
extent of the value of the inheritance are transmitted.
c) The transmission takes place only at the time
of death.
d) The transmission takes place either by will or
by operation of law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
0 - it is 0 /ego! contract
92) The following rights are extinguished by
death, except:
a) Legal support
b) Parental authority
c) Right to inherit
d) Agency
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — right to inherit
93) The attestation clause contains the follo-
wing, except:
a) the number of pages used;
b) that the testator signed or caused another
to sign the will and every page thereof in the pre-
sence of the instrumental witnesses;
c) notary public;
d) the instrumental witnesses witnessed and
signed the will and all the pages thereof in the pre-
sence of the testator and one another.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c — notary public
94) The following are the formalities required in
the execution of holographic will, except:
a) Entirely written;
b) Dated;
c) Signed by testator himself
d) Notarized by a notary public.
160 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — Notarized by a notary public

95) The following are the grounds for disallowance
of wills, except:
a) The formalities required by law have not
been complied with.
b) The testator was insane or mentally inca-
pable of making will.
c) The will was executed through force or un-
der duress, or influence of fear or threats.
d) The will contains an attestation clause.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a — The will contains an attestation clause.

96) It is the omission in the testator's will of one,
some or all of the compulsory heirs in direct line,
whether living at the time of execution of the will or
born after the death of the testator. What principle
is being referred to?
a) reserva troncal
b) preterition
c) deicommissary
d) disposicion captatoria
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b — preterition
97) Any disposition made upon the condition

that the heir shall make some provision in his will in
favor of the testator or of any other person shall be
void. Here, both the condition and the disposition
are void. What principle is being referred to?
a) reserva troncal
b) preterition
c) deicommissary
d) disposicion captatoria
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
d — disposicion captatoria
the statement — If at the time the contract of sale is
perfected, the thing which is the object of the
contract has been entirely lost:
a) the buyer bears the risk of loss.
b) the contract shall be without any effect.
c) the seller bears the risk of loss.
d) the buyer may withdraw from the contract.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b — the contract shall be without effect

99) A contract granting a privilege to a person,
for which he has paid a consideration, which gives
him the right to buy certain merchandise or
specied property, from another person, at anytime
162 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
within the agreed period, at a xed price. What

contract is being referred to?
a) Option Contract
b) Contract to Sell
c) Contract of Sale
d) Lease
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Ci — option controct
100) Which of the following contracts of sale is
void?
a) Sale of EGM's car by KRP, EGM's agent,
whose authority is not reduced into writing.
b) Sale of EGM’s piece of land by KRP, EGM’s
agent, whose authority is not reduced into writing.
c) Sale of EGM's car by KRP, a person stranger
to EGM, without EGM's consent or authority.
d) Sale of EGM's piece of land by KRP, a person
stranger to EGM, without EGM’s consent or authority.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
b - Sole of EG/v1’s piece of Ionci by KRP, EGM's

ogent, whose outnority is not reduced into writing.
SET B
ESSAY — TYPE QUESTIONS
I.
a) Roberto was in Nikko Hotel when he

bumped into a friend who was then on her way to a
wedding reception being held in said hotel.
Roberto alleged that he was then invited by his
friend to join her at the wedding reception and
carried the basket full of fruits which she was
bringing to the affair. At the reception, the wedding
coordinator of the hotel noticed him and asked
him, allegedly in a loud voice, to leave as he was
not in the guest list. He retorted that he had been
invited to the affair by his friend, who however
denied doing so. Deeply embarrassed by the
incident, Roberto then sued the hotel for damages
under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code. Will
Roberto’s action prosper? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Roberto’s action will not prosper. To give

rise to a cause of action under Articles i9 of the
Civil Code, it is necessary that there must be a legal
right or duty which is exercised in bad faith for the
sole intent of prejudicing another. On the other
hand, under Article 2i one is liable for damages if
he wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a
manner which is contrary to morals, good customs
or public policy. Based on the facts, bad faith
cannot be assumed on the part of the hotel
164 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
because iT had basis To deny enTry To The recepfion

To one who is noT in The guesT lisT. Secondly, The acT
of denying enfry cannof be considered confrary To
rnorals, good cusTonns or public policy or ThaT The
hoTel wilfully caused Roberio loss or injury. On The
confrary, RoberTo was The one who appears To
have acTed in bad faiTh since he wilfully enTered
The recepfion of The wedding knowing Thai he is
noT one of The invifed guesTs. Thus, RoberTo’s acTion
rnusT fail.
b) Ricky donafed P 1 Million To The unborn child

of his pregnanf girlfriend, which she accepfed. Aer
six (6) monThs of pregnancy, The fefus was born and
baptized as Angela. However, Angela died 20
hours after birfh. Ricky soughT To recover The P 1
Million. ls Ricky enTiTled To recover? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Ricky enTiTled To recover The Pi Million.

is
The law requires ThaT if a fefus had an inTra-uTerine
life of less Than seven (7) monThs if should live for
Twenfy-Tour hours from iTs compleie delivery from
The moTher‘s womb for iT To acquire civil personaliTy.
ln This case, Angela had an inTra-uTerine life of only
six monThs buT did noT survive for TwenTy—four hours,
Thus, she is noT considered or person. Being such, she
had no juridical capacify To be a donee and The
donaTion To her did noT Take effecf. Therefore, The
Pl M musi be refurned To Ricky.
a) Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then the Com-

missioner of Internal Revenue while Fortune Tobacco
Corporation is an entity engaged in the manufacture
of different brands of cigarettes, among which are
"Champion," "Hope," and "More" cigarettes.
Fortune led a complaint against Vinzons-
Chato to recover damages for the alleged violation
of its constitutional rights arising from Vinzons-
Chato's issuance of Revenue Memorandum Circular
No. 37-934 (which re-classied Fortune cigarettes
as locally manufactured with foreign brands and
thereby imposed higher taxes), which the Supreme
Court later declared invalid.
Vinzons-Chato led a Motion to Dismiss arguing
that she cannot be held liable for damages for acts
she performed while in the discharge of her duties
as BIR Commissioner. ls she correct? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, she is correct. ln a case decided by the

Supreme Court, it held that public officers cannot
be held liable for damages for acts performed
while in the discharge of their duties unless the pub-
lic officer acted with malice, bad faith, or gross
negligence in the performance of his/her duty, or
when his act is in violation of the constitutionally-
guaranteed rights and liberties of a person. In the
problem given, there is nothing from which it can
be deduced that Commissioner Vinzons-Chato
166 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
acted with malice, bad faith or gross negligence.

Fortune merely made a general allegation of the
supposed violation of its constitutional rights without
stating that it suffered injury as a result of the
Memorandum issued by the Commissioner. To give
rise to a cause of action, there must be both a right
of action for a legal wrong committed by the
defendant. Therefore, the motion to dismiss must
be granted (Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune Tobacco,
GR. No. i4l309, December 23, 2008).
b) The petitioner led a petition for declaration
of nullity of marriage based allegedly on the
psychological incapacity of the respondent, but the
psychologist was not able to personally examine the
respondent and the psychological report was based
only on the narration of petitioner. Should the
annulment be granted? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the annulment must be denied. ln petitions

for declaration of nullity based on Article 36,
jurisprudence instructs that the psychologist must
conduct a personal and independent assessment
of the person alleged to be psychologically
incapacitated. ln this case, the psychological
report was solely based on petitioner‘s narration
who has an interest on the positive outcome of the
case in his favor (Marcos v. Marcos, GR. No.
136490, October l9, 2000, 343 SCRA 755).
a) Maria, wife of Pedro, wiThdrewP5 Million from

Theirconjugal funds. WrTh This money, she consirucied
a building on a loT which she inheriied from her
faiher. ls The building conjugal or paraphernal?
Reasons. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
On The assumpiion ThaT The parlies are governed

by The regime of conjugal partnership of gains, The
answer would depend on wheiher The cosT of The
building is more Than Thai of The land. Based on
Ariicle T20 of The Family Code if an improvemenT is
iniroduced on The exclusive properTy belonging To
one of The spouses using conjugal funds, The enTire
properTy (building and The land) shall belong To The
conjugal properTy if The cosl of The improvemenl and
The resuliing increase in The value of The properTy are
more Than The value of The properTy aT The Time of
The improvemenT subjeci To The obligaiion of The
conjugal parlnership To reimburse The owner spouse
The value of his or her exclusive properTy. If The cosT
of The improvemenT wiih The use of The conjugal fund
is less Than The value of The exclusive properly of The
spouse, Then The laTTer owns The enTire properly buT
he or she shall be obligaiecl To reimburse The
conjugal parinership aT The Time The liauidaiion
Thereof. The TacTs did noT menTion The value of The
exclusive properTy of Maria. Hence, The aToresTaTed
rule shall apply in The deTerminaTion of The issue of
wheiher The building is conjugal or paraphernal.
168 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
b) Cipriano and Lady Miros married each

other. Lady Miros then left for the US and there, she
obtained American citizenship. Cipriano later
learned all about this including the fact that Lady
Miros has divorced him in America and that she
had remarried there. He then filed a petition for
authority to remarry, invoking Par. 2, Art. 26 of the
Family Code. ls Cipriano capacitated to re-marry
by virtue of the divorce decree obtained by his
Filipino spouse who was later naturalized as an
American citizen? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes,Cipriano is capacitated to re-marry. In the

case of Republic v. Orbecido (G.R. No. 154380,
October 5, 2005), the Supreme Court had the
occasion to rule that even if the parties are both
Filipinos at the time of the celebration of the
marriage, Article 26 of the Family Code will apply
so as to capacitate the Filipino spouse to remarry
provided that the divorce was obtained by the
other spouse at a time when he or she is no longer
a Filipino citizen. The reckoning point for the
determination of the applicability of Article 26 is not
the citizenship of the parties at the time of the
celebration of the marriage but their citizenship at
the time that the divorce is obtained by the other
spouse. In the instant case, Lady Miros was already
a US citizen when she obtained divorce from
Cipriano which capacitated her to remarry and
that she did in tact remarry. Therefore, Cipriano is
capacitated to remarry.
IV.
a) After they got married, Nikki discovered that

Christian was having an affair with another woman.
But Nikki decided to give it a try and lived with him
for two (2) years. After two (2) years, Nikki led an
action for legal separation on the ground of
Christian’s sexual indelity. Will the action prosper?
Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the action will not prosper on the ground of

condonation. While it is true that an action for legal
separation may be filed within five years from the
occurrence of the cause, the same must fail it the
offended spouse has condoned the marital offense.
In the instant case, Nikki already had knowledge of
the infidelity of Christian and yet she continued to
live with him two years. The act of Nikki in cohabiting
with Christian despite knowledge of his infidelity
constitutes condonation and should bar an action
for legal separation (Bugayong v. G/'nes GR. No. L-
lOO33 December 28, i956).
b) Honorato led a petition to adopt his minor

illegitimate child Stephanie, alleging that Stepha-
nie’s mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia; that Ste-
phanie has been using her mother’s middle name
and surname; and that he is now a widower and
qualied to be her adopting parent. He prayed that
Stephanie's middle name be changed from
"Astorga“ to "Garcia," which is her mother’s surname
and that her surname "Garcia" be changed to
"Catindig," which is his surname. This the trial court
‘I70 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
denied. Was The courT correcT in denying

Trial
HonoraTo's requesT for STephanie’s use of her moTher’s
surname as her middle name? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The Trial courT was noT correcT in denying

HonoraTo’s prayer. The Supreme CourT had The
occasion To rule in one case ThaT while There is no
law reguldiing The use of a middle name and The
law is also silenl as To whaT middle name an adop-
Tee may use. However, IT is o recognized The Filipino
cuslom of adding The surname of The child's
moTher as his middle name. Being d legiTimaTe
child by virTue of her adopTion, iT follows ThdT
Slephonie is enTiTled To all The righTs provided by
low To a legiTimaTe child wiThouT discrimlnaiion of
any kind, including The righT To bear The surname of
her foiher and her molher. Thus, The prayer of
Honoraio ThdT Siephanie be allowed To use Garcia
which is her moTher‘s surname, as her middle name
should noT have been denied by The Trial courT. (IN
ADOPTION OF STEPHANIE NATHY
THE MATTER OF THE
ASTORGA GARCIA, GR. No. I483] l. March 3i, 2005).
V.
a) Spouses Primo and Monina Lim, childless,

were enTrusTed wiTh The cusTody of Two (2) minor
children, The parenTs of whom were unknown.
Eager of having children of Their own, The spouses
made iT appear ThaT They were The children's parenTs
by naming Them Michelle P. Lim and Michael Jude
Lim. SubsequenTly, Monina married Angel Olario
afTer Primo’s deaTh.
She decided to adopt the children by availing

the amnesty given under R.A. 8552 to those
individuals who simulated the birth of a child. She
led separate petitions for the adoption of Michelle,
then 25 years old and Michael, 18. Both Michelle
and Michael gave consent to the adoption.
The trial court dismissed the petition and ruled
that Monina should have led the petition jointly
with her new husband. Monina, in a Motion for
Reconsideration argues that mere consent of her
husband would suffice and thatjoint adoption is not
needed, for the adoptees are already emancipated.
ls the trial court correct in dismissing the pe-
titions for adoption? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the trial court is correct in dismissing the

petitions for adoption. The Domestic Adoption Act
requires both husband and wife to jointly file the
petition for adoption unless the circumstances fall
under the enumerated exceptions since the adoptees
are not the illegitimate children of Monina and
neither are they legitimate children of Monina‘s
husband. Thus, the adoption ot Michelle and
Michael does not appear to be under the
exceptions mentioned in the law which would
permit only one of the spouses to file the petition.
ln the present case, Monina already remarried at
the time she tiled the petition tor adoption, thus, her
contention that her husband's consent is enough
must fail because the law specifically requires both
172 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
husband and wife to jointly adopt (ln Re Petition for

Adoption of Michelle P. Lim and Michael P. Lim,
GR. Nos. 168992-93 May 21, 2009).
b) Jambrich, an Austrian, fell in-love and lived
together with Descallar and bought their houses and
lots at Agro-Macro Subdivision. ln the Contracts to
Sell, Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as the
buyers. When the Deed of Absolute Sale was
presented for registration before the Register of
Deeds, it was refused because Jambrich was an
alien and could not acquire alienable lands of
the public domain. After Jambrich and Descallar
separated, Jambrich purchased an engine and
some accessories for his boat from Borromeo. To
pay for his debt, he sold his rights and interests in the
Agro-Macro properties to Borromeo.
Borromeo discovered that titles to the three (3)
lots have been transferred in the name of Descallar.
Who is the rightful owner of the properties? Explain.
(5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Borromeo and Descallar own the lots in equal

shares. This is based on the assumption that Jambrich
and Descallar were capacitated to marry each
other under the Family Code. Their property relations
shall be governed by co-ownership (Art. l47). In such
case, all the properties in question acquired by
Jambrich using his salaries or wages, or the income
from his business or profession are equally owned by
them even if Descallar’s contributed consisted merely
in the care and maintenance of the household.
While iT is True ThaT save in cases of heredilary succes-

sion, aliens are consTiTuTionally prohibiTed from ow-
ning lands, ThaT deTecT was cured when Jambrich
Transferred his shares in Agro-Macro Subdivision To
Borromeo, a Filipino, Thus making The laTTer and
Descallar The owners Thereof. (Anchefa v. Dalaygon,
GR. No. T39868 June 8, 2006)
VI.
a) Siga-an granTed a loan To Villanueva in The

amounT of P 540, 000.00. Such agreemenf was noT
reduced To wriTing. Siga-an demanded inTeresT
which was paid by Villanueva in cash and checks.
The ToTal amounT Villanueva paid accumulated
To P 1, 200, 000.00. Upon advice of her lawyer, Villanueva
demanded for The reTurn of The excess amount of P 660,
000.00 which was ignored by Siga-an.
1) ls The paymenl of inTeresT valid? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The baymenl of inTeresT in invalid. The law

slates Thai no inTeresT shall be due unless iT has
been expressly siipulaled in wriling (Ari. T956, New
Civil Code) Hence, Villanueva is enTiTled To recover
TheinTeresTs baid since iT cannoi legally be
demanded by Siga-an under an oral conTracT of
loan (Siga-an v. Villanueva, GR. No. 173227
January 20,2009).
‘I74 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
2) ls soluTio indebiTi applicable? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, soluTio indebiTi is applicable because The

overpaid inTeresT of P660,000 is noT due. The law
provides when someThing is received when There is
no righi To demand iT, and iT was unduly delivered
Through misTake, The obligaon To reTurn IT arises
(ArTicle 2154, Civil Code) Since The inTeresT was noT
validly reduced inTo wriTing, Siga-an had no righi
To receive ii.
b) Eulalia was engaged in The business of

buying and selling large caTTle. ln order To secure
The nancial capiTal, she advanced for her emplo-
yees(biyaheros). She required Them To surrender
TCT of Their properTies and To execuTe The cor-
responding Deeds of Sale in her favor. Domeng
Bandong was noT required To posT any securiTy buT
when Eulalia discovered ThaT he incurred shorTage
in caTTle procuremenT operaTion, he was required To
execuTe a Deed of Sale over a parcel of land in
favor of Eulalia. She sold The properTy To her
grandniece Jocelyn who Thereaer insTiTuTed an
acTion for ejecTmenT againsT The Spouses Bandong.
Bandong led an
To asserT Their righT, spouses
action for annulment of sale againsT Eulalia and
Jocelyn alleging ThaT There was no sale inTended
buT only equiTab|e morTgage for The purpose of
securing The shorTage incurred by Domeng in The
amounT ofP70, 000.00 while employed as "biya
hero“ by Eulalia. Was The Deed of Sale beTween
Domeng and Eulalia a contract of sale or an

equitable mortgage? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The Deed of Sale executed between Domeng

and Eulalia was not really a contract of sale but
merely an equitable mortgage. The Civil Code
provides that the contract shall be presumed to be
an equitable mortgage when it may be fairly
interred that the real intention of the parties is simply
to secure the payment of a debt or the
performance at an obligation (Article i602). In the
given problem, it is clear that the contract was
executed to secure the shortage incurred by
Domeng in the amount of P70,000.00 while em-
ployed as “biyahero” by Eulalia.
Vll.
a) Natividad’s holographic will, which had only

one (l) substantial provision, as first written, named
Rosa as her sole heir. However, when Gregorio
presented it for probate, it already contained an
alteration, naming Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as
sole heir, but without authentication by Natividad’s
signature. Rosa opposes the probate alleging such
lack of proper authentication. She claims that the
unaltered form of the will should be given effect.
Whose claim should be granted? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
On the assumption that it was Natividad who

erased Rosa's name and wrote Gregorio’s name,
176 BAR Q 8- A
CIVIL LAW
neither of the parties’ claim should be granted. In

The landmark case of Kalaw v. Relova, (GR. No. L-
40207, September 28, i984), the Supreme Court
ruled that when a number of erasures, corrections,
and interlineations are made by the testator in a
holographic will had not been noted under his
signature, the will is not Thereby invalidated as a
whole, but at most only as respects The particular
words erased, corrected or inTerlined. However, it
There is only one substantial provision in The
holographic will which was altered without The
authentication by The tesTaTrix’s signature, The
whole will is voided as nothing remains in The will
after that which could remain valid. Rosa's claim
that The original version of The will should be given
effect is without merit because The Testatrix had an
apparent change of mind when she erased The
name ot Rosa. Hence, both Rosa and Gregorio‘s
claim should be denied and The estate should be
distributed intestate.
b) John Sagun and Maria Carla Camua, British
citizens at birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by
naturalization after their marriage. During their
marriage, the couple acquired substantial land-
holdings in London and in Makati. Maria begot
three (3) children, Jorge, Luisito, and Joshur. In one
of their trips to London, the couple executed a joint
will appointing each other as their heirs and
providing that upon the death of the survivor
between them, the entire estate would go to Jorge
and Luisito only but the two (2) could not dispose of
nor divide the London estate as long as they live.
John and Maria died tragically in the London
subway terrorist attack in 2005. Jorge and Luisito

led a petition for probate of their parents’ will
before a Makati Regional Trial Court. Joshur vehemently
objected because he was preterited.
1) Should the will be admitted to probate?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the will should not be admitted to probate.

Since both John and Maria are Filipino citizens at
the time of the execution of theirjoint will, the same
is void under Article 818 and 819 of the Civil Code
which provides that two or more persons cannot
make a will jointly, or in the same instrument and
that joint wills executed by Filipinos in a foreign
country shall not be valid in the Philippines even
if allowed in the country where it may have
been executed.
2) Are the testamentary dispositions valid?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the testamentary dispositions in a void will

are likewise void. Assuming that the will is extrinsically
valid, the testamentary dispositions shall be without
effect because of the preterition of Joshur in the will.
Joshur is a compulsory heir in the direct line of John
and Maria and his omission in the will shall annul the
institution of heirs, except legacies and devisees
which are not inotficious.
178 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
3) ls the testamentary prohibition against the

division of the London estate valid? Explain. (1%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As above stated, the joint will is void, ergo,

testamentary provisions including the prohibition
against the division of the London estate would be
rendered void. But on the assumption that the will is
valid, the prohibition against the division should not
last longer than twenty (20) years (Articles i083 and
494, New Civil Code).
Vlll.
a) Ricky and Arlene are married. They begot

Franco during their marriage. Franco had an illicit
relationship with Audrey and out of which, they
begot Arnel. Franco predeceased Ricky, Arlene
and Arnel. Before Ricky died, he executed a will
which when submitted to probate was opposed by
Arnel on the ground that he should be given the
share of his father, Franco. ls the opposition of Arnel
correct? Why? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the opposition is incorrect. Since Franco is

a legitimate child of Ricky and Arlene, he can only
be represented by his own legitimate child. While
Franco is a legal heir of Ricky and Arlene, Arnel on
the other hand is not. Under the law, an illegitimate
child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the
legitimate children and relatives of his father or
mother. From the facts given, Arnel is the illegitimate

child of Franco, therefore he cannot inherit
Franco’s share from Ricky by right of representation.
b) How can RJP distribute his estate by will, if
his heirs are JCP, his wife; HBR and RVC, his parents;
and an illegitimate child, SGO?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
RJP may distribute his estate as follows:

His wife JCP gets i/8 of his estate
His parents, HBR and RVC gets l/2 of his estate
His illegitimate son, SGO gets l/4 of his estate
The remaining l/8 shall be the free portion of
his estate
IX.
a) Does the right to request for the issuance of

a writ of possession over a foreclosed real property
prescribe in ve (5) years? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the request for the issuance of a writ of

possession over ci foreclosed real property pres-
cribes in five (5) years after judgment of foreclosure.
Although a mortgage action prescribes after ten
(l0) years (Article H42, Civil Code), once a favorable
judgment is issued ordering foreclosure is obtained
and the property is thereafter sold, the purchaser
180 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
musT reauesT for The issuance of The wriT of

possession wilhin five years. The former is governed
by The prescripTion of acTions under The Civil Code,
while The laTTer is governed by The Rules of Courl.
b) A peTiTion for dec|araTion of nullily of a void
marriage can only be filed by eiTher The husband or
The wife? Do you agree? Explain your answer. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, do noT agree. The rule ThaT a peTiTion To

I
declare a marriage void can only be filed by The

husband on The wife will noT apply To cases of
bigamous marriage conTracTed by eiTher of The
parTies. The legal spouse has sTanding To auesTion a
subseauenT bigamous marriage conTracTed by The
oTher spouse. (Juliano-l_Iave v. Republic, G.R. No.
169766, 30 March 2011)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, agree. Under The rules promulgaTed by

l
The Supreme CourT a peTiTion for declaraTion of

nulliTy of a void marriage may be filed solely by The
husband or The wife (A.M. No. O2-i i-TO-SC).
X.
a) A conTracT To sell is The same as a conditio-

nal conTracT of sale. Do you agree? Explain your
answer. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, do not dgree. A contrdct to sell is d bila-

I
teral contrdct; whereby the prospective seller ex-

pressly reserves ownership of the subject property,
despite delivery binds himself to sell the property to
the prospective buyer upon fulfillment by the lotter
of the positive suspensive condition which is usudlly
the full pdyment of the purchdse price. In d
conditiondl sdle, the seller mdy likewise reserve title
until the fulfillment of the suspensive condition.
However, in d conditiondl sole, the consent to trdn-
sfer ownership to the vendee is present, dlthough
conditioned upon the happening of d contingent
event which mdy or mdy not occur. If the suspensive
condition is fulfilled, dnd there WClS prior delivery of
the object to the vendee, ownership thereto
outomdticdlly transfers to the buyer by operdtion of
ldw without dny further oct hdving to be performed
by the seller. In contrdst, in d contrdct to sell, upon
the fulfillment of the suspensive condition which is
the full pdyment of the purchdse price, ownership
will not dutomdticdlly trdnsfer to the buyer, oilthough
the property mdy hdve been previously delivered to
him. The prospective seller still has to convey title to
the prospective buyer by entering into d contrdct of
dbsolute sole (Nobus v. Pocson, GR. No. l6l3l8 No-
vember 25, 2009).
b) A partner cannot demand the return of his
share (contribution) during the existence of a part-
nership. Do you agree? Explain your answer. (5%)
182 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, agree. A partner cannot demand the

l
return of his capital contribution during the exis-

tence of a partnership. However, a limited partner
may demand for a return of his contribution
provided all liabilities of the partnership to third
persons (not partners) have been paid and the
consent of all members is had (Article 1856 and
1857, New Civil Code).
(MULTIPLE CHOICE)
la
Armand died intestate. His full-blood brothers,

Bobby and Conrad, and half-blood brothers, Danny,
Edward and Floro, all predeceased him. The following
are the surviving relatives:
1. Benny and Bonnie, legitimate children of Bobby;
2. Cesar, legitimate child of Conrad;
3. Dante, illegitimate child of Danny;
4. Ernie, adopted child of Edward; and
5. Felix, grandson of Floro.
The net value of Armand's estate is Pl,200,000.
l.(l) How much do Benny and Bonnie stand to

inherit by right of representation? (1%)
(A) P200,000
(B) P300,000
(C) P400,000
(D) P150,000
(E) None of the above.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
E - None of the above — Since all brothers of

Armand predeceased him, the nephews inherit in
l83
184 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
their own right or per capita under Article 975 and

not by right ot representation.
1.(2) How much is Dante's share in the net
estate? (1%)
(A) P150,000.
(B) P200,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P400,000.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
E- None of the above - Dante will not inherit

because he is an illegitimate child of a legitimate
halt-brother ot Armand, thus, the barrier applies. An
illegitimate child has no right to inherit ob intestoto
from the legitimate relatives of his father or mother.
(Article 992, Civil Code)
1.(3) How much is Ernie's share in the net
estate? (1%)
(A) P 0.
(B) P400,000.
(C) P150,000.
(D) P200,000.
(E) None of the above
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A — P 0- Ernie will noT inheriT because being an

adopTed child of Edward, he cannoT inheriT from The
relaTives of The laTTer as The adopTion creales only a
relaTionship beTween adopTer and adopTed (Sayson
v. Courl of Appeals, GR. No. 89224-25, January 23,
1992).
1.(4) How much is Fe|ix's share in The neT

esToTe? (1%)
(A) P400,000.
(B) P150,000.
(C) P300,000.
(D) P O.
(E) None of The above.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
D —PO- Felix is noT enTiTled To inheriT because of

The rule of proximiTy, The presence of nephews of
Armand excludes him because he is a grand-
nephew. He also cannoT represenT Floro because in
The collaTeral line, represenTaTion is limiTed To chil-
dren of brolhers or sisTers of The deceased. Felix
here is noT Cl son buT a grandson of Floro.
A, B, C and D are The solidary debTors of X for

P40,000. X released D from The paymenT of his share
of P|0,000. When The obligc|Tion became due and
demandable, C Turned ouT To be inso|venT.
186 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Should the share of insolvent debtor C be

divided only between the two other remaining
debtors, A and B? (1%)
(A) Yes. Remission of D's share carries with it
total extinguishment of his obligation to the benet
of the solidary debtors.
(B) Yes. The Civil Code recognizes remission as
a mode of extinguishing an obligation. This clearly
applies to D.
(C) No. The rule is that gratuitous acts should
be restrictively construed, allowing only the least
transmission of rights.
(D) No, as the release of the share of one
debtor would then increase the burden of the other
debtors without their consent.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
D. No, as the release of the share of one

debtor would then increase the burden of the
other debtors without their consent. — Under Art.
i2l7, when one of the solidary debtors cannot be-
cause oi his insolvency reimburse his share to the
debtor paying, such share shall be borne by all his
co-debtors in proportion to the debt of each. The
remission made by X ot the share of D only
operates to discharge him from paying his part of
the obligation but does not affect the nature of the
solidary nature of the obligation. Hence, D shall still
be liable together with A and B for the share ot the
insolvent solidary debtor C.
Amador obtained a loan of P300,000 from

Basilio payable on March 25, 2012. As security for
the payment of his loan, Amador constituted a
mortgage on his residential house and lot in Ba-
silio's favor. Cacho, a good friend of Amador, gua-
ranteed and obligated himself to pay Basilio, in
case Amador fails to pay his loan at maturity.
lll.(l) If Amador fails to pay Basilio his loan on
March 25, 2012, can Basilio compel Cacho to pay?
(1%)
(A) No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay
because as guarantor, Cacho can invoke the
principle of excussion, i.e., all the assets of Basilio
must rst be exhausted.
(B) No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay
because Basilio has not exhausted the available
remedies against Amador.
(C) Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho to pay be-
cause the nature of Cacho's undertaking indicates
that he has bound himself solidarily with Amador.
(D) Yes, Basilio can compel Cacho who bound
himself to unconditionally pay in case Amador fails
to pay; thus the benet of excusslon will not apply.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Basilio cannot compel Cacho to pay

B.
because Basilio has not exhausted the available
remedies against Amador. — Basilio has in his favor
a REM and he should exhaust his legal remedies
188 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
against Amador. The liability assumed by Cacho for

the obligation of Amador is only that of a
guarantor. As such, Cacho is entitled to the benefit
of excussion (Art. 2058).
lll. (2) If Amador sells his residential house and
lot to Diego, can Basilio foreclose the real estate
mortgage? (1%)
(A) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
mortgage because real estate mortgage creates a
real right that attaches to the property.
(B) Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate
mortgage. It is binding upon Diego as the mort-
gage is embodied in a public instrument.
(C) No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate
mortgage. The sale confers ownership on the
buyer, Diego, who must therefore consent.
(D) No, Basilio cannot foreclose the real estate
mortgage. To deprive the new owner of ownership
and possession is unjust and inequitable.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. Yes, Basilio can foreclose the real estate

mortgage because real estate mortgage creates a
real right that attaches to the property. —Art. 2126
The mortgage directly and immediately subjects
the property upon which it is imposed, whoever the
possessor may be to the fulfillment of the obligation
for whose security it was constituted. (Note: This
answer is based on the assumption that the
mortgage was registered)
IV.
Cruz lent Jose his car until Jose nished his Bar
exams. Soon after Cruz delivered the car, Jose
brought it to Mitsubishi Cubao for maintenance
check up and incurred costs of P8,000. Seeing the
car's peeling and faded paint, Jose also had the
car repainted for Pl0,000. Answer the two questions
below based on these common facts.
IV. (I) After the bar exams, Cruz asked for the
return of his car. Jose said he would return it as
soon as Cruz has reimbursed him for the car
maintenance and repainting costs of P 18,000. ls
Jose's refusal justied? (1%)
(A) No, Jose's refusal is not justied. In this kind of
contract, Jose is obliged to pay for all the expenses
incurred for the preservation of the thing loaned.
(B) Yes, Jose's refusal is justied. He is obliged
to pay for all the ordinary and extraordinary
expenses, but subject to reimbursement from Cruz.
(C) Yes, Jose's refusal is justied. The principle of
unjust enrichment warrants the reimbursement of
Jose's expenses.
(D) No, Jose's refusal is not justied. The ex-
penses he incurred are useful for the preservation
of the thing loaned. It is Jose's obligation to
shoulder these useful expenses.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
There is no correct cho/'ce— In commodatum,

the bailee has no right of retention Article I944. The
190 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
bailee (Jose) has no righf of refenfion even if if may

be by reason of expenses, and uncler Arficle l95l,
The boilee can only refoin The Thing if he suffers
damage by reason of o flow or defecf in The Thing
which was known To The boilor oncl noT communicofeol
To The bailee.
connof be The correcT answer be-

(NoTe: D
cause repoinfing The cor is noT considered on
ordinary expense for preservofion.)
lV.(2) During The bar exam monTh, Jose lenT The
car To hisgirlfriend, Jolie, who parked The car aT The
Mall of Asia's open parking loT, wiTh The ignifion key
inside The car. Car Thieves broke inTo and Took The
car. ls Jose liable To Cruz for The loss of The car due
To Jolie's negligence? (1%)
(A) No, Jose is noT liable To Cruz as The loss was

noT due To his faulT or negligence.
(B) No, Jose is noT liable To Cruz. In The ab-
sence of any prohibifion, Jose could lend The car To
Jolie. Since The loss was due To force majeure,
neiTher Jose nor Jolie is liable.
(C) Yes, Jose is liable To Cruz. Since Jose lenT
The car To Jolie wiThouT Cruz's consenT, Jose musf
bear The consequenf loss of The car.
(D) Yes, Jose is liable To Cruz. The conTracT bef-
ween Them is personal in naTure. Jose can neiTher
lend nor lease The car To a Third person.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
D. Yes, Jose is liable To Cruz. The confrocf

befween Them is personol in nofure. Jose con
neither lend nor lease The car To a third person. —

Commodatum is purely personal in nature (Article
T939), the bailee can neither lenol nor lease the
object of the contract to a Third person. The bailee
is liable for loss of the thing even it the loss be due
To a fortuitous cause, it he lends or leases The thing
to a person who is not a member ot his household
(Article T942).
V.
In 2005, L, M, N, O and P formed a partnership.

L,M and N were capitalist partners who contributed
P500,000 each, while O, a limited partner, contributed
Pl P joined as an industrial partner, contributing
only his services. The Articles of Partnership, registered
with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
designated L and 0 as managing partners; L was
liable only to the extent of his capital contribution;
and P was not liable for losses. In 2006, the partnership
earned a net prot of P800,000. In the some year, P
engaged in a different business with the consent of
all the partners. However, in 2007, the partnership
incurred a net loss of P500,000. In 2008, the partners
dissolved the partnership. The proceeds of the sale
of partnership assets were insufficient to settle its
obligation. After liquidation, the partnership had an
unpaid liability of P300,000.
V.(l) Assuming that the just and equitable share
of the industrial partner, P, in the prot in 2006
amounted to P1 00,000, how much is the share of O,
a limited partner, in the P800,000 net prot? (1%)
192 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(A) P160,000.
(B) P175,000.
(C) P280,000.
(D) P200,000.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
C. P280,000.— Since afTer deducling The PiOOk

share of P There remains P700l<, The Three parTners L,
M, N will each have i share and O will have Two
shares (2:1). Adding Three shares plus Two shares
means The balance of P700k will be divided by 5
which will yield The resulT of Pl4Ok mulTiplied by 2
(Tor O).
V.(2) In 2007, how much is The share of 0, a

|imiTed parfner, in The neT loss of P500,000? (1%)
(A) P 0.
(B) P100,000.
(C) P125,000.
(D) P200,000.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
D.P200,000— ArTicle i797 provides ThaT The

share of each parlner in proTiTs and losses shall be
in proporon To whaT he may have conTribuTed
V.(3) Can the partnership creditors hold L, O

and Pliable alter all the assets of the partnership are
exhausted? (1%)
(A) Yes. The stipulation exempting P from losses
isvalid only among the partners. L is liable because
the agreement limiting his liability to his capital
contribution is not valid insofar as the creditors are
concerned. Having taken part in the management of
the partnership, O is liable as capitalist partner.
(B) No. P not liable because there is a valid
is
stipulation exempting him from losses. Since the other
partners allowed him to engage in an outside business
activity, the stipulation absolving P from liability is valid.
For O, it is basic that a limited partner is liable only up
to the extent of his capital contribution.
(C) Yes. The stipulations exempting P and L
from losses are not binding upon the creditors. O is
likewise liable because the partnership was not
formed in accordance with the requirements of a
limited partnership.
(D) No. The Civil Code allows the partners to
stipulate that a partner shall not be liable for losses.
The registration of the Articles of Partnership
embodying such stipulations serves as constructive
notice to the partnership creditors.
(E) None of the above is completely accurate.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. Yes. The stipulation exempting P from losses

isva/la only among the partners. L is liable because
the agreement limiting his liability to his capital
I94 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
conTribuTion is valid insofar as The crediiors are

noT
concerned. Having Taken pan‘ in The managemenT
of The parTnershib, O is liable as cabiTalisT parTner.—
Ariicle I799, a slipulaiion which excludes one or
more pariners from any share in prols and losses is
void. Allhough There is a siipulaiion limiiing The
liabiliTy of L To his capiial conlribulion, such
sTipulaTion is valid only among The parlners and noT
wllh respeci To parinership credilors. P, who is an
induslrial pariner may be exempi buT ThaT is only
wiTh respeci To The pariners buT noT The crediTors.
O, by Taking pari in The managemenl even if he is
a limiied parTner becomes liable as a general
pariner (ArTicle I848).
VI.
Gary Tobacco Trader and also a lending

is a
invesTor. He sold Tobacco leaves To Homer for
delivery wiThin a monTh, alihough The period for de-
livery was noT guaranTeed. DespiTe Gary's efforTs To
deliver on Time, TransporTaTion problems and
governmeni red Tape hindered his efforTs and he
could only deliver aer 30 days. Homer refused To
accepT The laTe delivery and To pay on The ground
ThaT The agreed Term had noT been complied wiTh.
As lending lnvesTor, Gary granted a Pl,0O0,000

loan To Isaac To be paid wiThin Two years from
execuon of The conl'racT. As securily for The loan,
Isaac promised To deliver To Gary his ToyoTa lnnova
wiThin seven (7) days, buT Isaac failed To do so. Gary
was Thus compelled To demand paymenT for The loan
before The end of The agreed Two-year Term.
V|.(l) Was Homer justied in refusing to accept

the tobacco leaves? (1%)
(A) Yes. Homer was justified in refusing to ac-
cept the tobacco leaves. The delivery was to be
made within a month. Gary's promise of delivery on
a "best effort" basis made the delivery uncertain.
The term, therefore, was ambiguous.
(B) No. Homer was not justied in refusing to
accept the tobacco leaves. He consented to the
terms and conditions of the sale and must abide by
it. Obligations arising from contract have the force
of law between the contracting parties.
(C) Yes. Homer was justied in his refusal to
accept the delivery. The contract contemplates an
obligation with a term. Since the delivery was
made after 30 days, contrary to the terms agreed
upon, Gary could not insist that Homer accept the
tobacco leaves.
(D) No. Homer was not justied in refusing to
accept the tobacco leaves. There was no term in
the contract but a mixed condition. The fulllment
of the condition did not depend purely on Gary's
will but on other factors, e.g., the shipping compa-
ny and the government. Homer should comply with
his obligation.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B. No. Homer was notjustified in refusing to ac-

cept the tobacco /eaves. He consented to the
terms and conditions of the sale and must abide by
it. Obligations arising from contract have the force
I96 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
of low between The contracting parties. - Homer

was not justified in refusing To dccept The delivery.
lt clear that
is The period Tor delivery was not
gudrdnteed. Obligations arising from contrdcts
have The force of law between The contracting
parties and must be complied with in good faith.
There is nothing stdted in The facts which would
ihdicote Thdt Gory dcted in bod fdith or
deliberately deldyed The delivery.
VI.(2) Can Gary compel Isaac to pay his loan
even before the end of the two-year period? (1%)
(A) Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to immediate-
ly pay the loan. Noncompliance with the promised
guaranty or security renders the obligation
immediately demandable. Isaac lost his right to
make use of the period.
(B) Yes, Gary can compel Isaac to imme-
diately pay the loan. The delivery of the Toyota ln-
nova is a condition for the loan. Isaac's failure to
deliver the car violated the condition upon which
the loan was granted. It is but fair for Gary to
demand immediate payment.
(C) No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to immediately
pay the loan. The delivery of the car as security for
the loan is an accessory contract; the principal
contract is still the PI,000,000 loan. Thus, Isaac can
still make use of the period.
(D) No, Gary cannot compel Isaac to imme-
diately pay the loan. Equity dictates that Gary
should have granted a reasonable extension of
time for Isaac to deliver his Toyota lnnova. It would
be unfair and burdensome for Isaac to pay the

P1,000,000 simply because the promised security
was not delivered.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. Yes, Gary can compel Isaac To immediaie/y

pay Theloan. Nohcompiiance wiTh The promised
guaranty or security renders The obligaiion immediaiely
demahdable. Isaac /osT his right To make use of The
period (Article H98). Isaac lost his right to make use
of The period because he failed To furnish The
guaranty or security in consideration of which Gary
agreed To The period. As a result, the obligation
which was originally with a period became
immediately demandable.
Vll.
Lito was a commercial pilot who flew for Paci-

c-Micronesian Air. In 1998, he was the co-pilot of
the airline's Flight MA9l6 that mysteriously dis-
appeared two hours after take-off from Agana,
Guam, presumably over the Pacic Ocean. No
trace of the plane and its 105 passengers and crew
was ever found despite diligent search; Lito himself
was never heard of again. Lito left behind his wife,
Lita, and their two children. In 2008, Lita met and
and married Jaime. They now have a child of their
own. While on a tour with her former high school
classmates in a remote province of China in 2010,
Lita was surprised to see Lito or somebody who
looked exactly like him, but she was sure it was Lito
because of the extreme surprise that registered in
198 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
his face when he also saw her. Shocked, she

immediately fled to her hotel and post-haste
returned to the country the next day. Lita now
comes to you for legal advice. She asks you the
following questions:
Vll.(l). If Lito is alive, what is the status of his
marriage to Lita? (1%)
(A) The marriage subsists because the marital
bond has not been terminated by death.
(B) The marriage was terminated when Lita
married Jaime.
(C) The marriage subsists because Lita's marriage
to Jaime is void.
(D) The marriage is terminated because Lito is
presumed dead after his plane has been missing
for more than 4 years.
(E) Themarriage can be formally declared
terminated if Lito would not resurface.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. The marriage subsists because the marital
bond has not been terminated by death.— Since
Lito is still alive the marital bond has not been se-
vered. There was also the absence of the declara-
tion of presumptive death of Lito which is a con-
dition before Lita may contract a subsequent
marriage (Article 41, Civil Code).
Vl.(2). If Lito is alive, what is the status of Lita's
marriage to Jaime? (1%)
(A) The marriage is valid because Lita's mar-

riage to Lito was terminated upon Lito‘s disappea-
rance for more than seven years.
(B) The marriage is valid. After an absence of
more than T0 years, Lito is already presumed dead
for all purposes.
(C) The marriage is void. Lito‘s mere absence,
however lengthy, is insufficient to authorize Lita to
contract a subsequent marriage.
(D) The marriage is void. If Lito is indeed alive,
his marriage to Lita was never dissolved and they
can resume their marital relations at any time.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
C. The marriage is void. Lito‘s mere absence,

however lengthy, is insufficient to authorize Lita to
contract a subsequent marriage.— Lito‘s absence
did not automatically grant Lita the right to remarry
without securing a declaration of presumptive
death which is specifically required under Article 41
of the Family Code. In tact, the subsequent marriage
of Lita to Lito may be deemed void and bigamous.
Vlll.
Which of the following actions or defenses are
meritorious: (1%)
(A) An action for recovery of downpayment
paid under a rescinded oral sale of real property.
(B) A defense in an action for ejectment that the
lessor verbally promised to extend or renew the lease.
200 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(C) An action for payment of sum of money

led against one who orally promised to answer
another's debt in case the latter defaults.
(D) A defense in an action for damages that
the debtor has sufficient, but unliquidated assets to
satisfy the credit acquired when it becomes due.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. An action for recovery of downpayment

paid under a rescinded oral sale of real property.-
ln Asia Productions v. Pano (205 SCRA 458), the SC
allowed recovery of the partial payment made by
the buyer of a building under a verbal contract of
sale because the buyer is not seeking the
enforcement of the contract. Also, it is not covered
by the statute of frauds since the statute applies
only to purely executory contracts.
IX.
Betty entrusted to her agent, Aida, several

pieces of jewelry to be sold on commission with the
express obligation to turn over to Betty the pro-
ceeds of the sale, or to return the jewelries if not
sold in cl month's time. Instead of selling the je-
welries, Aida pawned them with the Tambunting
Pawnshop, and used the money for herself. Aida
failed to redeem the pawned jewelries and after a
month, Betty discovered what Aida had done. Betty
brought criminal charges which resulted in Aida's
conviction for estafa.
Betly thereafter led an action against Tambunting

Pawnshop for the recovery of the jewelries. Tambunting
raised the defense of ownership, additionally arguing
that it is duly licensed to engage in the pawnshop
and lending business, and that it accepted the
mortgage of the jewelry in good faith and in the
regular course of its business. If you were the judge,
how will you decide the case? (1%)
(A) I will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is based
on the Civil Code provision that one who has lost
any movable or has been unlawfully deprived
thereof may recover it from the person in possession
of the same. Tambunting's claim of good faith is
inconsequential.
(B) I will rule in favor of Betty. Tambunting's claim
of good faith pales into insignicance in light of the
unlawful deprivation of the jewelries. However,
equity dictates that Tambunting must be reimbursed
for the pawn value of the jewelries.
(C) I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Its good
faith takes precedence over the right of Betty to re-
cover the jewelries.
(D) I will rule in favor of Tambunting. Good faith is
always presumed. Tambunting's lawful acquisition in
the ordinary course of business coupled with good
faith gives it legal right over the jewelries.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A. will rule in favor of Betty. My ruling is based

l
on the Civil Code provision that one who has lost
any movable or has been unlawfully deprived
202 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Thereof may recover iT from The person in possession

of The same. TombunTing‘s claim of good faith is
inconsequential. — Article 559 of The Civil Code
applies because The owner of The jewelry was
unlawfully deprived of her movable property. As
such, she is entitled To recover it from The present
possessor without reimbursing The price paid Therefor.
The good faith of Tambunting is immaterial since it
did not acquire The jewelry at Cl public sole To entitle
it to retain possession of The jewelry until Betty has
reimbursed The amount loaned (See Dizon vs.
Suntoy, 47 SCRA 160).
X.
Arlene owns a row of apartment houses in

Kamuning, Quezon City. She agreed to lease
Apartment No. 1 to Janet for a period of 18 months
at the rate of Pl0,000 per month. The lease was not
covered by any contract. Janet promptly gave Arlene
two (2) months deposit and 18 checks covering the
rental payment for 18 months. This show of good
faith prompted Arlene to promise Janet that should
Arlene decide to sell the property, she would give
Janet the right of rst refusal.
X.(l) Not long after Janet moved in, she received
news that her application for a Master of Laws
scholarship at King's College in London had been
approved. Since her acceptance of the scholarship
entailed a transfer of residence, Janet asked Arlene
to return the advance rental payments she made.
Arlene refused, prompting Janet to le an action to
recover the payments. Arlene led a motion to
dismiss, claiming that the lease on which the action

is based, is unenforceable. If you were the judge,
would you grant Arlene's motion? (1%)
(A) Yes, I will grant the motion because the
lease contract between Arlene and Janet was not
in writing, hence, Janet may not enforce any right
arising from the same contract.
(B) No, will not grant the motion because to
I
allow Arlene to retain the advance payments

would amount to unjust enrichment.
(C) Yes, I will grant the motion because the ac-
tion for recovery is premature; Janet should rst
secure a judicial rescission of the contract of lease.
(D) No. will not grant the motion because the
I
cause of action does not seek to enforce any right

under the contract of lease.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
D. No. I will not grant the motion because the

cause of action does not seek to enforce any right
under the contract of /ease.— The action for the
recovery of advance rental payments made is not
covered by the statute of frauds since it does not
seek to enforce the contract of lease. lt is to be
noted that the contract has been partially executed
and thus, the statute of frauds will not apply.
X.(2) Assume that Janet decided not to accept
the scholarship and continued leasing Apartment
No. 1. Midway through the lease period, Arlene
decided to sell Apartment No. 1 to Jun in breach of
her promise to Janet to grant her the right of rst
208 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
copies of receipts of expenses incurred in connection

with the treatment of his injuries. will also present
l
the testimony of my client and perhaps a bystander

who witnessed the incident as to the circumstances
surrounding the accident.
lwill base the action of my client on quasi-
delict. There was clear negligence on the part of
the taxi driver which resulted in damage and injury
to my client and a reasonable causal connection
between the damage and the act or omission and
the absence of contractual relationship between
them. (Article 2176, Civil Code).
As for the legal argument, will rebut the claim
l
of negligence on my client’s part by presenting

evidence that my client has actually crossed the
intersection ahead of the taxicab and it was the
latter who rapidly cut the path ot the bicycle which
caused the collision. Also, even assuming that there
was contributory negligence on the part of my
client, will argue that it will not preclude the recovery
l
of damages but may only mitigate the damages to

which he is entitled. (Article 2179, Civil Code)
QUESTION Ill.
Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square

meter land. His friend, Marcelo, who has long been
interested in the property, succeeded in persuading
Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2, 2012, they agreed
on the purchase price of P600,000 and that Sergio
would give Marcelo up to June 30, 2012 within
which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone
usual between them, said that they should seal

their agreement through a case of Jack Daniels
Black and P5,000 “pulutan” money which he
immediately handed to Sergio and which the latter
accepted. The friends then sat down and drank the
rst bottle from the case of bourbon.
On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another
buyer, Roberto, who was offering P800,000 in ready
cash for the land. When Roberto conrmed that he
could pay in cash as soon as Sergio could get the
documentation ready, Sergio decided to withdraw
his offer to Marcelo, hoping to just explain matters
to his friend. Marcelo, however, objected when the
withdrawal was communicated to him, taking the
position that they have a firm and binding
agreement that Sergio cannot simply walk away
from because he has an option to buy that is duly
supported by a duly accepted valuable consideration.
(A) Does Marcelo have a cause of action
against Sergio? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Marcelo has a cause of action against

Sergio. As a rule, an otter can be withdrawn at any
time before acceptance by communicating such
withdrawal (Art. 1324), except when the option is
founded upon a consideration as something paid or
promised. In this case, although there was no
separate consideration tor the option, the otter had
already been accepted and thus, it resulted into a
perfected contract of sale between Marcelo and
210 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Sergio. Sale, being a consensual contract, is perfected

by mere consent (Sanchez v. Rigos, GR. No. L-25494
June l4, 1972).
claim that whatever they might
(B) Can Sergio
have agreed upon cannot be enforced because
any agreement relating to the sale of real property
must be supported by evidence in writing and they
never reduced their agreement to writing? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Sergio cannot claim that the agreement

cannot be enforced because it was not reduced
into writing. Contracts shall be obligatory, in what-
ever form they may have been entered into, provi-
ded all the essential reauisites for their validity are
present (Art. 1356). ln fact when the law requires a
document or other special form, as in the acts and
enumerated by law, the contracting parties may
compel each other to observe that form, once the
contract has been perfected, and this right may be
exercised simultaneously with the action upon the
contract (Art. i357). In the case at bar, what is
involved is the preparatory contract of option
which is considered valid even it not in writing. The
option contract is separate and distinct from the
contract of sale since in an option contract, the
optionee is not buying anything yet except the
privilege to buy. ln fact, even an oral sale of a parcel
ot land is valid between the parties (Campillo vs. CA
129 SCRA 5l3; Zaide v. CA 163 SCRA 7l).
QUESTION IV.
Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and

a house that his friend Boboy occupied for a nominal
rental and on the condition that Boboy would
vacate the property on demand. With Anselmo’s
knowledge, Boboy introduced renovations consisting
of an additional bedroom, a covered veranda, and a
concrete block fence, at his own expense.
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as
his residence, and thus asked Boboy to vacate and
turn it over to him. Boboy, despite an extension,
failed to vacate the property, forcing Anselmo to
send him a written demand to vacate.
In his own written reply, Boboy signied that he
was ready to leave but Anselmo must rst reimburse
him the value of the improvements he introduced
on the property as he is a builder in good faith.
Anselmo refused, insisting that Boboy cannot ask for
reimbursement as he is a mere lessee. Boboy
responded by removing the improvements and
leaving the building in its original state.
(A) Resolve Boboy’s claim that as a builder in
good faith, he should be reimbursed the value of
the improvements he introduced. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Boboy’s claim that he is a builder in good faith

is without merit. The contract between the parties
remains to be a lease despite the nominal rentals
paid by Boboy. As such, Boboy's right with regard
to the improvements he introduced on the
212 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
properTy should noT be resolved on The basis of The

provisions of The Civil Code on builder in good faiTh
under ArTicle 448, buT by The provision on lease,
parTicularly ArTicle 1678. A lessee who makes
improvemenTs on The bropeny cannoT be considered a
builder in good TaiTh for he knows ThaT he does noT
own The properiy and his possession is merely
Temporary. Boboy may only claim one-half of The
value of The imbrovemenTs from Anselmo buT if The
laTTer refuses To reimburse him, Boboy may remove
The im|orovemenTs even if iT may cause damage To
The properTy.
(B) Can Boboy be held liable for damages for

removing The improvemenis over Anselmo’s objec-
Tion? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Boboy cannoT be held liable Tor damages

excepT if he caused unnecessary im|oairmenT To The
proberTy leased. Since Anselmo refused To
ap|oropriaTe The improvemenis and To reimburse
Boboy, The laTTer may exercise his righT To remove
The improvemenis provided he shall noT cause any
more im|oairmenT To The properTy leased Than is
necessary (ArTicle i678, Civil Code).
QUESTION V.
Josefa execufed a deed of donation covering a

one hecTare rice land in favour of her daughfer,
Jennifer. The deed specically provides ThaT:
“For and in consideration of the love and

service Jennifer has shown and given to me, I here-
by freely, voluntarily, and irrevocably donate to her
my one-hectare rice land covered by TCT No.
H550, located in San Fernando, Pampanga. This
donation shall take effect upon my death."
The deed also contained Jennifer's signed
acceptance, and an attached notarized declaration
by Joseta and Jennifer that the land will remain in Josefa’s
possession and cannot be alienated, encumbered,
sold or disposed of while Joseta is still alive.
Advise Jennifer on whether the deed is a
donation inter vivos or mortis causa and explain the
reasons supporting your advice. (8%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Iwill advise Jennifer that the deed of donation

executed in her favor by Joseta is a donation inter
vivos. A donation mortis causa is revocable during
the lifetime of the donor. On the other hand, an
inter vivos donation once accepted is generally
irrevocable. The law further requires that it it involves
immovable property, it must be in a public
document and there must be a deed of
acceptance which must be in the same deed of
donation. It the acceptance is in a separate
instrument, it has to be noted in both instruments
(Art. 749). ln the case presented, the deed of
acceptance clearly signifies that it is a donation
inter vivos because a donation mortis causa need
not be accepted by the donee during the lifetime
of the donor, in fact it would be premature to
214 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
accept a donation mortis causa if The donor is still

alive. The fact that the donation made by Josefa
was irrevocable and that There is an acceptance
clause indicate that it is a donation inter vivos.
Also, the prohibition on alienation during
Josefa’s lifetime all the more indicates that The do-
nation is inter vivos because The fact that Josefa
reserved The lifetime usutruct of The land shows that
her intent is to Transfer The ownership of The donated
property to Jennifer or else There would have been
no need for her To reserve The lifetime usufruct
Thereof if it were a donation mortis causa (Reyes vs.
/viosaueda, l87 SCRA 661, 671 (1990); Concepcion vs.
Concepcion, 91 Phil. 823, 827 (1952).
QUESTION VI.
obtained a loan of Pi,O00,000 from Ferdie,

Lito
payable within one year. To secure payment, Lito
executed a chattel mortgage on a Toyota Avanze
and a real estate mortgage on a 200-square meter
piece of property.
(A) Would it be legally signicant—from the
point of view of validity and enforceability—if the
loan and the mortgages were in public or private
instruments?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
With respect to the loan, the same is both valid

and enforceable regardless of whether it is in a
private or public document because as a rule,
conTracTs shall be obligaTory in whaTever form They

may have been enTered inTo provided all The
essenTial requisiTes for Their validiTy are presenT.
(ArTicle T358, Civil Code). A loan is a conTracT
which The law does noT require To be in a parTicular
form in order ThaT if may be valid or enforceable.
However, if The crediTor imposed inTeresT on The
loan, The inTeresT musT be expressly sTipulaTed in
wrifing, oThervvise iT is void (ArTicle T956, Civil Code).
However, wiTh regard To The chaTTel morTgage,
since The law (AcT 1508) requires an aTfidaviT of
good faiTh sTaTing ThaT The chaTTel morTgage is
supposed To sTand as securiTy Tor The loan, iT is
submiTTed ThaT for validiTy of The chaTTel morTgage,
iT musT be in a public documenT. A real esTaTe
morTgage under The provisions of ArTic|e 2125

requires ThaT in order ThaT a morTgage may be
validly consTiTuTed ThaT The documenT in which iT
appears musT be recorded. If iT is noT recorded, The
morTgage is neveriheless valid and binding
beTween The parTies. Hence, for validiTy boTh
chaTTel and real esTaTe morTgages musT be in a
public documenT. BuT for purposes of enTorceabiliTy,
iT is submiTTed ThaT The form of The conTracT wheTher
in a public or privaTe documenT would be

immaTerial (Mobil Oil vs. Diocares G.R. No. L-26371,
SepTember 30, T969).
(B) Lifo’s failure To pay led To The exfra-judicial
foreclosure of The morfgaged real properfy. WiThin
a year from foreclosure, Lifo Tendered a manager's
check To Ferdie To redeem The properly. Ferdie
216 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
refused to accept payment on the ground that

he wanted payment in cash: the check does not
qualify as legal tender and does not include the
interest payment.
ls Ferdie’s refusal justied?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Ferdle‘s refusal to accept the check on the

ground that it does not qualify as legal tender is
correct because a check, whether a manager's
check or ordinary check, is not legal tender, and
an offer of a check in payment of a debt is not a
valid tender of payment and may be refused by
the obligee or creditor (Philippine Airlines vs. CA
and Amelia Tan, GR. No. L-49188, January 30,
1990). Mere delivery of a check does not discharge
the obligation under a judgment. The obligation is
not extinguished and remains suspended until the
payment by commercial document is actually realized
(Art. 1249, Civil Code, par. 3). Also, redemption
within the period allowed by law is not a matter of
intent but a question of payment or valid tender of
full redemption price within the said period.
Whether the redemption is being made under Act
3135 or under the General Banking Law, the mortgagor
or his assignee is required to tender payment to
make said redemption valid (Heirs of Quisumbing vs.
PNB and SLDC —G.R. No. l78242 January 20, 2009).
QUESTION VII.
In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot

whose only access to the national highway was a
pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and
others have been using this pathway (Pathway A)
since 1980.
In 2006, Brando fenced off his property, thereby
blocking Andres’ access to the national highway.
Andres demanded that part of the fence be
removed to maintain his old access route to the
highway (Pathway A), but Brando refused, claiming
that there was another available pathway (Pathway B)
for ingress and egress to the highway. Andres
countered that Pathway B has defects, is circuitous,
and is extremely inconvenient to use.
To settle their dispute, Andres and Brando hired
Damian, a geodetic and civil reengineer, to survey
and examine the two pathways and the surrounding
areas, and to determine the shortest and the least
prejudicial way through the servient estates. After
the survey, the engineer concluded that pathway B
is the longest route and will need improvements
and repairs, but will not signicantly affect the use
of Brando’s property. On the other hand, Pathway A
that had long been in place, is the shorter route but
would signicantly affect the use of Brando’s property.
In light of the engineer‘s findings and the cir-
cumstances of the case, resolve the parties’ right of
way dispute. (6%)
218 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor ot Brando. The easement of

right of way should be established at a point least
prejudicial To The servient estate where the
distance from the dominant estate to The public
highway may be The shortest (Art. 650) If These Two
conditions do not concur in one estate, The criterion
of least prejudice prevails over shortest distance.
(Anastacia Quimen vs. CA and Yolanda Oliveros,
GR. No. ll233l May 29, I996 May 29, I996). In This
case, to establish The easement on The property of
Brando would signicantly affect The use of his
property. While Pathway B may prove To be The
longer route, it will cause least prejudice to Brando.
Andres‘ argument that Pathway B is circuitous and
inconvenient To use should not be given weight
because The True test of The establishment of an
easement is adequacy. Convenience of The
dominant estate has never been The gauge for The
establishment of The easement. (Costabe/la Corporation
v. CA I93 SCRA 333; Cristobal vs. Ledesma 291
SCRA I22).
QUESTION VIII.
Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the

spouses Dela Cruz a 500-square meter land (Lot A)
in Paraaque. The land now has a fair market value
of Pl,200,000. CRC likewise sold to the spouses
Rodriguez, a 700-square meter land (Lot B) which is
adjacent to Lot A. Lot B has a present fair market
value of P1,500,000.
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on

Lot B, relying on the representation of the CRC sales
agent that it is the property they purchased. Only
upon the completion their house did the spouses
Dela Cruz discover that they had built on Lot B owned
by the spouses Rodriguez, not on Lot A that they
purchased. They spent Pl ,000,000 for the house.
As their lawyer, advise the spouses Dela on
their rights and obligations under the given circum-
stances, and the recourses and options open to
them to protect their interests.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will advise Spouses Dela Cruz that they have

the right to retain possession of the premises until
Rodriguez exercises any of the options under Article
448 of the Civil Code (Tecnogas Manufacturing vs.
CA, GR. No. lO8894 February l0, i997). Spouses
Dela Cruz are builders in good faith because before
constructing their house, they exercised due
diligence by asking the agent of CRC the location
of Lot A. They relied on the information given by the
agent who is presumed to know the identity of the
lot they purchased (Pleasant ville vs. CA, GR. No.
79688 February l, 1996 [253 SCRA lO]). The owner of
the loncl on which anything has been built in good
faith by another has the right to appropriate as his
own the works, sowing or planting after payment of
the indemnity or to oblige the builder to pay the
price of the land if its value is not considerably
220 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
higher than the building or Trees, or To ask The sower

To pay proper rent. will also advise my clients that
l
Rodriguez may not compel them To remove

the improvements because it is not one of the
options granted To The landowner if The builder is in
good faith.
QUESTION IX.
Rica petitioned for The annulment of her Ten-

year old marriage to Richard. Richard hired Atty.
Cruz to represent him in The proceedings. In pay-
ment for Atty. Cruz's acceptance and legal fees,
Richard conveyed to Atty. Cruz a parcel of land in
Taguig that he recently purchased with his lotto
winnings. The Transfer documents were duly signed
and Atty. Cruz immediately took possession by
fencing off the property's entire perimeter.
Desperately needing money to pay for his
mounting legal fees and his other needs and des-
pite the transfer to Atty. Cruz, Richard offered the
same parcel of land for sale to the spouses Garcia.
After inspection of the land, the spouses considered
it a good investment and purchased it from
Richard. Immediately after the sale, the spouses
Garia commenced the construction of a three-storey
building over the land, but they were prevented
from doing this by Atty. Cruz who claimed he has a
better right in light of the prior conveyance in his favour.
ls Atty. Cruz's claim correct?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The claim of ATTy. Cruz is noT correcT. While

ATTy. Cruz may appear To have a beTTer righT consi-
dering ThaT he Tirsl Took possession of The properTy, as
The lawyer for Richard, he is prohibiTed from acquiring
by purchase, even aT a public or judicial aucTion,
eiTher in person or Through The media-Tion of
anoTher The properTy and righTs which may The
objecT of any liTigaTion in which he may Take parT
by virTue of his profession (Ariicle 1491, Civil Code).
Arguably, The suiT is for annulmenT of marriage and
The land iTselT is noT The objecT of The liTigaTion.
However, if The annulmenT of marriage is granTed The
liauidaTion of The absoluTe communiTy or conjugal
parlnership of The spouses as The case may be, will
follow as a necessary consequence (ArTicle 50 in
relaTion To ArTicle 43 of The Family Code). On The
assumpTion ThaT The parTies are governed eiTher by
The regime of absoluTe communiTy or conjugal
parTnership of gains, all winnings from gambling or
beTTing shall Torm parT Thereof. Hence, since
Richard purchased The land wiTh his loTTo winnings
during The pendency of The suiT for annulmenT The
land iTselT forms parT of The absoluTe communiTy or
conjugal parTnership. As such, iT may noT be sold or
alienaTed wiThouT The consenT of Rica because any
disposiTion or encumbrance of The properTy of The
communiTy or conjugal properTy wiThouT The con-
senT of The oTher spouse is void (ArTicle 96 and
ArTicle T24, Family Code).
222 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
QUESTION X.
Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1,000-

square meter property where he grew up helping
his father, Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has
lived on the property since the land was opened for
settlement at about the time of the Commonwealth
Government in 1935, but for some reason never
secured any title of the property other than a tax
declaration in his name. He has held the property
through the years in the concept of an owner and
his stay was uncontested by others. He has also
conscientiously and continuously paid the realty
taxes on the land.
Michael died in 2000 and Manuel as Michael's
only son and heir-now wants to secure and register
title to the land in his own name. He consults you for
legal advice as he wants to perfect his title to the
land and secure its registration in his name.
(A) What are the laws that you need to consider
in advising Manuel on how he can perfect his
title and register the land in his name? Explain
the relevance of these laws to your projected
course of action.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The following laws must be considered in ad-

vising Manuel regarding the registration of the land
in his name. For purposes of confirmation of
imperfect title, the provisions of Commonwealth
Act No. l4l, as well as the Property Registration
Decree or P.D. 1529. C.A. No. 141, which dmended

The second Public Lond AcT (AcT 2874) provides
ThdT There ore Two requisiTes Torjudiciol confirmdon of
imperTecT TiTle ndmely: 1) open dnd conTinuous,
exclusive dnd noTorious possession dnd occupoTion
of The ldnd by himself or Through his predecessor in
inTeresT under bond Tide cldim of ownership since
June 12, 1945 dnd; 2) The cldssificdTion of The ldnd os
dlienoble dnd disposdble ldnd of The public domoin
(SecreTdiy of DENR v. Yop, GR. NO. 167707, OcTober
8, 2008). The ProperTy RegisTrdTion Decree or P.D.
1529 specifies who moy file on opplicdiion for regis-
TrdTion of TiTle To The ldnd under SecTion 141. SecTion
14 provides ThdT: Those who by Themselves or Their
predecessors-in-inTeresT hove been in open,
conTinuous, exclusive dnd noTorious possession dnd
occupdTion of dliendble dnd disposoble ldnds for
The public domoin under o bond de cldim of
ownership since June 12, 1945 or edrlier. Since
1SecTion 14. Who mcry dpply. The following persons mory le

in The proper CourT of FirsT lnsTcrnce on dpplicoon for regisTroTion
of TiTle To ldnd, wheTher personolly or Through Their duly ouThorized
represenToTives:
(1) Those who by Themselves or Through Their predecessors-in-
inTeresT hove been in open, conTinuous, exclusive dnd noTorious
possession dnd occupoon of dliendble dnd disposoble ldnds of
The public domoin under o bond Tide cldim of ownership since
June 12, 1945, or eorlier.
(2) Those who hove dcquired ownership of privole ldnds by
prescripTion under The provision of exisTing lows.
(3) Those who hove ocquired ownership of privoTe ldnds or
crbdndoned river beds by righT of occession or occreon under The
exisTing lows.
(4) Those who hove ocquired ownership of ldnd in ony oTher
mdnner provided for by low.
224 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
l\/lanuel’s father Michael had been in open,

continuous, exclusive and notorious possession of
the land since T935, and that the land was
declared alienable in the same year, his possession
has ripened into ownership which entitles him or his
successor Manuel to file an application for judicial
confirmation of imperfect title.
(B) What do you have to prove to secure
Manuel's objectives and what documentation are
necessary?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
have to prove that the land was declared

I
alienable at the time that Manuel or his father

Michael took possession of the land and that their
possession started prior to or on June T2, T945 as
required by C.A. No. l4l. also have to file together
l
with the application for registration all original

muniments of title or copies thereof, and a survey
plan of the land approved by the Bureau of Lands
in accordance with Section i7 of P.D. T5292
2SectIon 17. What and where to file. The application for land
registration shall be filed with the Court of First Instance of the
province or city where the land is situated. The applicant shall file
together with the application all original muniments of titles or
copies thereof and a survey plan of the land approved by the
Bureau of Lands.
The clerk of court shall not accept any application unless it is
shown that the applicant has furnished the Director of Lands with
a copy of the application and all annexes.
I.
Ariz and Paz were officemates at Perlas ng

Silanganan Bank (PSB). They fell in love with each
other and had a civil and church wedding. Mean-
while, Paz rapidly climbed the corporate ladder of
PSB and eventually became its Vice-President, while
Ariz remained one of its bank supervisors, although
he was short of twelve (T2) units to nish his Masters
of Business Administration (MBA) degree.
Ariz became envious of the success of his wife.
He started drinking alcohol until he became a drunkard.
He preferred to join his barkadas; became a wife-
beater; would hurt his children without any reason;
and failed to contribute to the needs of the family.
Despite rehabilitation and consultation with a
psychiatrist, his ways did not change.
After 19 years of marriage, Paz, a devout Catholic,
decided to have their marriage annulled by the
church. Through the testimony of Paz and a
psychiatrist, it was found that Ariz was a spoiled brat
in his youth and was sometimes involved in brawls.
In his teens, he was once referred to a psychiatrist
for treatment due to his violent tendencies. In due
time, the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal
(NAMT) annulled the union of Ariz and Paz due to
the failure of Ariz to perform and full his duties as a
husband and as a father to their children. The NAMT
225
226 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
concluded that it is for the best interest of Paz, Ariz

and their children to have the marriage annulled.
In the view of NAMT decision, Paz decided to
le a Petition for Declaration of Nullily of Marriage
of their civil wedding before the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Makati City using the NAMT decision and
the same evidence adduced in the church
annulment proceedings as basis. (5%)
If you are the judge, will you grant the petition?
Explain.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
If were the judge, will not grant the petition.

l l
While the decision of the church tribunal annulling

the marriage of the parties may be persuasive, it is
not however, binding upon the civil courts. For
psychological incapacity to be a ground for nullity,
it must be shown that it was rooted in the history of
the party alleged to be suffering from it, it must be
grave, serious, and incurable such that it renders
the person incapacitated to perform the essential
marital obligations due to causes psychological in
nature. In the case presented, it appears that Ariz
fulfilled his marital obligations at the beginning and
it was only after feeling envious about the success
of Paz that he started exhibiting violent tendencies
and refused to comply with marital obligations.
Psychological incapacity is not mere refusal but
outright incapacity to perform marital obligations
which does not appear to be present in the case of
Ariz (Marcos v. Marcos, GR. No. i3649O- October
i9, 2000).
Crispin died testote ond wos survived by Alex

ond Josine, his children from his rst wife; Ren ond
Ruby, his children from his second wife; ond Allon,
Beo ond Chesko, his children from his third wife.
One importont provision in his will reods os
follows:
“Ang Iupo ot bohoy so Lungsod ng Moynilo oy
ililipot ot ilologoy so pongolon nino Alex of Rene
hindi bilong pomono ko so konilo kundi upong po-
moholoon ot pongologoon lomong nilo ot nong ong
sinumon so oking mgo onok, sompu ng oking mgo
opo ot koopuopuhon ko so hobong ponohon, oy
moy tutuluyon kung mognonois no mog-orol so
Moynilo o so kolopit no mgo lungsod.”
ls the provision volid? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
l quolify. The provision conveying or tronsferring

the title to the property to Alex ond Rene is volid.
However, the provision prohibiting portition forever
is not volid. A legocy or devise is to be construed os
o donotion effective mortis couso, ond it is
intended to transfer ownership to the legotee or
devisee. Since the ownership is legolly tronsterred
to the Alex ond Rene, they connot be prohibited
by the testotor from olienoting or portitioning the
some perpetuolly. The low provides thot dispositions
of the testotor decloring oll or port of the estote
inolienoble for more thon twenty yeors ore void
228 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(ArTicle 870) Also, every co-heir hos The righT To

demdnd The division of The esToTe unless The
TesTc|Tor should hove expressly forbidden iTs
pdrTiTion, in which cdse The period of indivision shdll
noT exceed TwenTy yedrs. (ArTicle T083, Civil Code).
lll.
The Roman CoTholic Church occepTed c|

donc|Tion of Cl reol property locdTed in Lipo Cify. A
deed of donoon was execufed, signed by The
donor, Don Moricmo, ond The donee, The Church, as
represenTed by Fr. Damion. Before The deed could
be noTorized, Don Moriono died.
is The donoon valid? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The dondTion is noT vdlid becouse The

subjecT mdTTer of The donoTion is reol properTy dnd
hence, The Torrndlies menTioned in ArTicle 749 shdll
govern. The low requires ThoT The donoTion of on im-
movdble properTy musT be in o public insTrumenT dnd
ThoT The dccepTdnce nndy be mode in The some
deed of dondTion or in d sepo|rdTe insTrumenT buT iT
shdll noT Toke eTTecT, unless iT is done during The
liTeTinne of The donor. The donoTion was never
reduced inTo d public documenT becouse The donor
died before The deed could be noTdrized. Hence,
iT remdined d privdTe insTrumenT which renders The
donoTion void.
IV.
Nante, a registered owner of a parcel of land in

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

deed itself states that for consideration received, he
sells, transfers, and conveys the land to Monica and
there was delivery of the property to the latter. The
contract is clearly one of sale as there was no
reservation of ownership on the part of the seller
Nante. In a contract of sale, title passes to the buyer
230 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
upon delivery of The Thing sold. ln d conTrdcT To sell,

There is no Trdnsfer of TiTle To The buyer since The seller
reserves ownership in The Thing sold unTil dfler The
fulTillmenTof The posiTive suspensive condiTion which is
The pdymenT of The purchdse price. The non-pdymenT
of The price in d conTrdcT To sell is considered ds The
fdilure To cornply wiTh The posiTive suspensive
condiTion which would prevenT The obligdTion of The
seller To convey TiTle from dcquiring obligdTory force.
However, The non-pdymenT of The price in d conTrdcT
of sdle would only enTiTle The seller To rescind The con-
TrdcT buT iT does noT Thereby prevenT The Trdnsfer of
ownership pdrTiculdrly so ds in This cdse, where There
wds dlreddy delivery To The buyer. There is no menTion
ThdT The seller hds reTdined ownership of The ldnd unTil
Monicd hos fully pdid The price, Thus, The conTrdcT is
cledrly one of d sdle.
V.
WhaT is The effecT of preTeriTion? (1%)

(A) iT cmnuls The devise and legacy
(B) iT onnuls The insTiTuTion of heirs
(C) if reduces The devise and legacy
(D) iT parlially dnnuls The insTiTuTion of heir
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B — IT dnnuls The insTiTuTion of heirs

VI.
Miko and Dinah started to live together as hus-

band and wife without the benet of marriage in
1984. Ten (l0) years after, they separated. In 1996,
they decided to live together again, and in 1998,
they got married.
On February 17, 2001, Dinah led a complaint
for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Miko
on the ground of psychological incapacity under
Article 36 of the Family Code. The court rendered
the following decision:
1. Declaring the marriage null and void;
2. Dissolving the regime of absolute community
of property; and
Declaring that a decree of absolute nullity of
3.
marriage shall only be issued after liquidation,
partition and distribution of the parties’ properties
under Article 147 of the Family Code.
Dinah led a motion for partial reconsideration
questioning the portion of the decision on the
issuance of a decree of nullity of marriage only
after the liquidation, partition and distribution of
properties under Article 147 of the Code. If you are
the judge, how will you decide petitioner’s motion
for partial reconsideration? Why? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
lwill grant partial reconsideration. It the marriage

is declared void under Article 36, the provisions of
the Family Code on liquidation, partition, and
232 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
distribution of The properTies on absoluTe communiTy

or conjugal parTnership will noT apply. lnsTead,
ArTic|e T47 or Arlicle T48 shall govern The liquidaTion
and parTiTion of The properTies of The parTies
depending on The presence or absence of a legal
impedimenT beTween Them. ln Dino v. Dino? The
SC ruled ThaT ArT. 5O of The Family Code and
Seciion l9 of The Rules on DeclaraTion of NulliTy
applies only To marriages which are declared void
ab iniTio or annulled by final judgmenT under
ArTicles 40 and 45 of The Family. ln shorT, ArT. 50 of
The Family Code does noT apply To marriages which
are declared void ab iniTio under Ari. 36 of The FC,
which should be declared void wiThouT waiTing Tor
The liauidaiion of The properTies of The parlies.
VII.
Due To The conTinuous heavy rainfall, The major

sTreeTs in Manila became flooded. This compelled
Cris To check-in aT Square One HoTel. As soon as
Cris goT off from his ToyoTa ATlis, The HoTel’s parking
aTTendanT goT The key of his car and gave him a
valeT parking cusTomer's claim sTub. The aTTendanT
parked his car aT The basemenT of The hoTel. Early
morning, Cris was informed by The hoTel manager
ThaT his car was carnapped. (4%)
(A) WhaT conTracT, if any, was perfecTed beT-

ween Cris and The HoTel when Cris surrendered The
key of his car To The HoTel’s parking aTTendanT?
3Alain Dino vs. lvia. Caridad Dino GR. No. l78044, January
19, 2Oil
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The conTrdcT beTween Cris dnd Squdre One

HoTel is one of deposiT, pdrTiculdrly, d necessdry
deposiT. The deposiT of effecls mode by Trdvelers
or guesTs in hoTels or inns is considered Cl necessdry
deposiT dnd The keepers of hoTels dnd inns ore
responsible for The eTTecTs deposiTed os depo-
siTdries provided ThdT noTice wds given To Them, or
To Their employees of The effecTs broughT by The
guesTs.4 Thisincludes noT only The persondl eTfecTs
broughT inside The hoTel premises buT dlso vehicles
or onimols dnd drTicles which hove been inTro-
duced or pldced in The dnnexes of The hoTel (Dur-
bdn ApdrTmenTs v. Pioneer lnsuronce, GR. No.
179419 Jdnudry 12, 201 l).
(B) What is The liqbilily, if cmy, of The HoTel for
The loss of Cris’ car?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
In The cdse of Durbdn Aporfmenfs vs. Pioneer

lnsuronce,5 The Supreme CourT held The hoTel lidble
Tor The loss of The vehicle of The guesT dTTer iTs vorleT
pdrking dTTendonT pdrked The vehicle in fronT of d
bdnk nedr The hoTel premises. The conTrdcT of
necessory deposiT wds perTecTed when The guesT
surrendered The keys To his vehicle To The poirking
dTTenddnT dnd The hoTel is under obligoTion of sdfely
keeping dnd reTurning iT. UlTimoTe|y, Squdre One
HoTel is lidble To Cris for The vdlue of The losT vehicle.
4ArTic|e 1998, Civil Code

~’>G.R. No. 179419 Jonuory i2, 2Oll
234 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Vlll.
Tess leased her 1,500 sq.m. lot in Antpolo City

to Ruth for a period of three (3) years, from January
2010 to February 2013. On March 19, 201 T, Tess sent
a letter to Ruth, part of which reads as follows:
“l am offering you to buy the property you are
presently leasing at P5,000.00 per sq. m. or for a
total of P7,500.000.00. You can pay the contract
price by instalment for two (2) years without inte-
rest. I will give you a period of one (T) year from re-
ceipt of this letter to decide whether you will buy
the property."
After the expiration of the lease contract, Tess
sold the property to her niece for a total consi-
deration of P4,000,000.00. Ruth led a complaint for
the annulment of the sale, reconveyance and
damages against Tess and her niece. Ruth alleged
that the sale of the leased property violated her right
to buy under the principle of right of rst refusal.
ls the allegation of Ruth tenable? (4%)
PRQPOSED ANSWER:
No, the allegation of Ruth not tenable. The

is
letter written by Tess did not grant right of rst refusal
a
to Ruth. At most, it can be construed as an option
contract whereby Ruth was given the right to buy or
not to buy the leased property. An option is itself not
a purchase but it merely secures the privilege to
buy. However, the option is not valid because it was
not supported by a cause or consideration distinct
from The price of the properly (Article T479). In addition,

Ruth does not appear to have exercised her option
before the offer was withdrawn by the subsequent
sale of the property to The niece of Tess. As a mere
otter to sell which is not supported by any cause or
consideration, The otter may be withdrawn at any
Time before acceptance. (Article T324, Civil Code)
IX.
Spouses Macario and Bonifacia Dakila entered

into a contract to sell with Honorio Cruz over a
parcel of industrial land in Valenzuela, Bulacan for
a price of P3,500,000.00. The spouses would give a
downpayment of P500,000.00 upon The signing of
The contract, while The balance would be paid for
The next three (3) consecutive months in the amount
of PT,O00,000.00 per month. The spouses paid the
rst two (2) instalments but not the last installment.
After one (1) year, the spouses offered to pay the
unpaid balance which Honorio refused to accept.
The spouses led a complaint for specic performance
against Honorio invoking the application of the
Maceda Law.
lf you are the judge, how will you decide the
case? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
will rule in favor of Honorio. The invocation of

l
the Maceda Law is misplaced. The law applies only

to sale or financing of realty on installment payments
including residential units or residential condominium
apartments and does not apply to sales of industrial
236 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
units or industrial lands like in The case presented.

Another reason why The Maceda law will not apply is
That The sale in The case aT bar is not the sale on
installment as contemplated by the law. The sale on
installment covered by The Maceda Law is one
where The price is paid or amortized over a certain
period in equal installments. The sale To The Spouses
Dakila is not a sale on installment but more of a
straight sale where a down payment is To be made
and The balance To be paid in a relatively short
period of Three months.
X.
Dorotea leased portions of her 2,000 sq.m. lotto

Monet, Kathy, Celia and Ruth for ve (5) years. Two
(2) years before The expiration of The lease contract,
Dorotea sold the properly to PM Realty and Development
Corporation. The following month, Dorotea and PM
Realty stopped accepting rental payments from all
the lessees because they wanted to terminate the
lease contracts.
Due to the refusal of Dorotea to accept rental
payments, the lessees, Ruth, et al., led a complaint
for consignation of the rentals before the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Manila without notifying Dorotea.
ls the consignation valid? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The consignation is not valid. For consigna-

Tion of The Thing or sum due To be proper, There must
be prior notice To The creditor That The debtor is
going to consign the payment in court. This notice is

intended to give the creditor the opportunity to
accept payment and to avoid liability for costs in
cose it is tound that the act of consignation was
properly mode. Even on the assumption that
Dorotea was no longer the creditor as she had
already sold the property to DM Realty, the facts do
not stote that the realty corporation was also given
notice before filing the case tor consignation (Article
1257, Civil Code).
XI.
An easement that can be acquired by pres-

cription: (1%)
(A) right of way
(B) watering of an animal
(C) lateral and subjacent support

(D) light and view
CORRECT ANSWER:
(D) light and view
XII.
J.C. Construction (J.C.) bought steel bars from

Matibay Steel Industries (MSI) which is owned by
Buddy Batungbacal. J.C. failed to pay the purchased
materials worth P500,000.00 on due date. J.C. persuaded
its client Amoroso with whom it had receivables to
pay its obligation to MSI. Amoroso agreed and paid
238 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
MSI the amount of P500,000.00 After two (2) other

payments, Amoroso stopped making further payments.
Buddy led a complaint for collection of the
balance of the obligation and damages against
J.C. J.C. denied any liability claiming that its obli-
gation was extinguished by reason of novation
which took place when MSI accepted partial pay-
ments from Amoroso on its behalf.
Was the obligation of J.C. Construction to MSI
extinguished by novation? Why? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the obligation of JC was not extinguished

by novation. Novation may either be objective or
subjective. Subjective novation takes place by the
substitution of debtor or subrogation of a third
person to the rights of the creditor. Novation by sub-
stituting a new debtor may take place even without
the knowledge or against the will of the original
debtor, but not without the consent of the creditor.
There appears to be no consent on the part of MSI
to release J.C. and substitute Amoroso as the new
debtor. Moreover, novation must be expressed and
it cannot be implied and there must be an
agreement that the old obligation is extinguished.
MSI did not agree to release JC from the obligation.
Hence, the obligation of JC was not extinguished.
Xlll.
Esteban and Martha had four (4) children:

Rolando, Jun, Mark and Hector. Rolando had a
daughter, Edith, while Mark had a son, Philip. After the
death of Esteban and Martha, their three (3) parcels
of land were adjudicated to Jun. After the death of
Jun, the properties passed to his surviving spouse
Anita, and son Cesar. When Anita died, her share
went to her son Cesar. Ten (10) years after, Cesar
died intestate without any issue. Peachy, Anita’s
sister, adjudicated to herself the properties as the
only surviving heir of Anita and Cesar. Edith and Philip
would like to recover the properties claiming that
they should have been reserved by Peachy in their
behalf and must now revert back to them.
ls the contention of Edith and Philip valid? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the contention is not valid. The property

adjudicated to Jun from the estate of his parents
which he in turn left to Anita and Cesar is not subject
to reservation in favor of Edith and Philip. In Mendoza
ef. al. vs. Policarpio, ef. al. 6 the court ruled that lineal
character of the resen/able property is reckoned
from the ascendant from whom the propositus
received the property by gratuitous title. The
ownership should be reckoned only from Jun, as he
is the ascendant from where the first transmission
occurred or from whom Cesar inherited the properties.
Moreover, Article 891 provides that the person
6 GR. NO. 176422 -Ivlarch 20,2013

240 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
obliged To reserve The properTy should be on

oscendonl. Peochy is noT Cesor’s oscenddnT buT o
mere colldTerol reloTive. On The ossumpTion ThoT The
properTy is resen/dble, Edilh ond Philip being TirsT
cousins of Cesor, who is The proposiTus, ore
disqudlified To be reservoTorios os They ore noT Third
degree reloTives of Cesoir.
XIV.
A pedesTrian, who was four (4) monThs pregnanT,

was hiT by a bus driver while crossing The sTreeT.
AlThough The pedesTrian survived, The feTus inside her
womb was aborled. Can The pedeslrian recover
damages on account of The deaTh of The feTus? (1%)
(A) Yes, because of Arlicle 2206 of The Civil Code
which allows The surviving heirs To demand damages
for menTal anguish by reason of The deaTh of
The deceased.
(B) Yes, for as long as The pedesTrian can
prove Thai she was noT al faulT and The bus driver
was The one negligenT.
(C) No, because a feTus is noT a naTural person.
(D) No, if The feTus did noT comply wiTh The
requiremenTs under ArTicle 41 of The Civil Code.
CORRECT ANSWER:
(D) No, if The feTus did noT comply wiTh The

—
requiremenTs under ArTicle 4i of The Civil Code.

XV.
Mr. Bong owns several properties in Pasig Cily.

He decided to build a condominium named Flores
de Manila in one of his lots. To fund the project, he
obtained a loan form the National Bank (NB) secured
by a real estate mortgage over the adjoining
properly which he also owned.
During construction, he built three (3) pumps
on the mortgaged property to supply water to the
condominium. After one (1) year, the project was
completed and the condominium was turned over
to the buyers. However, Mr. Bong failed to pay
his loan obligation to NB. Thus, NB foreclosed the
mortgaged properly where the pumps were
installed. During the sale on public auction of the
mortgaged property, Mr. Simon won in the bidding.
When Mr. Simon attempted to take possession of
the property, the condominium owners, who in the
meantime constituted themselves into Flores de
Manila Inc. (FMI), claimed that they have earlier
led a case for the declaration of the existence of
an easement before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
Pasig Cily and prayed that the easement be
annotated in the title of the property foreclosed by
NB. FMI further claimed that when Mr. Bong installed
the pumps In his adjoining properly, a voluntary
easement was constituted in favour of FMI.
Will the action prosper? (4%)
242 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The acTion will noT prosper. An easemenT or

serviTude is “a real righT consTiTuTed on anoTher‘s
properTy, corporeal and immovable, by virTue of
which The owner of The same has To absTain from
doing or To allow somebody else To do someThing
on his properly Tor The benefiT of anoTher Thing or
person." (Valdez v. Tabisura, GR. No. 175510, July
28, 2008). There are Two Types of easemenTs, legal
and volunTary. The former are esTablished by law
while The laTTer by The will of The owners. By iTs very
deTiniTion, an easemenT is an encumbrance im-
posed upon an immovable for The beneTiT of
anoTher immovable belonging To a diTTerenT owner.
IT is To be noTed ThaT aT The Time The pumps were
builT, The properTy on which iT was builT also be-

longed To Mr. Bong. IT cannoT Therefore be said
ThaT an easemenT was esTablished when The
pumps were inslalled as boTh properTies were
owned by one and The same person. IT would be
absurd To say ThaT lvlr. Bong consTiTuTed an ease-
menT on his own properTy. Thus, There is neiTher a
legal easemenT or volunTary easemenT consTiTuTed
in favor of Flvll (PrivaTizaTion and /vlanagemenT
Office vs. Legaspi Towers 300, lnc. GR. No. 147957
July 22, 2009).
XVI.
A congregaon for religious women, by way of

commodaTum, is using The real properTy owned and
regisfered in The name of Spouses Manuel as a
reTreaT house.
Maria, a helper of the congregation discovered

a chest in the backyard. When she opened the chest,
it contained several pieces of jewelry and money.
(4%)
(A) Can the chest containing the pieces of je-
welry and money be considered as hidden treasure?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, for property to be considered hidden treasure

it must consist of money, jewelry or other precious
objects, the lawful ownership of which does not
appear. In the case at bar, it is clear that the
property where the chest was found belongs to the
spouses Manuel and the facts do not indicate that
the chest was hidden from the public eye as in tact
it was found by the helper. Since, the land on
which it was found belong to the spouses Manuel,
they are presumed the owner of the chest where
the jewelry was found.
(B) Who has the right to claim ownership of it?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Since it does not come within the purview of hid-

den treasure, the spouses Manuel have the right to
claim ownership over the chest as well as its contents.
XVII.
On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and

was survived by his wife, Leonora, and children,
Danilo and Carlito. One of the properties he left was
244 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
a piece of land in Alabang where he built his

residential house.
After his burial, Leonora and Mariano’s children
extrajudicially settled his estate. Thereafter, Leonora
and Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to
partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking
Article 159 of the Family Code. Carlito alleged that
since his minor child Lucas still resides in the
premises, the family home continues until that minor
beneciary becomes of age.
ls the contention of Carlito tenable? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the contention of Carlito not tenable. In

is
the case of Patricio v. Dario) with similar facts to the
case at bar, the court ruled that to quality as be-
neficiary of the family home three requisites must be
present (l) the person must be among those
mentioned in Article 154, (2)he/she must be actually
living in the family home and (3) must be
dependent for legal support upon the head of the
family. While Lucas, resides in the family home and is
a descendant of Leonora, he is not dependent for
legal support upon the latter. Lucas cannot directly
claim legal support from his grandmother because
the person primarily obliged to give support to Lucas
is his father, Carlito. Thus, partition may be successfully
claimed by Leonora and Danilo.
7G.R. No. l70829 November 20, 2006

XVIII.
Spouses Magtanggol managed and operated a

gasoline station on a 1,000 sq.m. lot which they
leased from Francisco Bigla-awa. The contract was
for a period of three (3) years. When the contract
expired, Francisco asked the spouses to peacefully
vacate the premises. The spouses ignored the
demand and continued with the operation of the
gasoline station.
One month after, Francisco, with the aid of a
group of armed men, caused the closure of the
gasoline station by constructing fences around it.
Was the act of Francisco and his men lawful?
Why? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the act of Francisco was not lawful. Even if

the lessee's right to occupy the premises has expired,
the lessor cannot physically oust the lessee from the
leased premises if the latter refuses to vacate. The
lessor must go through the proper channels by filing
an appropriate case for unlawful detainer or
recovery of possession. Every person has a right to be
respected in his possession and should he be
disturbed therein he shall be protected in or restored
to said possession by the means established by the
laws and the Rules of Court (Article 539, Civil Code).
The act of Francisco and his men constitute an abuse
of rights because even it he has the right to recover
possession of his property, he must act with justice
246 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
and give the lessees their clay in court and observe

honesty and good faith (Article l9, Civil Code).
XIX.
Who enjoys the Right of Retention? (1%)

(A) depositary until full payment of what may
be due him in deposit
(B) lessee if he advances the expenses for the
repair of the leased premises
(C) bailee if bailor owes him something
(D) builder in bad faith for the recovery of
necessary and useful expenses
CORRECT ANSWER:
A — depository until full payment of whot may

be clue him in deposit (Article 7994)
XX.
Mabuhay Elementary School organized a eld

trip of its Grade VI students in Fort Santiago, Manila
Zoo, and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of
the students had to sign a piece of paper that reads
as follows:
“l allow my child (name of student), Grade—
Section, to join the school's eld trip on February 14,
2014. I will not le any claim against the school,
administrator or teacher in case something happens
to my child during the trip."
Joey, a 7-year old sTudenl of Mabuhay Elemen-

Tary School was biflen by a snake while The group
was Touring Manila Zoo. The parenTs of Joey sued The
school for damages. The school, as a defense,
presenTed The waiver signed by Joey’s parenTs.
Was There a valid waiver of righT To sue The
school? Why? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, There was no valid waiver of The n'ghT To sue

The school. A waiver To be valid musl have Three
reauisiles: l) exislence of The n'ghT; 2) legal capacily of
The person waiving The righl and; 3) The waiver musT
noT be conlrary To law, morals, good cusloms, public
order or public policy or prejudicial To a Third person
wiTh a n'ghT recognized by law. In The case presenled,
The waiver may be considered conlraiy To public
policy as iT exonerales The school from liabilily for fulure
negligence. The waiver in effecl allows The school To
noT exercise even ordinary diligence.
XXI.
A delayed accession is: (1%)

(A) formaTion of an island
(B) avulsion
(C) alluvium
(D) change in The course of The riverbed
248 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
CORRECT ANSWER:
B - avulsion
XXII.
On March 27, 1980, Cornelio led an application

for land registration involving a parcel of agricultural
land that he had bought from Isaac identied as Lot
No. 2716 with an area of one (1) hectare. During the
trial, Cornelio claimed that he and his predecessors-
in-interest had been in open, continuous, uninterrupted,
public and adverse possession and occupation of
the land for more than thirty (30) years. He likewise
introduced in evid\7ence a certication dated
February 12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to
the effect that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands of
the public domain, including the subject matter of
the application, were declared alienable and dispo-
sable agricultural land. (4%)
(A) If you are the judge, will you grant the
application for land registration of Cornelio?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, will not grant the application. To be en-

I
titled to registration of the parcel of land, the appli-

cant rnust show that the land being applied for i5
alienable land of the public domain. Section 48 (b)
of C.A. No. 141 otherwise known as the Public Land
Act as amended and P.D. No. i529, the applicant
through himself or through his predecessors-in-
interest, must have been in open, continuous,
exclusive and noTorious possession and occupaTion

of The land he seeks To regisTer in his name since
June l2, T945 or earlier. AT The Time Cornelio Tiled his
applicaTion for regisTraTion on March 27, 1980, The
land has noT yeT even been declared alienable and
disposable by The STaTe as iT was only declared so
on June l4, i980. Hence, Cornelio’s applicaiion for
regisTraTion musT be denied.
(B) Can Cornelia acquire said agriculTural land

Through acquisitive prescripTion, whether ordinary
or exfraordinary?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Based on The TacTs, Cornelio cannoT acquire

The land Through acquisiTive prescripiion wheTher
ordinary or exTraordinaiy because he possessed iT
aT a Time when iT was sTill parT of The public domain.
His possession of The land no maTTer how long
before iT was declared alienable by The STaTe
should noT be counTed Tor purposes of prescripTion.
lf ever Cornelio can acquire The land by acquisiTive
prescripTion, iT would only be if he possessed The
land for The required number of years in a public,
peaceful, adverse manner, and in The concepT of
an owner aTTer an express declaraTion by The STaTe
ThaT iT is no longer needed for public use or for The
developmenT of naTional wealrh.
250 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
XXIII.
After undergoing sex reassignment in a foreign

country, Jose, who is now using the name of "Josie,"
married his partner Ador. ls the marriage valid? (1%)
(A) Yes, the marriage is valid for as long as it is
valid in the place where it is celebrated following
Article T7 of the Civil Code.
(B) Yes, the marriage is valid if all the essential
and formal elements of marriage under the Family
Code are present.
(C) No, the marriage is not valid because one
essential element of marriage is absent.
(D) No, the marriage is not valid but is voidable
because “Josie” concealed her real identify.
CORRECT ANSWER:
C — No, the marriage is not valid because one

essential element of marriage is absent.
XXIV.
Ted, married to Annie, went to Canada to work.

Five (5) years later, Ted became a naturalized
Canadian citizen. He returned to the Philippines to
convince Annie to settle in Canada. Unfortunately,
Ted discovered that Annie and his friend Louie were
having an affair. Deeply hurt, Ted returned to
Canada and led a petition for divorce which was
granted. In December 2013, Ted decided to marry
his childhood friend Corazon in the Philippines. In
preparation for the wedding, Ted went to the Local
Civil Registry of Quezon City where his marriage

contract with Annie was registered. He asked the
Civil Register to annotate the decree of divorce on
his marriage contract with Annie. However, he was
advised by the National Statistics Office (NSO) to
le a petition for judicial recognition of the decree
of divorce in the Philippines.
Is it necessary for Ted to le a petition for judi-
cial recognition of the decree of divorce he ob-
tained in Canada before he can contract a second
marriage in the Philippines? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, a divorce decree even if validly obtained

abroad cannot have effect in the Philippines unless
it is judicially recognized through an appropriate
petition filed before Philippine courts. In Corpuz v.
Sfo. Tomas, (GR. No. 186571; August ll, 2010), with
facts similar to the case presented, the Supreme
Court ruled that while the second paragraph of
Article 26 of the Family Code bestows no rights in
favor of aliens, it does not strip the latter of legal
interest to petition the court for the recognition of his
foreign divorce decree. The foreign divorce decree
itself, after its authenticity and conformity with the
alien's national law have been duly proven
according to our rules of evidence, serves as a
presumptive evidence of a right in favor of the alien.
ln that case, the foreigner must file a petition under
Rule lO8 and prove therein the fact of divorce by
presenting an official copy attested by the officer
having custody of the original. He must also prove
252 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
that the court which issued the divorce has

jurisdiction to issue it and the law of the foreign
country on divorce.
XXV.
Mario executed his last will and testament

where he acknowledges the child being conceived
by his live-in partner Josie as his own child; and that
his house and lot in Baguio City be given to his
unborn conceived child. Are the acknowledgement
and the donation mortis causa valid? Why? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the acknowledgment is considered valid

because a will (although not required to be filed by
the notary public) may still constitute a document
which contains an admission of illegitimate filiafion.
Article 834 also provides that the recognition of an
illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect even
though the will wherein it was made should be
revoked. This provision by itself warrants a conclusion
that a will may be considered as proof of filiafion.
The donation rnortis causa is also valid because
although unborn, a fetus has a presumptive
personality for all purposes favorable to it provided it
be born under the conditions specified in Article 41.
XXVI.
Isaac leased the apartment of Dorotea for two

(2) years. Six (6) months after, Isaac subleased a
portion of the apartment due to nancial difculty.
ls the sublease contract valid? (1%)
(A) Yes, it is valid for as long as all the elements

of a valid sublease contract are present.
(B) Yes, it is valid if there is no express prohi-
bition for subleasing in the lease contract.
(C) No, it is void if there is no written consent on
the part of the lessor.
(D) No, it is void because of breach of the lease
conhact
CORRECT ANSWER:
B — valid if there is no express prohibition

Yes, it is
for subleasing in the lease contract (Article I650).
XXVII.
Fe, Esperanza, and Caridad inherited from their

parents a 500 sq.m. lot which they leased to Maria for
three (3) years. One year after, Fe, claiming to have
the authority to represent her siblings Esperanza and
Caridad, offered to sell the leased property to Man'a
which the latter accepted. The sale was not reduced
into writing, but Maria started to make partial
payments to Fe, which the latter received and
acknowledged. After giving the full payment, Maria
demanded for the execution of a deed of absolute
sale which Esperanza and Caridad refused to do.
Worst, Maria learned that the siblings sold the same
property to Manuel. This compelled Maria to le a
complaint for the annulment of the sale with specic
performance and damages.
254 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
If you are the judge, how will you decide the

case? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will dismiss the case for annulment of the sale

and specific performance tiled by Maria with res-
pect to the shares pertaining to Esperanza and
Caridad. Since the object of the sale is a co-owned
property, a co-owner may sell his undivided share or
interest in the property owned in common but the
sale will be subject to the result of the partition
among the co-owners. Under the law, each co-
owner shall have full ownership of his part and of the
fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may
therefore alienate, assign, or mortgage it, and even
substitute another person in its enjoyment (Article
493, Civil Code). It is also a rule that in a co-
ownership there is no mutual agency except as
provided under Article 487. Thus, Fe cannot sell the
shares of Esperanza and Caridad without a special
power of attorney from them and the sale with
respect to the shares of the latter without their
written authority is void under Article 1874. Hence,
the sale of the property to lvlanuel is not valid with
respect to the shares of Esperanza and Caridad.
lvlaria can only assail the portion pertaining to Fe as
the same has been validly sold to her by Fe.
XXVIII.
Spouses Esteban and Maria decided to raise
their two (2) nieces, Faith and Hope, both minors, as
their own children after the parents of the minors
died in a vehicular accident.
Ten (T0) years after, Esteban died. Maria later

on married her boss Daniel, a British national who
had been living in the Philippines for two (2) years.
With the permission of Daniel, Maria led a pe-
tition for the adoption of Faith and Hope. She did not
include Daniel as her co-petitioner because for
Maria, it was her former husband Esteban who raised
the kids. (4%)
If you are the judge, how will you resolve the petition?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
l will dismiss the petition for adoption. The rule is

that the husband and wife must jointly adopt and
there are only three recognized exceptions to joint
adoption by the husband and wife: l) if one spouse
seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the other; 2) if
one spouse seeks to adopt his or her own illegitimate
child; 3) it the spouses are legally separated. The
case of Maria and Daniel does not appear to tall
under any of the recognized exceptions, accordingly
the petition tiled by the wife alone should be
dismissed (Section 7, Domestic Adoption Act,
Republic Act. No. 8552).
XXIX.
Timothy executed a Memorandum of Agree-

ment (MOA) with Kristopher setting up a business
venture covering three (3) fastfood stores known as
“Hungry Toppings" that will be established at Mall
Uno, Mall Dos, and Mall Tres.
The pertinent provisions of the MOA provide:
256 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
1.Timothy shall be considered a partner with

thirty percent (30%) share in all of the stores to be
set up by Kristopher;
2. The proceeds of the business, after deduc-
ting expenses, shall be used to pay the principal
amount of P500,000.00 and the interest therein
which is to be computed based on the bank rate,
representing the bank loan secured by Timothy;
3. The net prots, if any, after deducting the ex-
penses and payments of the principal and interest
shall be divided as follows: seventy percent (70%)
for Kristopher and thirty percent (30%) for Timothy;
4. Kristopher shall have a free hand in running
the business without any interference from Timothy,
his agents, representatives, or assigns, and should
such interference happen, Kristopher has the right
to buy back the share of Timothy less the amounts
already paid on the principal and to dissolve the
MOA; and
5. Kristopher shallsubmit his monthly sales
report in connection with the business to Timothy.
What is the contractual relationship between
Timothy and Kristopher? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The contractual relationship between Timothy

and Kristopher is a contract of partnership as defined
under Article 1767 of the Civil Code, since they have
bound themselves to contribute money, property or
industry to a common fund, with the intention of
dividing the prots of the partnership between them.
With o seed money of P500, 000.00 obtained by

Timothy through d bonk loan, they agreed to divide
The profits, 70% for Kristopher and 30% for Timothy.
However, to be more specific, Theirs is a limited

portnership as defined under Article i843 of the
Civil Code because Timothy does not Take port in
the control of The business pursuant to Article i848,
Civil Code. Nevertheless, Timothy is entitled to
monthly sales reports in connection with The
business, a right enshrined in Article i85i of The Civil
Code which gives a limited portner The right To
have on demand a True and Tull intormoition of all
Things affecting The partnership, and a formal
account of partnership attairs whenever circumstances
render it just and reasonable.
XXX.
Joe Miguel, a well-known treasure hunter in

Mindanao, executed a Special Power of Attorney
(SPA) appoinng his nephew, John Paul, as his attor-
ney-in-fact. John Paul was given The power to deal
with treasure-hunting activities on Joe Miguel‘s land
and to le charges against Those who may enter it
without the latter’s authority. Joe Miguel agreed to
give John Paul tony percent (40%) of the treasure that
may be found on the land.
Thereafter, John Paul led a case for damages
and injunction against Lilo for illegally entering Joe
Miguel‘s land. Subsequently, he hired the legal
services of Atty. Audrey agreeing to give the latter
thirty percent (30%) of Joe Miguel‘s share in
whatever Treasure that may be found in the land.
258 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Dissatised however with the strategies imple-

mented by John Paul, Joe Miguel unilaterally
revoked the SPA granted to John Paul.
ls the revocation proper? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the revocation was not proper. As a rule, a

contract of agency may be revoked by the prin-
cipal at will (Article 1920, Civil Code).
However, an agency ceases to be revocable
at will if it is coupled with an interest or if it is a
means of fulfilling an obligation already contracted
(Article i927). In the case at bar, the agency may
be deemed an agency coupled with an interest
not only because of the fact that John Paul
expects to receive 40% of whatever treasure may
be found but also because he also contracted the
services of a lawyer pursuant to his mandate under
the contract of agency. An agency cannot be
revoked if a bilateral contract depends upon it, or if
it is the means of fulfilling an obligation already
contracted. John Paul also stands to be liable to
the lawyer whose services he has contracted.
Hence, Joe Miguel cannot revoke the agency at
will (Sevilla vs. Court of Appeals, GR. No. L-4l 182-3
April 16, 1988).
l.
Alden and Stela were both former Filipino

citizens. They were married in the Philippines but
they later migrated to the United States where they
were naturalized as American citizens. ln their
union they were able to accumulate several real
properties both in the US and in the Philippines.
Unfortunately, they were not blessed with children.
In the US, they executed a joint will instituting as
common heirs to divide their combined estate in
equal shares, the ve siblings of Alden and the
seven siblings of Stela. Alden passed away in 2013
and a year later, Stela also died. The siblings of
Alden who were all citizens of the US instituted
probate proceedings in a US court impleading the
siblings of Stela who were all in the Philippines.
(A) Was the joint will executed by Alden and
Stela who were both former Filipinos valid? Explain
with legal basis. (3%).
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the joint will of Alden dnd Steld is consi-

dered volid. Being no longer Filipino citizens ot the
time they executed their joint will, the prohibition
under our Civil Code on joint wills will no longer
apply to Alden and Stela. For as long os their will
was executed in occordonce with the law of the
pldce where they reside, or the low ot the country
259
260 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
of which they are citizens or even in accordance

with the Civil Code, a will executed by an alien is
considered valid in the Philippines (Article 816).
(B) Can thejoint will produce legal effect in
the Philippines with respect to the properties of
Alden and Stela found here? If so, how?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela can take

effect here in the Philippines with respect to the pro-
perties located in the Philippines provided that it is
submitted for re-probate before the proper court in
this jurisdiction (In Re Matter of the Petition to
Approve the Will of Ruperta Palaganas, G.R. No.
l69l44, January 26, 2Ol l). Wills proved and allowed
in a foreign country, according to the laws of such
country, may be allowed, filed, and recorded by
the proper Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial
Court) in the Philippines. (Section l, Rule 77 Rules of
Court). After the will has been allowed, the effects
of such allowance shall extend to all the estate of
the testator in the Philippines (Section 4, Rule 77).
(C) ls the situation presented in item I an example

of depecage?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, because depecage is a process of applying

rules of different states on the basis of the precise
issue involved. It is a conflict of laws where different
issues within a case may be governed by the laws
ot different states. In the situation in letter (a) no

conflict of laws will arise because Alden and Stela
are no longer Filipino citizens at the time of the
execution of their joint will and the place of
execution is not the Philippines.
Marco and Gina were married in 1989. Ten

years later, or in 1999, Gina left Marco and lived
with another man, leaving their two children of school
age with Marco. When Marco needed money for
their children's education he sold a parcel of land
registered in his name, without Gina's consent,
which he purchased before his marriage. ls the sale
by Marco valid, void or voidable? Explain with
legal basis. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The sale made by Marco is considered void.

The parties were married in 1989 and no mention
was made whether they executed a marriage
settlement. In the absence of a marriage settle-
ment, the parties shall be governed by absolute
community of property whereby all the properties
owned by the spouses at the time of the cele-
bration of the marriage as well as whatever they
may acauire during the marriage shall torm part of
the absolute community. In ACP, neither spouse
can sell or encumber property belonging to the
ACP without the consent of the other or authority of
the court. Any sale or encumbrance made by one
spouse without the consent of the other shall be
262 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
void, although it is considered as a continuing otter

on the part of the consenting spouse upon
authority of the court or written consent of the
other spouse (Article 96 FC).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
On the assumption that the parties are go-

verned by the regime ot conjugal partnership of
gains, the sale of the land by Marco even without
Gina’s consent shall be considered valid. Under
the regime of conjugal partnership of gains, the
spouses retain ownership of the properties they
bring into the marriage and only the fruits and
income of their separate properties as well as
whatever they may acauire during the marriage
through their work, profession, or industry shall form
part ot the conjugal partnership of gains. The facts
state that the land was purchased by lvlarco
before his marriage to Gina and in fact registered
in his name alone. Thus, it the parties are governed
by conjugal partnership of gains, the land would
be the exclusive property of Marco and hence, he
is tree to dispose of it without Gina‘s consent
(Article HO & ill,Family Code).
Julie had a relationship with a married man

who had legitimate children. A son was born out of
that illicit relationship in 1981. Although the putative
father did not recognize the child in his certicate
of birth, he nevertheless provided the child with all
the support he needed and spent time regularly
with the child and his mother. When the man died
in 2000, the child was already 18 years old so he
led a petition to be recognized as an illegitimate
child of the putative father and sought to be given
a share in his putative father's estate. The legitimate
family opposed, saying that under the Family Code
his action cannot prosper because he did not bring
the action for recognition during the lifetime of his
putative father.
(A) If you were the judge in this case, how
would you rule? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
If Iwere the judge, will not allow the action for

I
recognition led after the death of the putative

father. Under the Family Code, an illegitimate child
who has not been recognized by the father in the
record of birth, or in a private handwritten instru-
ment, or in a public document and may prove his
tiliation based on open and continuous possession
of the status of an illegitimate child. Under Article
175, if the action is based on the record of birth of
the child, a final judgment, or an admission by the
parent of the child's tiliation in a public document or
in a private handwritten signed instrument, the
action may be brought during the lifetime of the
child. However, it the action is based on the open
and continuous possession by the child of the status
of an illegitimate child, or on other evidence
allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws, the
action must be brought during the lifetime of the
264 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
alleged parenT (Tayag Courl of Appeals, GR. No.

v.
95229, June 9, 1992). The provision of ArTicle 285 of
The Civil Code allowing The child To Tile The aclion for
recogniTion even afTer The deaTh of The TaTher will
noT apply because in The case presenTed, The child
was no longer a minor aT The Time of deaTh of The
puTaTive faTher.
(B) Wishing To keep The peace, The child during

The pendency of The case decides To compromise
wiTh his puTaTive faTher's family by abandoning his
peTiTion in exchange for ‘/2 of whaT he would have
received as inheriTance if he were recognized as an
illegiTimaTe child. As The judge, would you approve
such a compromise? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, will noT approve The compromise agree-

l
menT because filiaTion is a maTTer To be decided by

law. ll is noT for The parTies To sTipulaTe wheTher a
person is a legiTimaTe or illegiTimaTe child of anoTher
(De Jesus v. EsTaTe of Dizon, 366 SCRA 499).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, I would approve The compromise because IT
isno longer considered TuTure inheriTance. WhaT The

law prohibirs is a compromise wiTh respecT To fuTure
legiTime. ln This case, The TaTher is already dead so The
compromise is considered valid.
IV.
Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together

as common law spouses and agreed to raise a son
of Bert's living brother as their child without legally
adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took care of
their home and the boy. ln their 20 years of
cohabitation they were able to acquire real estate
assets registered in their names as co-owners.
Unfortunately, Bert died of cardiac arrest, leaving
no will. Bert was survived by his biological siblings,
Joe, and the boy.
(A) Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to
Bert and Joe, whereby all properties they acquired
will be presumed to have been acquired by their
joint industry and shall be owned by them in equal
shares? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Article 147 cannot apply to Bert ancl Joe

because the law only applies to a man ancl a
woman who are capacitatecl to marry each other,
who live together as husband and wife without the
benefit of marriage or under a voia marriage. In the
case of Bert and Joe, they are both men so the law
does not apply. The rules on ordinary co-ownership
shall apply where their shares in the properties shall
be in proportion to their contribution.
(B) What are the successional rights of the boy
Bert and Joe raised as their son? (2%)
266 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Neither of the two will inherit from Bert. Joe

cannot inherit because the law does not recognize
the right of a stranger to inherit from the decedent
in the absence ot a will. Joe is neither a compulsory
or intestate heir of Bert and their cohabitation will
not vest the former with the right to inherit from the
latter. The child will likewise not inherit from Bert
because of the lack of formal adoption of the
child. A mere ward or “ampon” has no right to
inherit from the adopting parents (Manuel v. Ferrer,
GR. No. H7246 August 2i, i995).
(C) If Bert and Joe had decided in the early
years of their cohabitation to jointly adopt the boy,
would they have been legally allowed to do so?
Explain with legal basis? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Bert and Joe cannot jointly adopt the boy

because the law on adoption only allows joint
adoption between husband and wife. (Section 7,
Republic Act No. 8552).
V.
Mrs. was married to a ship captain who

L
worked for an international maritime vessel. For her

and her family’s support, she would claim monthly
allotments from her husband’s company. One day,
while en route from Hong Kong to Manila, the vessel
manned by Captain L encountered a severe
typhoon at sea. The captain was able to send radio
messages of distress to the head otce until all

communications were lost. In the weeks that followed,
the search operations yielded debris of the lost ship
but the bodies of the crew and the passengers were
not recovered. The insurance company thereafter
paid out the death benets to all the heirs of the pas-
sengers and crew. Mrs. L led a complaint demanding
that her monthly allotments continue for the next four
years until her husband may be legally presumed
dead because of his absence. If you were the
magistrate, how would you rule? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I would rule against Mrs. L. There is no merit in her

contention that the monthly allotments to her should
continue despite the presumptive death of the
husband. The presumption of death under Article 390
or 391 of the Civil Code arises by operation of law
without need of a court declaration, once the factual
conditions mentioned in the said articles are
established (Manuel v. People of the Philippines, GR.
No. 165842, November 29, 2005 citing TOLENTINO, THE
NEW CIVIL CODE, VOL. l, 690). In addition, in case of
disappearance where there is danger of death, the
person shall be presumed to have died at the
beginning of the tour (4) year period although his
succession will be opened only at the end of the tour-
year period. Hence, the complaint must be dismissed.
268 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
VI.
Kardo as a young lieutenant, met Glenda, and

after a whirlwind courtship they were married. In the
early part of his military career, Kardo was assigned
to different places all over the country but Glenda
refused to accompany him as she preferred to live
in her hometown. They did not live together until the
12th year of their marriage when Kardo had risen
up the ranks and was given his own command.
They moved to living quarters in Fort Gregorio. One
day, while Kardo was away on ofcial business,
one of his military aides caught Glenda having sex
with the corporal assigned as Kardo’s driver. The
aide immediately reported the matter to Kardo who
rushed home to confront his wife. Glenda readily
admitted the affair and Kardo sent her away in
anger. Kardo would later come to know the true
extent of Glenda’s unfaithfulness from his aides, his
household staff, and former neighbors who in-
formed him that Glenda has had intimate relations
with various men throughout their marriage
whenever Kardo was away on assignment.
Kardo led a petition for declaration of nullity
of marriage under Article 36. Based on interviews
from Kardo, his aide, and the housekeeper, a
psychologist testied that Glenda's habitual indelity
was due to her affliction with Histrionic Personality
disorder, an illness characterized by excessive
emotionalism and uncontrollable attention-seeking
behaviour rooted in Gleda’s abandonment as a
child by her father. Kardo, himself, his aide, and his
housekeeper also testied in court. The RTC granted

the petition, relying on the liberality espoused by Te
v. Te (G.R. No. 161793, February 13, 2009) and
Azcueta v. Republic (G.R. No. 180668, May 26,
2009). However, the OSG led an appeal, arguing
that sexual indelity was only a ground for legal
separation and that the RTC failed to abide by the
guidelines laid down in the Molina case. How
would you decide the appeal? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will resolve the appeal in favor of the Republic

and declare that the psychological incapacity of
Glenda has not been sufficiently established. In the
case of Dede! v. Dede! (GR. No. i5l867, January 29,
2004), the Supreme Court refused to declare the
marriage of the parties void on the ground of sexual
infidelity of the wife not with one but with several
men. The Court said that it was not shown that the
sexual infidelity was a product of a disordered perso-
nality and no proof was presented that it was rooted
in the history of the party alleged to be psycho-
logically incapacitated. In the case presented, the
conclusion as to Glenda's psychological incapacity
was arrived at by the psychologist without even
conducting a personal assessment of Glenda but
based only on his interviews with Kardo and other
witnesses. Hence, the appeal should be granted and
the marriage should be declared valid.
270 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Vll.
Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their

children. As they had no intention of coming back,
they offered their house and lot for sale to their
neighbours, Mr. and Mrs. A (the buyers) who
agreed to buy the property for 8 Million. Because
Mr. and Mrs. A needed to obtain a loan from a
bank rst, and since the sellers were in a hurry to
migrate, the latter told the buyers that they could
already occupy the house, renovate it as it was
already in a state of disrepair, and pay only when
their loan is approved and released. While waiting
for the loan approval, the buyers spent PiMillion in
repairing the house. A month later, a person
carrying an authenticated special power of
attorney from the sellers demanding that the buyers
either immediately pay for the properly in full now
or vacate it and pay damages for having made
improvements on the property without a sale
having been perfected.
(A) What are the buyers’ options or legal rights
with respect to the expenses they incuned in improving
the properly under the circumstance? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The buyers here may be deemed possessors or

builders in good faith because they were made to
believe by the sellers that it is alright to make repairs
or renovation on the property while waiting for the
release of their loan. In fact, the sellers themselves
allowed Them To occupy The house make The

much needed repairs. As builders in good TaiTh,
They have The righT To seek reimbursemenT for The
value of The improvemenTs in case The owner
decides To appropriaTe Them. In addiTion They have
The righT To reTain possession of The properTy unTil
They have been reimbursed The amounT They
spenT. They cannoT be asked To remove The
improvemenTs because ThaT is noT one of The
opTions given by law To The landowner in case The
builder is in good TaiTh (ArTicle 448, Civil Code).
(B) Can The buyers be made To immediaTely

vacaTe on The ground Thai The sole was noT perfec-
Ted? Explain briefly. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The buyers cannoT be made To vacaTe on

The ground ThaT The sale was noT perTecTed. A
conTracT of sale is a consensual conTracT and is
perTecTed by mere consenT ThaT is, upon meeTing
of The offer and accepTance upon The Thing and
The cause which are To consTiTuTe The conTracT
(ArTicle T319, Civil Code). The TacTs clearly sTaTe
ThaT when Mr. and Mrs. X offered To sell The house
and LoT To The buyers, The offer was accepTed by
The laTTer who agreed To buy The properTy for P8
million. There was also delivery of The properTy To
The buyers. UndoubTedly, The conTracT of sale was
already perfecTed.
272 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
VIII.
X, Y, are siblings who inherited a 10-storey

Z
building from their parents. They agreed in writing
to maintain it as a co-owned property for leasing
out and to divide the net prots among themselves
equally for a period of 20 years. On the 8th year, X
wanted to get out of the co-ownership so he could
get his 1/3 share in the property. Y and Z refused,
saying X is bound by their agreement to keep the
co-ownership for 20 years. Are Y and Z correct?
Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Y and Z are partly correct. The law provides

that none of the co-owners shall be obliged to re-
rnain in the co-ownership and it is the right of a co-
owner to ask for partition of the co-ownership
anytime. One exception to the rule is if the co-
owners agree to keep the thing undivided which
period shall not exceed ten years. ln this case, the
agreement to keep the thing undivided shall be
valid for ten years but this term may be extended by
a new agreement (Article 494, Civil Code).
IX.
Jose, single, donated a house and lot to his only

niece, Maria, who was of legal age and who
accepted the donation. The donation and Maria's
acceptance thereof were evidenced by a Deed of
Donation. Maria then lived in the house and lot do-
nated to her, religiously paying real estate taxes
thereon. Twelve years later, when Jose had already

passed away, a woman claiming to be an
illegitimate daughter of Jose led a complaint
against Maria. Claiming rights as an heir, the woman
prayed that Maria ordered to reconvey the house
and lot to Jose's estate. In her complaint, she alleged
that the notary public who notarized the Deed of
Donation had an expired notarial commission when
the Deed of Donation was executed by Jose. Can
Maria be made to reconvey the property? What can
she put up as a defense? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. Maria cannot be compelled to reconvey

the property. The Deed of Donation was void be-
cause it was not considered a public document.
However, a void donation can trigger acauisitive
prescription (Solis v. CA 176 SCRA 678; Doliendo v.
Biarnesa 7 Phil. 232). The void donation has a qua-
lity of titulo colorado enough for acquisitive pres-
cription especially since l2 years had lapsed from
the deed ot donation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, Maria can be made to reconvey the

property. The law provides that no person may give
or receive by way of donation more than what he
may give or receive by will. On the assumption that
the property donated to Maria is the only property
ot Jose, the legitime of his illegitimate child would
be impaired if Maria would be allowed to keep the
entire property. After taking into account the value
274 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
of The properTy, Ivldrid can be made To reconvey

The properTy To The exTenT necessary To sdTisfy The
legiTime of .lose‘s illegiTimdTe ddughTer, provided
ThdT The woman claiming To be Jose‘s child can
prove her filidTion To The deceased.
Maria cdn seT up The defense ThdT The dcTion
has prescribed. An dcTion for revocaTion of The
dondTion on The ground Thai iT impaired The legime
of d compulsory heir may only be filed wiThin Ten (l0)
yedrs from The Time The cduse of dclion accrues
which is aT The Time of The dedTh of Jose. The TdcTs are
noT cledr as To when Jose died buT on The dssumpTion
ThdT he died more Ten yedrs prior To The Tiling of The
dcTion, The some hos clearly prescribed. Under ArTicle
il44 of The Civil Code, dcTions upon an obligaTion
credTed by law musT be broughT wiThin Ten yedrs from
The Time The n'ghT of dclion dccrues. Thus, The Ten-yeor
prescriplive period applies To The obligdTion To reduce
inoicious donoTions, required under Arlicle 77l of The
Civil Code, To The exTenT ThdT They impdir The legiTime
of compulsory heirs (Imperial v. Courl of Appeals, GR.
No. H2483 OcTober 8, 1999).
X.
X, a dressmaker, accepTed cloThing maTerials

from Karla To make Two dresses for her. On The day X
was supposed To deliver Karla’s dresses, X called up
Karla To ThaT she had an urgenT malTer To alTend To
and will deliver Them The nexT day. ThaT nighT,
however, a robber broke inTo her shop and Took
everything including Karla's Two dresses. X claims
she is not liable to deliver Karla's dresses or to pay

for the clothing materials considering she herself
was a victim of the robbery which was a fortuitous
event and over which she had no control. Do you
agree? Why? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, do not agree with the contention of X.

l
The law provides that except when it is otherwise

declared by stipulation or when the law provides or
the nature of the obligation requires the assump-
tion of risk, no person shall be liable for those events
which could not be foreseen or which though
foreseen were inevitable (Article ll74, Civil Code).
Based on the facts, X was supposed to deliver the
dress the day immediately before the robbery.
Thus, X cannot invoke fortuitous event as a defense
because she had already incurred in delay at the
time of the occurrence of the loss.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, agree that X is not liable since the loss was

l
due to a fortuitous cause. The rule is that before the

debtor may be put in default, there must first be a
judicial or extrajudicial demand by the creditor.
(Article l 169, Civil Code). This is true even if 0 period
may have been stipulated for the performance of
the obligation unless by stipulation of the parties,
demand has been waived by them. The facts are
silent as to whether Karla has made any demand
upon X to fulfill her obligation to deliver the dresses
and, the mere arrival of the period does not
necessarily put the debtor in actionable delay
276 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
wiThouT proof ThaT demand was dispensed wiTh

based on Their agreemeni. Hence, aT The Time of
The forTuiTous loss, The debTor X was noT yeT in
defaulT. However, X shall sTill be liable for The value
of The cloThing maTerials delivered by Karla.
XI.
Jackie, 16, inherifed a Townhouse. Because she

wanTed To sTudy in an exclusive school, she sold her
Townhouse by signing a Deed of Sale and Turning
over possession of The same To The buyer. When The
buyer discovered ThaT she was sTill a minor, she
promised To execufe anoTher Deed of Sale when she
Turns 18. When Jackie Turned 25 and was already
working, she wanTed To annul The sale and reTurn The
buyer's money To recover her Townhouse. Was The
sale conTracT void, voidable or valid? Can Jackie sTill
recover The properTy? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The conTracT of sale was voidable on The

ground ThaT Jackie is incapable of giving consenT aT
The Time of The execuTion of The sale. Minors are
incapable of giving consenT To a conTracT (ArTicle
1327, Civil Code) and where one of The parTies is
incapable of giving consenT, The conTracT is VOICICIDI6
even Though There may have been no damage To
The conTracTing parlies (ArTicle i390, Civil Code).
Jackie can no longer recover The Townhouse uniT
because if a conTracT is voidable on The ground of
minoriTy, The acTion To annul iT musT be filed wiThin
four (4) years from attainment of the age of majority.

Since Jackie was already 25 years old, the action
has clearly prescribed because it was filed seven
years after she reached the age of majority (Article
i391, Civil Code).
Xll.
(A) lya and Betty owed Jun P500,000.00 for

advancing their equity in a corporation they joined
as incorporators. lya and Betty bound themselves
solidarily liable for the debt. Later, lya and Jun
became sweethearts so Jun condoned the debt of
P500,000.00. May lya demand from Betty P250,000.00
as her share in the debt? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
l
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, lya may not demand the 250,000 from

Betty because the entire obligation has been con-
doned by the creditor Jun. in a solidary obligation,
the remission of the whole obligation obtained by
one of the solidary debtors does not entitle him to
reimbursement from his co-debtors (Article 1220,
Civil Code).
(B) Juancho, Don and Pedro borrowed P150,

000.00 from their friend Cita to put up an internet
café, orally promising to pay her the full amount af-
ter one year. Because of their lack of business
know-how, their business collapsed. Juancho and
Don ended up penniless, but Pedro was able to
borrow money and put up a restaurant which did
well. Can Cita demand that Pedro pay the entire
obligation since he, together with the two others,
278 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
promised to pay the amount in full after one year?

Defend your answer. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Cita cannot demand that Pedro pay The

entire obligation because The obligation in this
case is presumed To be joint. The concurrence of
two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in
one and The same obligation does not imply that
each one of The former has a right to demand, or
that each one of The latter is bound To render,
entire compliance with The prestation. There is is
solidary liability only when The obligation expressly
so states, or when The law or The nature of The
obligation requires solidarity (Article T207, Civil
Code). ln a joint obligation, There is no mutual
agency among The joint debtors such that if one of
Them is insolvent The others shall not be liable for his
share. Thus, being merely a joint debtor, Pedro shall
only be liable for his proportionate share of The
credit extended by Clta.
Xlll.
(A) X and Y are partners in a shop offering

portrait painting. Y provided The capital and The
marketing while X was the portrait artist. They ac-
cepted The 50,000.00 payment of Kyla to do her
portrait but X passed away without being able to
do it. Can Kyla demand that Y deliver the portrait
she had paid for because she was dealing with the
business establishment and not with the artist
personally? Why or why not? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Kyld cdnnoT demond ThdT Y deliver The

porTrdiT. AlThough Kyld conTrdcTed wiTh The pdrTner-
ship, iT wds cleor in The TocTs Tho|T Y merely provided
cdpiTdl dnd iT wds X who wds supposed To credTe
The porTrdiT. The dedTh of X (indusTridl pdrTner) hos
The eTTecT of dissolving The pdrThership (ArTicle 1830,
Civil Code). This is wiThouT prejudice To The righT of
Kyld To recover The dmouni ThdT she hds pdid.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Yes, Kyld mdy demdnd The delivery of The

of such
porTrdiT from Y. Where The service or dcT is
chdrdcTer ThdT iT mdy shdll be performed by oThers,
dedTh does noT TermindTe The conTrdcT or excuse
non-performdhce.
Unless Kyld specificdlly wdnTed X dnd only X To
credTe The porTrdiT, Y mdy sTill comply wiTh The
obligdTion by hiring dnoTher porTrdiT drTisT. (DKC
Ho/dings v. Couri‘ of Appedls, G. R. No. li8248).
However, Y should be given d redsondble Time To
hire d new porTrdiT drTisT To perform The obligdTion.
(B) In This jurisdicon, is 0 joinT venTure (i.e.,c1

group of corporqons conTribuTing resources for c1
specic projecT and sharing The prots therefrom)
considered 0 parfnership? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, under Philippine low, d joinT venTure is un-

dersTood To medn on orgdnizdon formed for some
280 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
temporary purpose and is hardly distinguishable

from a partnership since its elements are similar
which are: community of interest in business, sharing
of profits, and losses, and a mutual right of control
(Primelink Properties v. Lazatin June 27, 2006 citing
Blackner v. Mcdermott, l76 F. 2d 498[l949]). A joint
venture is likened to a particular partnership or one
which has for its object determinate things, their use
or fruits, or specific undertaking or the exercise of a
profession or vocation.
XIV.
A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran over

a boy who died instantly. A criminal case for
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide was led
against the driver. He was convicted and was
ordered to pay P2 Million in actual and moral
damages to the parents of the boy who was an
honour student and had a bright future. Without
even trying to nd out if the driver had assets or
means to pay the award of damages, the parents of
the boy led a civil action against the bus company
to make it directly liable for the damages.
(A) Will their action prosper? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the action will prosper if the parents can

prove that they have not recovered damages in the
criminal case. The omission of the driver in violation
of Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code could give
rise not only to the obligation ex delicto, but also to
the obligation based on culpa aauiliana under
Arficle 2176 of The Civil Code. The source of The

lidbiliTy of The employer in This cdse is quosi-delicf
ond is included wifhin The coveroge of independenf
civil ocfion. In order To enforce The civil lidbilify of
The employer bosed on quosi-delicf, if is nof
necessdry fhof The driver or employee be proven To
be insolvenf. However, Arficle 2177, ofherwise known
os The rule dgoinsf double recovery provides ThdT
The responsibilify for foulf or negligence under Arficle
2176 is enfirely sepdrdfe dnd disfincf from The civil
lidbilify drising from negligence under The Penol
Code. Buf The pldinfiff cdnnol recover domoges
Twice for The some dcf or omission of The defendonf.
(B) If The parenTs of The boy do noT wish To le a
separafe civil acfion againsT The bus company, can
They sfill make The bus company liable if The driver
cannof pay The award for damages? If so, whaf is
The naTure of The emp|oyer’s liabilify and how may
civil damages be safised? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The pdrenfs of The boy con enforce The

subsididry liobilify of The employer in The crimindl
cdse ogdinsf The driver. Under Arficle 102 in relofion
To Arficle 103 of The Revised Penol Code, in defoulf
of persons crimincilly liczble, employers shcill be
subsididrily lioble for The civil lidbilify ddjudged for
crimes commiffed by Their employees. The convicfion
of The driver is o condifion sine duo non for The
subsidiory lidbilify of The employer To oTTdch.
However, proof musf be shown ThdT The driver is
282 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
insolvenT. The civil liabiliTy may be enforced againsT

The employer in The criminal case upon proof ThaT
The driver has no properly wlTh which To saTisfy The
damages awarded To The heirs of The vlcTim.
XV.
(A) Sara borrowed P50,000.00 from Julia and

orally promised To pay iT wiThin six monThs. When
Sara Tried To pay her debT on The 8Th monTh, Julia
demanded The paymenT of inTeresT of 12% per
annum because of Sara’s delay in paymenT. Sara
paid her debT and The inTeresT claimed by Julia.
AfTer reThinking, Sara demanded back from Julia
The amounT she had paid as inTeresT. Julia claims
she has no obligaTion To reTurn The inTeresT paid by
Sara because iT was a naTural obligaTion which
Sara volunTarily performed and can no longer
recover. Do you agree? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The case is one of a naTural obligaTion

noT
buT a case of soluTio indebiTi. This is so because in a
conTracT of loan, any sTipulaTlon wlTh respecl To The
paymenT of inTeresT musT be in wriTing in order for iTs
To valid and demandable (ArTicle i956, Civil Code).
The loan agreernenT between Sara and Julia WCTS HOT
reduced inTo wriTing and Sara could noT be made
liable To pay inTeresT even if she did noT pay The
obligaTion wiThln The 6 monTh sTipulaTed period, unless
There has been a previous demand by Julia. When
Sara paid inTeresT To Julia she did noT do so volunfarily

buf under The misfaken belief Thaf inTeresT was due.
Hence, This is noT d cdse of a nafurdl obligdfion.
(B) Disfinguish civil and nafural obligafions.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A civil obligafion is based on posifive law which

gives d righf of acfion To compel Their performance
in case of breach. A nafurdl obligafion is based on
equify and nafural law and cdnnof be enforced by
courf acfion buf affer volunfary fulfillrnenf by The
obligor, They aufhorize The reTenTion of whaf may
have been delivered or rendered by reason Thereof
(Arlicle 1423, Civil Code).
XVI.
Donna pledged a seT of diamond ring and

earring To Jane for P200,000.00. She was made To sign
an agreemenf Thaf if she cannof pay her debT wifhin
six monThs, Jane could immediafely appropriafe The
jewelry for herself. Aer six monfhs, Donna failed To
pay. Jane Then displayed The earrings and ring seT in
her jewelry shop locafed in a mall. A buyer, Juana,
boughf The jewelry seT for P300,000.00
(A) Was The agreemenf which Donna signed
wifh Jane valid? Explain wifh legal basis. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. The dgreennenf Thdf Jane could appro-

priafe The jewelry upon defaulf of Donna is consi-
284 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
dered pactum commissorium and it is considered

void by law (Article 2088, Civil Code). (NOTE: Article
2088 insofar as applicable to personal properly as
security has been repealed by Republic Act No.
llO57 otherwise known as the Personal Properly
Security Act of 20l 7)
(B) Can Donna redeem the jewelry set from
Juana by paying the amount she owed Jane to
Juana? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
No, Donna cannot redeem it from Juana. Pos-
session of movable properly acquired in good faith is
equivalent to a title (Article 559, Civil Code). Since
Juana acquired the jewelry by purchase in a jewelry
shop inside a mall, she is presumed in good faith. ln
addition, there is no privity of contract between
Donna and Juana since the latter is not a party to
the contract of pledge. This is without prejudice to
any action which Donna may take against Jane.
(C) Give an example of a pledge created by
operation of law. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
One example of a pledge created by opera-

tion of law is the right of the depositary to retain the
thing deposited until the depositor 5hC1l| have paid
him whatever may be due to the depositary by
reason of the deposit (Article i994, Civil Code).
Another is the right of the agent to retain the thing
which is the object of the agency until the principal
reimburses him the expenses incurred in the
execution of the agency (Article l9l4, Civil Code)
XVII.
Z, a gambler, wagered and lost P2 Million in

baccarat, a card game. He was pressured into signing
a Deed of Absolute Sale in favour of the winner
covering a parcel of land with improvements worth
P20 Million. One month later, the supposed vendee of
the properly demanded that he and his family vacate
the properly subject of the deed of sale. Was the deed
of sale valid? What can Z do? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The sale is valid. There is vitiation of consent by

intimidation when one of the contracting parties is
compelled by a reasonable and well-grounded tear
of an imminent and grave evil upon his person or
property, or upon the person or property of his
spouse, descendants or ascendants to give his
consent (Article i335, Civil Code). The facts did not
mention that Z was compelled to sign because of
his tear of imminent and grave evil either upon
himself, his property or spouse, descendants, or
ascendants. Being pressured to sign the deed of
sale is not equivalent to vitiation of consent. Z,
however, can recover his losses from the winner
because the law provides that no action can be
maintained by the winner for the collection of what
he has won in any game of chance. But any loser in
a game of chance may recover his loss from the
winner, with legal interests from the time he paid the
amount lost (Article 2014, Civil Code).
286 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
XVIII.
A lawyer was given an authority by means of a

Special Power of Attorney by his client to sell a parcel
of land for the amount of P3 Million. Since the client
owed the lawyer Pl Million in attorney's fees in a prior
case he handled, the client agreed that if the
property is sold, the lawyer was entitled to get 5%
agent's fee plus Pl Million as payment for his unpaid
attorney’s fees. The client, however, subsequently
found a buyer of his own who was willing to buy the
properly for a higher amount. Can the client
unilaterally rescind the authority he gave in favour of
his lawyer? Why or why not? (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the agency in the case presented is one

which is coupled with an interest. As a rule, agency
is revocable at will except if it was established for
the common benefit of the agent and the principal
or if it is a means of fulfilling an obligation already
contracted. In this case, the interest of the lawyer is
not merely limited to his commission for the sale of
the property but extends to his right to collect his
unpaid professional fees. Hence, it is not revocable
at will (Article I927, Civil Code).
XIX.
Mr. A, a businessman, put several real estate

properties under the name of his eldest son X
because at that time, X was the only one of legal
age among his four children. He told his son he was
to hold those assets for his siblings until they

become adults themselves. X then got married.
After 5 years, Mr. A asked X to transfer the titles
over three properties to his three siblings, leaving
two properties to himself. To A’s surprise, X said that
he can no longer be made to transfer the
properties to his siblings because more than 5 years
have passed since the titles were registered in his
name. Do you agree? Explain. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, do not agree with X. The registration of the

l
titles in the name of X was not intended to transfer

ownership of all the lands to him but merely to hold
it in trust for his younger siblings. If property is
acquired through mistake or fraud, the person
obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a trustee
of an implied trust for the benefit of the person from
whom the property comes (Article i456, Civil
Code). A trust was thereby created in favor of the
siblings of X, when their father A transferred the
titles in his name, since the intent is tor X to hold the
properties until his siblings become adults. An
action to recover property based on an implied
trust prescribes in ten years from the time the title
was issued in favor of the trustee. In the case
presented, only five years had lapsed from the
issuance of the title hence, the action has not yet
prescribed. (Olaco v. Co Cho Chit and Court of
Appeals, GR. No. 58010, 31, March, i993)
288 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
XX.
(A) Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz
led an application for registration of a parcel of
land which after due proceedings was granted by
the RTC, acting as a land registration court.
However, before the decree of registration could
be issued, the spouses Roman and the spouses
Cruz sold the lot to Juan. In the notarized deed of
sale, the sellers expressly undertook to submit the
deed of sale to the land registration court so that
the title to the property would be directly issued in
Juan’s name. ls such a stipulation valid? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, such stipulation is valid. The law does not

require that the application for registration be
amended by substituting the "buyer" or the "person
to whom the property has been conveyed" for the
applicant. Neither does it require that the "buyer" or
the "person to whom the property has been
conveyed" be a party to the case. He may thus be
a total stranger to the land registration proceedings.
The only requirements of the law are: (l) that the
instrument be presented to the court by the
interested party together with a motion that the
sarne be considered in relation with the application;
and (2) that prior notice be given to the parties to
the case (Mendoza v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-
36637, i4 July i978, 84 SCRA 67).
(B) Distinguish direct attack from a collateral
attack on a title. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The affack is considered direcf when fhe objecf

of an acfion is fo annul or sef aside such proceeding,
or enjoin ifs enforcemenf. Conversely, an affack is
indirecf or collaferal when, in an dcfion fo obfain a
differenf relief, an affack on fhe proceeding is
neverlheless made as an incidenf fhereof. Such
acfion fo affack a cerficafe of fifle may be an
original acfion or a counferclaim, in which a cer-
fificafe of fifle is assailed as void (Firaza Sr. v. Ugay,
GR. No. 165838, April 3, 2013; Arangofe v. /vlaglunob,
GR. No. l78906, February l8, 2009). A direcf affack
on a fifle is one where fhe acfion filed is precisely for
fhe purpose of poinfing ouf fhe defecfs in fhe fifle
wifh a prayer fhaf if be declared void. A collaferal
affack is one where fhe acfion is nof insfifufed for fhe
purpose of affacking fhe fifle buf fhe nullify of fhe fifle
is raised as a defense in a differenf acfion.
(C) If fhe fifle in lfem XX. (A) is issued in fhe

names of fhe original sellers, would a mofion led
by Juan in fhe same case fo correcf or amend fhe
fifle in order or reflecf as owner be considered a
collaferal aack? (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, because Juan is nof affacking fhe fifle buf

merely invoking his righf as fransferee. Hence, if
does nof involve a collaferal affack on fhe fifle.
I.
Section 1 of P.D. No. 755 states:
“Section 1. Declaration of National Policy,—lt is

hereby declared that the policy of the State is to
provide readily available credit facilities to the co-
conut farmers at preferential rates; that this policy
can be expeditiously and efciently realized by the
Commercial Bank for the Benet of the Coconut
Farmers’ executed by the Philippine Coconut
Authority, the terms of which’ Agreement’ are hereby
incorporated by reference; x>o<"
A copy of the Agreement was not attached to
the Presidential Decree.
P.D. No. 755 was published in the Official Gazette
but the text of the Agreement described in Section 1
was not published. Can the Agreement in question
be accorded the status of a law? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the Agreement cannot be accorded the

status of a law. Article 2 of the Civil Code requires
that as a condition for its effectivity, a law must be
published either in the Official Gazette or in a
newspaper of general circulation. While there is a
presumption that every person knows the law, this
presupposes that the law has been published if the
presumption is to have any legal justification at all.
290
in Tanada (GR. No. L-63915, 29 December i986),

The Courf ruled Thai all sTaTuTes, including Those of
local abplicafion and privafe laws, shall be
published as a condifion for Their effeclivify, which
shall begin fiffeen days affer publicafion unless a
differenf effecfivify dale is fixed by The legislafure.
Based on The facls, The agreemenf which was
incorporafed by reference in The sTaTuTe was nof
published, hence, if cannoT be accorded The
sTaTus of a law (Cojuangco v. Republic, November
27, 2012; GR. N. 180705).
WiTh regard To an award of inTeresT in The concepT

of acTual and compensaTory damages, please sTaTe
The guidelines regarding The manner of compuTing
legal inTeresT in The following siTuaTions:
(A) when The obligaTion is breached and iT
consisTs in The paymenT of a sum of money like a
loan on forbearance of money; (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
When The obligaTion is breached, and iT con-

paymenf of a sum of money, i.e., a loan
sisfs in The
or forbearance of money, The inTeresT due should
be Thaf which may have been sTibulaTed in
wrifing. Furfhermore, The inTeresT due shall ifself
earn legal inferesf from The Time if is judicially
demanded. ln The absence of sfipulafion, The rafe
of inTeresT shall be l2% per annum (now 6% per
292 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
annum beginning July l, 2Ol3 (Nacar v. Gallery

Frames, GR. No. l8987l - August l3, 2013) to be
computed from default, i.e., from judicial or extra-
judicial demand under and subject to the pro-
visions of Article H69 of the Civil Code.
(B) when the obligation does not constitute a

loan or forbearance of money. (2.5%)
Consider the issuance of BSP-MB Circular No.
799, which became effective on July 1, 2013.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
When an obligation, not constituting a loan or

forbearance of money, is breached, an interest on
the amount of damages awarded may be imposed
at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per
annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged on
unliauidated claims or damages except when or until
the demand can be established with reasonable
certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is
established with reasonable certainty, the interest
shall begin to run from the time the claim is made
judicially or extrajudicially (Art. H69, Civil Code) but
when such certainty cannot be so reasonably
established at the time the demand is made, the
interest shall begin to run only trom the date the
judgment of the court is made (at which time the
quantification of damages may be deemed to have
been reasonably ascertained). The actual base tor
the computation ot legal interest shall, in any case, be
on the amount finally adjudged (Eastern Shipping
Lines v. Court of Appeals; GR. No. 97412 July l2, i994).
Romeo and Juliet, both Filipinos, got married.

After a few years, Juliet got word from her mother
that she can go to the United States for naturalization.
Juliet promised she will be back the moment she
becomes an American. After sometime, Romeo
learned from a friend that Juliet already became a
U.S. citizen and even divorced him to marry a
wealthy American businessman. Romeo filed a
petition before the Regional Trial Court praying that
an order be issued authorizing him to remarry
pursuant to Article 26 of the Family Code. Decide
the petition with reasons. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The petition filed by Romeo should be granted.

Article 26 of the Family Code provides when a
marriage between an alien and a Filipino is validly
celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly
obtained by the alien spouse capacitating him or
her to remarry, the Filipino shall likewise have
the capacity to remarry under Philippine Law.
In Orbecido, the Supreme Court ruled that the
reckoning point for the applicability of Article 26 is
not the citizenship of the parties at the time of the
celebration of the marriage but their citizenship at
the time the valid divorce is obtained by the alien
spouse. The facts state that Juliet acquired American
citizenship, hence, she may obtain a divorce
abroad which if valid in accordance with her
national law shall also be regarded as valid in the
294 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Philippines provided that the divorce is proven

as a fact in accordance with the rules on evidence
in an appropriate proceeding filed before our
courts (Republic v. Orbecido, GR. No. l5-4380
October 5, 2005).
IV.
Leo married Lina and they begot a son. After

the birth of their child, Lina exhibited unusual beha-
viour and started to neglect her son; she frequently
went out with her friends and gambled in casinos.
Lina later had extra-marital affairs with several men
and eventually abandoned Leo and their son. Leo
was able to talk to the psychiatrist of Lina who told
him that Lina suffers from dementia praecox, a form
of psychosis where the afflicted person is prone to
commit homicidal attacks. Leo was once stabbed
by Lina but fortunately he only suffered minor
injuries. Will a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage led with the court prosper? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the petition tor nullity should be denied.

Psychological incapacity under Article 36 must be
characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical an-
tecedence and (c) incurability. The incapacity
must be grave or serious such that the party would
be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties
required in marriage. It must be rooted in the history
of the party antedating the marriage, although the
overt manifestations may only emerge after the
marriage. It must be incurable or, even it it were
otherwise, the cure would be beyond The means of

The party involved (Ligdrde v. Pcrtcrlinghug, GR. No.
168796, April 15, 2010, 618 SCRA 315, 320-321). ln
several cases decided by The Supreme Court, d
finding of psychological incapacity must be bdsed
on an in-depth assessment of The parties by The
psychologist or expert, for o conclusive diagnosis of
a grave, severe and incurable presence of
psychological incapacity (Ngo Te v. Yu-Te, G.R. No.
161793, 13 February 2009, 579 SCRA 193; Pdz v. Paz
GR. No. 166579 February 18, 2010).
In This case, The There was no mention that The
psychiatrist who examined Lina was ever |oresenTed
in court. Rather, it was The husband Leo who gave
an account of what The psychiatrist Told him about
Lina’s condition.
V.
Bernard and Dorothy lived together as common-

law spouses although They are both capacitated to
marry. After one year of cohabitation, Dorothy went
abroad to work in Dubai as a hair stylist and
regularly sent money to Bernard. With The money,
Bernard bought a lot. For a good price, Bernard
sold The lot. Dorothy came to know about The
acquisition and sale of The lot and led a suit to
nullify the sale because she did not give her
consent to the sale.
(A) Will Dorothy's suit prosper? Decide with
reasons. (2.5%)
296 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Yes, DoroThy‘s suiT will prosper. Under ArTicle 147,

if The parTies who are ca|oaciTaTed To marry each
oTher live exclusively wiTh each oTher as husband
and wife wiThouT The benefiT of marriage or under a
void marriage, Their wages and salaries shall be
owned by Them in equal shares and The |oroperTy
acquired by boTh of Them Through Their work or
indusTry shall be governed by The rules on
co-ownership. Clearly, DoroThy and Bernard’s union
iscovered by ArTicle l47 and neiTher parTy can
encumber or dispose by acTs inTer vivos of his or her
share in The properiy acquired during cohabiTaTion
and owned in common wiThouT The consenT of The
oTher, unTil aTTer The TerminaTion of The cohabiTaTion.
(B) Suppose DoroThy was jobless and did noT

conTribuTe money To The acquisition of The loT and her
efforfs consisTed mainly in The care and mainTenance
of The family and household, is her consenT To The
sale a prerequisiTe To iTs validily? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, even if DoroThy was noT working and did

noT conTribuTe money for The acquisiTion of The loT,
her consenT would sTill be necessary because
under ArTicle i47, a parTy who did noT conTribuTe in
The acquisiTion of The proberTy acquired during
cohabiTaTion shall sTill be deemed To have conTribuTed
joinTly in iTs acquisiTion if his or her eTTorTs consisTed in
The care and mainienance of The household.
Vl.
Pedro bought a parcel of land described as

Cadastral Lot No. 123 and the title was issued to his
name. Juan also bought a lot in the same place,
which is described as Cadastral Lot No. 124. Pedro
hired a geodetic engineer to determine the actual
location of Lot No. 123 but for some reason, the
engineer pointed to Lot No. 124 by mistake. Pedro
hired a contractor to construct his house and the
latter put up a sign stating the name of the owner of
the project and the construction permit number. It
took more than a year before the house was
constructed. When Pedro was already residing in
his house, Juan told him to remove his house
because it was built on his (Juan's) lot.
Juan led a Complaint for Recovery of Posses-
sion and prayed that the house be removed
because Pedro is a builder in bad faith. Pedro led
his Answer with Counterclaim that he is entitled to
the payment of the value of the house plus
damages because he is a builder in good faith and
that Juan is guilty of estoppel and laches.
(A) If Pedro is a builder in good faith, what are
the rights given to Juan under the law? Explain.
(2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
If a builder in good faith, Juan as owner

Pedro is
of the land, may appropriate the house built by
Pedro but he has to pay indemnity to the latter.
298 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Judn moy dlso compel Pedro To buy The lcind

provided ThoT iTs vdlue is noT considerdbly higher
Thorn The house. The low (ArTicle 448, Civil Code)
grdnTs To The londowner The righT To oppropridTe
The works inTroduced on The ldnd by Cl builder in
good TdiTh or in The dlTernoTive, he mdy compel The
builder or pldnTer To buy The lond, if The vdlue
Thereof is noT considerobly higher Thon The building
or The Trees; he moy dlso dsk The sower To pdy
proper renT.
(B) If Pedro is ci builder in bod fqiTh, whcT are The

rights given To Juan under The law? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Pedro is in bod fdiTh, Judn mdy osk for The de-

IT
moliTion of The house To resTore The lond To iTs former

condiTion oT The expense of Pedro. Judn mdy dlso
compel Pedro To pdy The price of The ldnd. Under
ArTicle 449, he who builds, pldnTs or sows in bod fdiTh
on The ldnd of dnoTher loses whdT is builT, plonTed or
sown, wiThouT The righT To indemniTy. The londowner
moy demond The demoliTion of The work or ThdT The
building or pldnTing be removed in order To repldce
Things in Their former condiTion dT The expense of The
person who builT, plonTed or sowed. The owner of
The lcind may O|SO compel The builder in bod fdiTh To
pdy The price of The ldnd dnd pdy domoges.
Vll.
Benjamin is the owner of a titled lot which is

bounded on the north by the Maragondon River. An
alluvial deposit of two (2) hectares was added to
the registered area. Daniel took possession of the
portion formed by accretion and claims that he
has been in open continuous and undisturbed
possession of said portion since 1923 as shown by a
tax declaration. In 1958, Benjamin led a Complaint
for Quieting of Title and contends that the alluvium
belongs to him as the riparian owner and that since
the alluvium is, by law, part and parcel of the
registered property, the same may be considered
as registered property. Decide the case and
explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The complaint tiled by Benjamin should be

dismissed. The rule is that the alluvium pertains to
the riparian owner or the owner of the land adjoi-
ning the bank of a river (Article 457, Civil Code).
However, even it the land to which the alluvial
deposit is added is registered land, the alluvium
does not of itself become registered property. The
riparian owner must still apply for registration of the
additional area as a result of the action of the river.
Hence, not being part of the registered land of
Benjarnin, the alluvium may still be subject to
acquisition by third persons by prescription (Heirs of
Francisco Nan/asa, et. AI. vs. lmbornal, GR. No.
182908, August 6, 2Oi4). The facts state that Daniel
took possession of the land in 1923 and the suit was
300 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
tiled only in i958 which is more than thirty (30) years

and by the time the case was filed by Benjamin
Daniel had been in possession for more than
the required number of years to acquire the land
by prescription.
Vlll.
Joven and Juliana are the owners of a 30-

hectare plantation in Cotabato, covered by a title.
One day, a group of armed men forcibly entered
their house and, at gun point, forced them to sign a
Deed of Absolute Sale in favour of Romeo. Romeo
got the title from them and they were ejected from
the house and threatened not to come back or else
they will be killed. The spouses went to Manila and
resided there for more than 35 years. They never
went back to Cotabato for fear of their lives. Word
came to them that peace and order have been
restored in their former place of residence and they
decided to reclaim their land for the benet of their
grandchildren. Joven and Juliana led a suit for
reconveyance of their property. This was opposed
by the grandson of Romeo to whom the title was
eventually transferred, on the ground of laches and
prescription. Decide the case and rule on the
defenses and laches and prescription. Explain your
answer. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The case filed by Joven and Juliana for recon-

veyance will prosper. Even if the Deed of Sale was
signed by Joven and Juliana by force and intimidation,
iT void dnd noT merely volddble becduse The sole

is
hos no cduse or considerdTion (ArTicle i352 and
ArTicle i409). Hence, The TiTle subsequenTly issued
To Romeo’s grandson is likewise void iT being
derived from The void TiTle of Romeo. Equally
unTenc|ble is The cldim Thdi The righT To recover The
possession of The subjecT properTy is dlreddy bdrred
by ldches and prescripTion. Since The deed of sole
which becdme The basis Tor The Transfer of TiTle To
Romeo’s grandson is void, The dcTion To decldre iT
void is imprescripTible. NeiTher will ldches apply
because The deldy in dsserling Their righl could noT
be considered unredsondble in view of The ThredT
To Their life.
IX.
BuTch goT a loan from Hagibis Corporalion

(Hagibis) buT he defaulled in The paymenT. A case
for collecTion of a sum of money was led againsT
him. As a defense, BuTch claims ThaT There was
already an arrangemenT with Hagibis on The
paymenT of The loan. To implemenT The same, BuTch
already surrendered ve (5) service uTiliTy vehicles
(SUVs) To The company for iT To sell and The
proceeds To be crediTed To The loan as paymenT.
Was The obligaon of BuTch exTinguished by reason
of dacion en pago upon The surrender of The SUVs?
Decide and explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The obligdon of BuTch To Hagibis wds noT

exnguished by The mere surrender of The SU\/‘s To
302 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
the latter. Dation in payment, whereby property is

alienated to the creditor in satisfaction of a debt in
money, shall be governed by the law of sales
(Article 1245). In dacion en pogo, as a special
mode of payment, the debtor offers another thing
to the creditor who accepts it as equivalent of
payment of an outstanding debt. The undertaking
really partakes in one sense of the nature of sale,
that is, the creditor is really buying the thing or
property of the debtor, payment for which is to be
charged against the debtor's debt. As such, the
essential elements of a contract of sale, namely,
consent, object certain, and cause or consideration
must be present. In dacion en pago, there is in
reality an objective novation of the obligation
where the thing offered as an accepted equivalent
of the performance of an obligation is considered
as the object of the contract of sale, while the debt
is considered as the purchase price. In any case,
common consent is an essential prerequisite, be it
sale or novation to have the effect of totally
extinguishing the debt or obligation (Filinvest Credit
Corporation vs. Philippine Acetylene Company, lnc.,
GR. No. L-50449 January 30, 1982). There being no
mention in the facts that Hagibis has given its
consent to accept the SUVs as equivalent payment,
the obligation of Butch is not thereby extinguished
by mere delivery of the SU\/s (Philippine National
Bank vs. Pineda, GR. No. L-46658 lvlay 13, 1991).
X.
Jerico, the project owner, entered into a Cons-

truction Contract with Ivan for the latter to construct
his house. Jojo executed a Surety undertaking to
guarantee the performance of the work by lvan.
Jerico and Ivan later entered into a Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) revising the work schedule of
Ivan and the subcontractors. The MOA stated that
all the stipulations of the original contract not in
conflict with said agreement shall remain valid and
legally effective. Jojo led a suit to declare him
relieved of his undertaking as a result of the MOA
because of the change in the work schedule. Jerico
claims there is no novation of the Construction
Contract. Decide the case and explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Jojo's suit will not prosper. The contention that

the MOA which changed the work schedule in the
Construction Contract resulted to novation which
relieved him of his undertaking is without merit. The
obligee accepts the surety’s solidary undertaking to
pay if the obligor does not pay. Such acceptance,
however, does not change in any material way the
ololigee’s relationship with the principal obligor.
Neither does it make the surety an active party in
the principal obligor-obligee relationship. It follows,
therefore, that the acceptance does not give the
surety the right to intervene in the principal
contract. The surety's role arises only upon the
obligor‘s default, at which time, it can be directly
304 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
held liable by The obligee for payment ds d soliddry

obligor (Philippine Charter lnsuronce Corp. v.
Petroleum Distributors & Sen/ice Corp., GR. No.
180898 April 18, 2012).
Moreover, novdlion of d contract is never presumed.
ln The absence of dn express agreement, novdtion
Takes place only when The old and The new
obligotions ore incompatible on every point (Security
Bonk and Trust Compdny, Inc, v. Cuenca, 396 Phil.
108, 122, (2000).
A surety is reledsed from its obligation when

There is d material alteration of The principal con-
tractin connection with which The bond is given,
such as a change which imposes d new obligation
on The promising party, or which Takes away some
obligation dlreddy imposed, or one which chdnges
The legal effect of The origindl conTrdcT and not
merely its form. In This cdse, however, no new
contract was concluded and perfected between
Jerico dnd lvdn. The MOA involves only d revision of
The work schedule ThdT"dll other Terms dnd
conditions of The originol conTrdcT remciin vdlid dnd
legdlly effective.“ There being no novation, Jojo's
contention that he is relieved of lidbility under The
Surety undertaking hds no merit.
XI.
Ellen entrusted her title over The lot where she is

residing to Patrick, her nephew, for safekeeping
because of her poor eyesight. Patrick, a gambler,
prepared a Special Power of Attorney empowering
him to mortgage the lot. Ellen's signature was
forged. With the help of Julia who represented

herself as Ellen, Mega Bank granted a loan to
Patrick secured by a mortgage on Ellen's lot. Due to
non-payment, Mega Bank foreclosed the mortgage
and was declared the highest bidder. Title was later
registered in the name of the bank. When Ellen was
notified that she should vacate the premises, she
led a complaint to nullify the loan with mortgage,
the auction sale and the title of Mega Bank on the
ground that the bank is not a mortgagee in good
faith. Decide the case with reasons. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Ellen. The law requires for

the validity of a contract of pledge or mortgage
that the mortgagor must be the absolute owner of
the property pledged or mortgaged.
Under the doctrine of innocent mortgagee for
value, a mortgagee has a right to rely in good faith
on the certificate of title of the mortgagor of the
property given as security and in the absence of
any sign that might arouse suspicion he has no
obligation to undertake further investigation.
Hence, even if the mortgagor is not the rightful
owner of, or does not have a valid title to, the
mortgaged property, the mortgagee in good foith
is nonetheless entitled to protection (Cabuhat v.
Court of Appeals, 4l8 Phil. 451). This doctrine
presupposes, however, that the mortgagor, who is
not the rightful owner of the property, has already
succeeded in obtaining a Torrens title over the
property in his name and that, after obtaining the
306 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
soid title, he succeeds in mortgoging the property

to onother who relies on whdt dppedrs on the sold
title. The innocent purchdser (mortgdgee in this
cose) for vdlue protected by low is one who
purchdses o titled ldnd by virtue of o deed
executed by the registered owner himself, not by o
forged deed, ds the low expressly stdtes. The
doctrine of mortgdgee in good foith does not
opply to d situotion where the title is still in the
ndme of the rightful owner ond the mortgdgor is Cl
different person pretending to be the owner. In
such d cose, the mortgogee is not on innocent
mortgdgee for vdlue ond the registered owner will
generdlly not lose his title (Ereno v. Kouffmon, GR.
No. 165853, June 22, 2006). Given thdt the property
is still registered in the ndme of Ellen ond the one
who constituted the mortgdge wds merely on
impostor, the doctrine of innocent mortgogee for
vdlue will not opply.
Also, the business of d bdnk imbued with
is
public interest ond bdnks ore expected to exercise
not merely ordindry diligence, but extroordinory
diligence in dll their dedlings.
XII.
On Mdrch 13, 2008, Ariel entered into Cl Deed

of Absolute Sole (DAS) with Noel where the former
sold his titled lot in Quezon City with on dreo of
three hundred (300) square meters to the lotter for
the price of P300,000.00. The prevailing mclrket
volue of the lot wds P3,000.00 per squore meter.
On March 20, 2008, they executed dnother
“Agreement to Buy Back/Redeem Property", where

Ariel was given an option to repurchase the properly
on or before March 20, 2010 for the same price.
Ariel, however, remained in actual possession of the
lot. Since Noel did not pay the taxes, Ariel paid the
real properly taxes to avoid a delinquency sale.
On March 21, 2010, Ariel sent a letter to Noel,
attaching thereto a manager’s check for P300,
000.00, manifesting that he is redeeming the property.
Noel rejected the redemption claiming that the
DAS was a true and valid sale representing the true
intent of the parties. Ariel led a suit for the
nullication of the DAS or the reformation of said
agreement to that of a Loan with Real Estate
Mortgage. He claims the DAS and the redemption
agreement constitute an equitable mortgage. Noel,
however, claims it is a valid sale with pacto de retro
and Ariel clearly failed to redeem the properly.
As the RTC judge, decide the case with reasons.
(5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Ariel and declare that the

contract between them is an equitable mortgage.
An equitable mortgage is one which, although
lacking in some formality, or form, or words, or other
requisites demanded by a statute, nevertheless
reveals the intention of the parties to charge real
property as security for a debt, and contains
nothing impossible or contrary to law (Dorado Vda.
de Delfin v. De//ota, GR. No. 143697, January 28,
308 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
2008, 542 SCRA 397, 401). The presence ot any of

the circumstances mentioned in Article 1602 would
be sufficient to make a finding that a sale with a
right to repurchase is in reality an equitable mortgage.
In the instant case, more than one of the
circumstances enumerated in Article 1602 are
present, to wit: the inadequacy of the selling price of
the properties in relation to its true value; the vendor
Ariel remained in possession of the property and paid
the real properly taxes. These circumstances are
indicative that the parties intended an equitable
mortgage and not a contract ot sale (lnamarga v.
A/ano, GR. No. 171321 December 18, 2008).
it also immaterial that the deed executed by
is
the parties is a Deed of Absolute Sale because the
provisions of Article 1602 shall also apply to a
contract purporting to be an absolute sale. (Article
1604, Civil Code)
Xlll.
Peter, a resident of Cebu City, sent through

Reliable Pera Padala (RPP) the amount of P20,
000.00 to his daughter, Paula, for the payment of
her tuition fee. Paula went to an RPP branch but was
informed that there was no money remitted to her
name. Peter inquired from RPP and was informed
that there was a computer glitch and the money
was credited to another person. Peter and Paula
sued for actual damages, moral damages and
RPP
exemplary damages. The trial court ruled that there
was no proof of pecuniary loss to the plaintiffs
but awarded moral damages of P20,000.000 and

exemplary damages of P5, 000.00. On appeal, RPP
questioned the award of moral and exemplary
damages. ls the trial court correct in awarding
moral and exemplary damages? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the trial court was not correct in awarding

moral and exemplary damages. Moral damages
include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright,
serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded
feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar
injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation,
moral damages may be recovered if they are the
proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act or
omission (Art. 2217). Moral damages may be
awarded in the instances mentioned in Article 2219
of the Civil Code. In breach of contract, moral
damages may only be awarded if the defendant
acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
In the case at bar, there is no indication that
RPP isguilty of fraud or bad faith when it failed give
the money remitted by Peter to Paula. Hence, no
moral damages may be awarded. Peter and Paula
are also not entitled to exemplary damages. If the
court has no proof or evidence upon which the
claim for moral damages could be based, such
indemnity could not be outrightly awarded. The
same holds true with respect to the award of
exemplary damages where it must be shown that
the party acted in a wanton, oppressive or
malevolent manner (Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs.
310 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
National Labor Relations Commission, 259 SCRA 459

[1996]). Furthermore, this specie of damages is
allowed only in addition to moral damages such
that no exemplary damages can be awarded
unless the claimant first establishes his clear right to
moral damages (Mahinay v. \/elasauez, Jr. GR. No.
152753 January 13, 2004).
XIV.
On February 28, 1998, Arthur led an application

for registration of title of a lot in Ternate, Cavite
before the Regional Trial Court of Naic, Cavite
under Section 48 (b) of Commonwealth Act No. 141
(CA 141) for judicial conrmation of imperfect title.
Section 48 (b) of CA 141 requires possession
counted from June 12, 1945. Arthur presented
testimonial and documentary evidence that his
possession and that of his predecessors-in-interest
started in 1936. The lot was declared alienable and
disposable (A and D) in 1993 based on a PENRO
certication and a certied true copy of the original
classication made by the DENR Secretary. The
government opposed the application on the
ground that the lot was certied A and D only in
1993 while the application was instituted only in
1998. Arthur’s possession of ve (5) years from the
date of declaration does not comply with the 30-year
period required under CA 141. Should the possession
of Arthur be reckoned from the date when the lot was
declared A and D or from the date of actual
possession of the applicant? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The possession of ArThur should be reckoned

only from The do|Te loTs A dnd D were declored ds
dliendble dnd disposoble by The STdTe dnd noT
from The ddTe of dcTuol possession. SecTion 48(b) of
The Public Ldnd AcT used The words "ldnds of The
public donndin" or “dliendble dnd disposdble ldnds
of The public domdin" To cleorly signify ThdT ldnds
oThervvise cloissified, i.e., minerdl, foresT or Timber, or
ndiiondl pdrks, dnd ldnds of poTrimonidl or privoTe
ownership, ore ouTside The coverdge of The Public
Ldnd AcT. WhdT The ldw does noT include, iT
excludes. The use of The descripve phrdse “dliendble
dnd disposable" furTher limiTs The coveroge of
SecTion 48(b) To only The cigriculTurol ldnds of The
public domdin. SecTion 48(b) of The Public Ldnd
AcT, in reldon To SecTion 14(1) of The ProperTy
RegisTrdTion Decree, presupposes ThdT The ldnd
subjecT of The cipplicoon for regisTrdTion nnusT hove
been dlreddy cldssified ds dgriculiurol ldnd of The
public domdin in order for The provision To dpply.
Thus, obseni proof ThdT The ldnd is dlreody cldssified
ds dgriculTurci| ldnd of The public dornoin, The
Regdlion DocTrine dpplies, dnd overcomes The
presumpon ThdT The ldnd is dlienoble dnd disposdble
os loid down in SecTion 48(b) of The Public Lond AcT
(Heirs of /vldldbondn v. Republic, GR. No. 179987
SepTember 3, 2013).
Bdsed on The fdcTs, The lond wos decldred
dlienoble only in i993 dnd The dppliccion WCTS filed
in 1998 which is shorT of The ThirTy yedr period
312 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
required for acauisitive prescription. Possession of

the land at a time that it is still classified as in-
alienable no matter how long will not ripen into
ownership. Hence, the application for registration
filed by Arthur should be denied.
XV.
Peter and Paul entered into a Contract to Sell

whereby Peter, the lot owner, agreed to sell to Paul
his lot on November 6, 2016 for the price of
P1,000,000.00 to be paid at the residence of Peter in
Makati City at 1:00 p.m. If the full price is paid in
cash at the specied time and place, then Peter
will execute a Deed of Absolute Sale and deliver
the title to Paul.
On November 6, 2016, Paul did not show up
and was not heard of from that date on. In view of
the non-performance by Paul of his obligation,
Peter sent a letter to Paul that he is expressly and
extra-judicially declaring the Contract to Sell
rescinded and of no legal and binding effect. Peter
further stated that failure on the part of Paul to
contest the rescission within thirty (30) days from
receipt of said letter shall mean that the latter
agreed to the rescission.
Paul did not reply to this letter for ve (5) years.
Thus, Peter decided to sell his lot to Henry in 2021.
After hearing that Henry bought the lot, Paul now
questions the sale of the lot to Henry and les a
complaint for nullication of the sale.
(A) ls the exercise by Peter of his power to

rescind extra-judicially the Contract to Sell the
proper and legal way rescinding said contract?
Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As a general rule, the power to rescind an

obligation must be invoked judicially and cannot
be exercised solely on a party’s own judgment that
the other has committed a breach of the ob-
ligation. This is so because rescission of a contract
will not be permitted for a slight or casual breach,
but only for such substantial and fundamental
violations as would defeat the very object of the
parties in making the agreement. However, rescission
as a remedy for breach is applicable only to an
obligation which is extant. In the case presented,
the contract between the parties in a contract to
sell and not a contract of sale and in a contract to
sell, there is a reservation of ownership on the part
of the seller and his obligation to convey title
will only arise upon full payment of the purchase
price. Nonetheless, Peter may validly cancel the
contract to sell.
(B) In case Paul made a down payment
pursuant to a stlpulatlon In the Contract to Sell,
what is the legal remedy of Peter? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
if Paul made a down payment, Peter may still

cancel the contract because in a contract to sell,
the seller does not yet agree to transfer ownership
314 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
To The buyer. The non-payment of The price in a

contract To sell is not a breach for which The
remedy of rescission maybe availed of, but rather it
is considered as a failure To comply with a positive
suspensive condition which will prevent The obligation
of The seller To convey Title Trom acquiring
obligatory force. (Ursa! v. Court of Appeals. GR.
No. l424i i, October i4, 2005, 473 SCRA 52, citing
Chua v. Court of Appeals, 401 SCRA 54 (2003)
XVI.
Don Ricardo had 2 legitimate children—Tomas

and Tristan. Tristan has 3 children. Meanwhile,
Tomas had a relationship with Nancy, who was also
single and had The legal capacity to marry. Nancy
became pregnant and gave birth to Tomas, Jr.
After The birth of Tomas, Jr., his father, Tomas, died.
Later, Don Ricardo died without a will and Tristan
opposed the motion of Tomas, Jr. to be declared
an heir of deceased since he is an illegitimate
child. Tomas, Jr. countered that Article 992 of Civil
Code is unconstitutional for violation of the equal
protection of the laws. He explained that an
illegitimate child of an illegitimate parent is allowed
to inherit under Articles 902, 982 and 990 of the Civil
Code while he an illegitimate child of a legitimate
father cannot. Civil Law commentator Arturo Tolentino
opined that Article 992 created an absurdity and
committed an injustice because while the illegitimate
descendant of an illegitimate child can represent,
the illegitimate descendant of legitimate child
cannot. Decide the case and explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
l will rule in favor of Trislan. Descendanls of an

illegiTimaTe child whelher legiTimaTe or illegiTimaTe
may represenT him in The esTaTe of The grandparenls;
descendanls of a legiTimaTe child, however, in
order To represenl The laTTer musT Themselves be
legilimale. Simply sTaTed, an illegilimale child may
be represenled by boTh legilimale and il|egiTimaTe
descendanls, while a legiTimaTe child may only be
represenled by his legiTimaTe descendanls. The
lines of This disTincTion beTween legiTimaTes and
i|legiTimaTes which goes back very far in legal
hisiory, have been soflened bul noT erased by
presenT law. Our legislalion has noT gone so far as
To place legilimale and illegilimale children on
exaclly The same fooling. Even The Family Code of
1987 has noT abolished The gradalion belween
legiTimaTe and illegilimale children lallhough iT has
done away wiTh The sub-classificaTion of illegiTimaTes
inlo naTural and 'spurious'). IT would Thus be correcT
To say ThaT illegiTimaTe children have only Those
righTs which are expressly or clearly granTed To
Them by law (Diaz v. lnfermediare Appe/laTe Courr,
GR. No. L-66574 February 2l, l99O).
Tomas cannoT argue ThaT Arlicle 992 is violaTive
of The equal proTecTion clause because equal
proTecTion simply requires ThaT all persons or Things
similarly silualed should be Trealed alike, boTh as To
righTs conferred and responsibiliTies imposed (lchong
v. Hernandez lOl Phil. li55). ll, however, does noT
require The universal applicaTion of The laws To all
316 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
persons or things without distinction. What it simply

requires is equality among equals as determined
according to q valid classification. Indeed, the
equal protection clause permits classication.
XVII.
Macario bought a titled lot from Ramon, got the

title and took possession of the lot. Since Macario
did not have the money to pay the taxes, fees and
registration expenses, he was not able to register the
Deed of Absolute Sale. Upon advice, he merely
executed an Afdavit of Adverse Claim and had it
annotated at the back of the title. A few years after,
he received a Notice of Levy on Attachment and
Writ of Execution in favour of Alex. The notice, writ
and certicate of sale were annotated at the back
of the title still in Ramon’s name. Alex contends that
since the Afdavit of Adverse Claim is effective only
for 30 days form the date of its registration, then its
validity has expired. Macario posits that the anno-
tation of his adverse claim is notice to the whole
world of his purchase of the lot in question. Who has
the superior right over the disputed property
Macario or Alex? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Macario has a better right to the land. It is a well

settled rule in this jurisdiction that actual notice of an
adverse claim is equivalent to registration and the
subsequent registration of the Notice of Levy could
not have any legal effect in any respect on account
of prior inscripfion of The ddverse cldim dnnofofed on

The Tifle (GuidoTe v. /vldrdvi/lo, 48 Phil. 442).
The conTenTion of Alex Thof The onnofdfion of

ddverse cldim is effecfive only for ThirTy ddys ThirTy
ddys is wiThouT merif. Under Secfion 7O of P. D.
i529, The ddverse cldim shdll be effecfive for d
period of ThirTy ddys from iTs regisfrdfion. The some
low, however, provides Thof offer The ldpse of sdid
period, The dnnofdfion of ddverse cldim mdy be
cdncelled upon filing of d verified pefifion Therefor
by The pdrTy in inferesf.
If The rdfiondle of The low wds for The ddverse
cldim To ipso focfo lose force dnd effecf offer
The
ldpse of ThirTy ddys, Then if would noT hove been
necessdry To include The foregoing cdveof To
clorify dnd complefe The rule. For Then, no ddverse
cloim need be cdncelled. If if hos been duTo-
mdficdlly Termindfed by mere ldpse of Time, The
low would nol hove required The pdrTy in inferesf To
do o useless dcf. In consfruing The low dforesdid,
cdre should be Token Thdf every porf Thereof be
given effecf dnd d consfrucfion Thdf could render
d provision inoperofive should be dvoided, dnd
inconsisTenT provisions should be reconciled
whenever possible ds pdrfs of d hdrnnonious whole.
In oiscerfclining The period of effecfivify of on
inscripfion of ddverse cldim, we musf redd The low
in ifs enTireTy (Sdjonos v. Courf of Appedls dnd
Pi/ores, GR. No. lO2377 July 5, i996).
318 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
XVIII.
Dr. Jack, a surgeon, holds clinic at the St.

Vincent’s Hospital and pays rent to the hospital. The
fees of Dr. Jack are paid directly to him by the
patient or through the cashier of the hospital. The
hospital publicly displays in the lobby the names
and specializations of the doctors associated or
accredited by it, including that of Dr. Jack. Marta
engaged the services of Dr. Jack because of
recurring stomach pain. It was diagnosed that she
is suffering from cancer and had to be operated
on. Before the operation, she was asked to sign a
“consent for hospital care," which reads:
“Permission is hereby given to the medical,
nursing and laboratory staff of the St. Vincent’s
Hospital to perform such procedures and to administer
such medications and treatments as may be
deemed necessary or advisable by the physicians
of this hospital for and during the connement.”
After the surgery, the attending nurses reported
that two (2) sponges were missing. Later, Marta
died due to complications brought about by the
sponges that were le in her stomach. The husband
of Marta sued the hospital and Dr. Jack for
damages arising from negligence in the medical
procedure. The hospital raised the defense that Dr.
Jack is not its employee as it did not hire Dr. Jack
nor pay him any salary or compensation. It has
absolutely no control over the medical services
and treatment being provided by Dr. Jack even
signed an agreement that he holds the hospital free

and harmless from any liability arising from his
medical practice in the hospital.
ls St. Vincent’s Hospital liable for the negligence
of Dr. Jack? Explain your answer. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, St. Vincent’s Hospital is liable for the

negligence of Dr. Jack. The doctrine of corporate
negligence allows allocating liability for negligent
acts of health practitioners absent facts to support
the application of respondeat superior. The duty of
providing health service is no longer the sole
prerogative and responsibility of the physician. Also,
under the “doctrine of apparent authority“, or
“holding out theory", or “ostensible agency”, or
“agency by estoppel" the hospital is liable because it
publicly displayed in its lobby the names and
specializations of physicians associated or accredited
by it, including Dr. Jack. It is now estopped from
passing all the blame to the physicians whose
names it proudly paraded in the hospital leading
the public to believe that it vouched for their skill
and competence. By accrediting Dr. Jack and
publicly advertising his qualifications, the hospital
created the impression that he was its authorized
agent to perform medical or surgical sen/ices for its
patients (Professional Services, Inc. v. Natividad and
Enriaue Agana/ Agana vs. Juan Fuentes/ Miguel
Ampil v. Agana GR. No. 126297 January 31, 2007).
320 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
XIX.
Brad and Angelina had a secret marriage

before a pastor whose office is located in Arroceros
Street, City of Manila. They paid money to the pastor
who took care of all the documentation. When
Angelina wanted to go to the U.S., she found out
that there was no marriage license issued to them
before their marriage. Since their marriage was
solemnized in 1995 after the effectivity of the Family
Code, Angelina led a petition for judicial declaration
of nullity on the strength of a certication by the
Civil Registrar of Manila that, after a diligent and
exhaustive search, the alleged marriage license
indicated in the marriage certificate does not
appear in the records and cannot be found.
(A) Decide the case and explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage of Brad and Angelina should be

declared void. One of the formal requisites of a
marriage is a marriage license, the total absence of
which will render the marriage void. The absence of
the marriage license was certified by the local civil
registrar who is the official custodian of these
documents oincl who is in the best position to certify
as to the existence of these records. Also, there is a
presumption of regularity in the performance of
official duty (Republic v. Castro GR. No. lO3047
September 2, i994).
(B) In case the marriage was solemnized in

T980 before the effectivity of the Family Code, is it
required that a judicial petition be eld to declare
the marriage null and void? Explain. (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, prior To T986 when The decision in Weigel v.

Semplo Diy (GR. No. L-53703 August T9, T986) was
promulgated, The prevailing doctrine was if The
marriage is void There is no absolute necessity That a
judicial action be Tiled To have it declared void
(People v. Aragon, GR. No. L-TOOT6 February 28,
T957, Odayal v. Amante, A.M. No. 58 June 2, T977,
People v. Mendoza (95 Phil., 845). However, The
decision in Weigel clarified that even if The marriage
is void, The parties should not be permitted to judge
for Themselves its nullity. The question should be
resolved entirely by The courts.
XX.
Princess married Roberto and bore a son, Onofre.

Roberto died in a plane crash. Princess later married
Mark and They also had a son - Pepito. Onofre
donated to Pepito, his half-brother, a lot in Makati
City worth P3,000,000.00. Pepito succumbed to an
illness and died intestate. The lot given to Pepito by
Onofre was inherited by his father, Mark. Mark also
died intestate. Lonely, Princess followed Mark to the
life beyond. The claimants to The subject lot
emerged - Jojo, the father of Princess; Victor, the
father of Mark; and Jerico, the father of Roberto.
322 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Who among the three (3) ascendcmts is entitled

to the lot? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Jojo entitled to the property. When Onotre

is
donoted the ldnd to his brother Pepito ond the lotter
died without o will which ollowed the property to
poss by operotion of low to his fother Mork, the
property become subject to reservo troncol in tovor
of third degree relotives of the Pepito, the propositus.
When Mork died intestote, the resen/oble property
possed to Princess who is or quolied resen/otorio
since she is o third degree relotive of the propositus,
Pepito ond she belongs to the line from which the
property corne (rnoternol). When Princess ocquired
the reservoble property upon Mork‘s deoth it ex-
tinguished the reservo. Hence, os heir of Princess, Jojo
is the one entitled to the property.
I.
Stale wheTher The following marilal unions are

valid, void, or voidable, and give The correspon-
ding for your answer.
(a) Ador and Becky's marriage wherein Ador
was afflicied wiTh AIDS prior To The marriage. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage of Ador and Becky is a voidable

marriage under paragraph (6) of Ariicle 45 of The
Family Code which provides Thal a marriage is
voidable if eiTher pariy was afflicled wiTh a sexually
Transmissible disease found To be serious and
appears incurable. Since Ador was afflicled wilh
AIDS even prior To The marriage which has no
known cure up To This day, his marriage To Becky is
considered voidable.
(b) Carlos’ marriage To Dina which Took place
aer Dina had poisoned her previous husband Edu
in order To free herself from any impedimeni in
order To live wiTh Carlos. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage of Carlos To Dina is considered

void by reason of public policy under paragraph
(9) Ariicle 38 of The Family Code which considers a
323
324 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
marriage beTween parTies where one, wiTh The

inTenTion To marry The oTher, killed The oTher
person's spouse or his or her own spouse. The TacTs
clearly sTaTe ThaT Dina poisoned her husband Edu
To remove The impedimenT and enable her To
marry Carlos. Hence, Their marriage is void by reo-
son of public policy.
(c) Eli and Fely’s marriage solemnized seven
years aer The disappearance of Chona, Eli’s pre-
vious spouse, aer The plane she had boarded
crashed in The WesT Philippine Sea. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage beTween Eli and Fely which was

solemnized seven years afTer The disappearance of
Eli's former wife, Chona is sTill void unless prior To The
celebraTion of The subseauenT marriage, Eli had filed
The appropriaTe peTiTion for The declaraTion of
presumpTive deaTh of Chona and prove ThaT he has
a well-founded belief ThaT his absenT spouse is
already dead. Arlicle 4i of The Family Code
considers void a marriage conTracTed by any
person during The subsisTence of his/ her previous
marriage unless prior To The celebraTion of The
subseauenT marriage, The prior spouse had been
absenT for four consecuTive years and The spouse
presenT had a well-founded belief ThaT The absenT
spouse is already dead. In case The disappearance
of The spouse occurred under circumsTances where
There is danger of deaTh under ArTicle 391 of The
Civil Code, an absence of only Two years shall
be sufficient for purposes of filing the petition

for declaration of presumptive death. The facts
failed to state Eli had secured the judgment of the
court declaring Chona presumptively dead prior to
the celebration of his marriage to Fely, hence,
the subsequent marriage is still considered void
and bigamous.
(d) David who married Lina immediately the
day after obtaining a judicial decree annulling his
prior marriage to Elisa. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage between David and Lina shall be

considered void even if if was celebrated after
David obtained a judicial decree annulling his
previous marriage fo Elisa. The law requires that in
case the marriage is annulled, the parties to the
dissolved marriage musf first comply with the
requiremenfs of recording the judgment of annulment
in the appropriate civil registry and undertake the
partition, liquidation, and distribution of the presumptive
legitimes of their common children before contracting
a subsequent marriage. The partition, liquidation,
and distribution of the presumptive legifimes must
likewise be recorded in the appropriafe registries of
property. The failure of the parties to comply with
these requirements would render their marriage void
under Article 53 of the Family Code.
(e) Maniage of Zoren and Carmina who did not
secure a marriage license prior to their wedding, but
lived together as husband and wife for T0 years
without any legal impediment to marry. (2%)
326 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The marriage between Zoren and Carmina is

valid because it is one of those exempt from the
license requirement uncler the Family Code (Article
34). No license shall be necessary tor the marriage
of a man and a woman who have liveol together
as husband ancl wife for at least five years without any
legal impediment to marry each other. Zoren and
Carmina must execute an attiaavit to that effect.
In 1960, Rigor and Mike occupied two separate

but adjacent tracts of land in Mindoro. Rigor’s tract
was classied as timber land while Mike's was
classied as agricultural land. Each of them fenced
and cultivated his own tract continuously for 30
years. In 1991, the Government declared the land
occupied by Mike as alienable and disposable,
and the one cultivated by Rigor as no longer
intended for public use or public service.
Rigor and Mike now come to you today for
legal advice in asserting their right of ownership of
their respective lands based on their long pos-
session and occupation since 1960.
(a) What are the legal consequences of the
1991 declarations of the Government respecting
the lands? Explain your answer. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The 1991 declaration by the Government thdt

the lond occupied by Mike ds dlienoble and that
ot Rigor as no longer intended tor public use or
public service will not give the present occupdnts
the right to claim ownership over the respective
portions they are occupying. All londs of The public
domain belong to The Stdte. All lands not
dppedring to be cledrly under privdte ownership
ore presumed to belong to The State. Also, public
londs remdin port of The inalienable land of The public
domdin unless The State is shown to have reclassified
or ciliendted thern to private persons (Republic v. Loo,
GR. No. 150413, July 1, 2003, 405 SCRA 291,298).
(b) Given that, according to Section 48 (b) of
Commonwealth Act No. 141, in relation to Section
14 (1) of Presidential Decree No. 1529, The open,
continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession
and occupation of alienable and disposable lands
of The public domain as basis for judicial conrmation
of imperfect title must be from June 12, 1945, or
earlier, may Mike nevertheless validly base his
assertion of the right of ownership on prescription
under the Civil Code? Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Mike may not vdlidly dssert ownership by

prescription over the ldnd. Section 48(b) ot the
Public Ldnd Act used the words “londs of the public
domain" or "olienoble and disposoble londs of the
public domdin“ to cledrly signify that londs
328 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
oTherwise classified, i.e., mineral, foresT or Timber, or

naTional parks, and lands of paTrimonial or privaTe
ownership, are ouTside The coverage of The Public
Land AcT. WhaT The law does noT include, iT
excludes. The use of The descripve phrase “alienable
and disposable" TurTher limiTs The coverage of
SecTion 48(b) only To agriculiural lands of The public
domain. SecTion 48(b) of The Public Land AcT, in
relaTion To SecTion l4(l) of The ProperTy RegisTraTlon
Decree, presupposes ThaT The land subjecT of The
applicaTion for regisTraTion musT have been already
classified as agriculTural land of The public domain
in order for The provision To apply.
AlThough lvlike’s possession lasTed for more
Than 30 years, prescripTion cannoT be reckoned
from The Time of possession buT from The Time ThaT
The land was declared alienable and disposable.
The land was declared alienable and disposable
only in T991 and even assuming ThaT Mike would Tile
The applicaTion Tor regisTraTion of The land in 2017,
his possession would only consisT of 26 years from
The Time of The declaraTion by The governmenT ThaT
The land is alienable and disposable. Hence, his
possession is shorT of The ThlrTy-year prescripTive
period. Possession of The land aT a Time when iT was
noT yeT classied as alienable and disposable,
no maTTer how long, will noT ripen inTo ownership
(Heirs of Ma/abanan v. Republic, GR. No. l79987
SepTember 3, 2013).
(c) Does Rigor have legal basis for his applica-
Tion for judicial conrmaon of imperfecT TiT|e based
on prescripTion as defined by The Civil Code given
that, like Mike, his open, continuous, exclusive, and

notorious possession and occupation was not since
June T2, T945, or earlier, and his tract of land was
timber land until the declaration in T991. Explain
your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Rigor would likewise be bereft of any legal

basis To Tile an application for judicial conrmation
of imperfect Title. In Republic v. Rizalvo (G.R. No.
l720l l, March 7, 20l l, 644 SCRA 516), it was held
ThaT The Thirty (30)-year period of prescription for
purposes of acquiring ownership and registration of
public land under Section T4 (2) of P.D. No. T529
only begins from The moment The State expressly
declares that The public dominion property is no
longer intended Tor public sen/ice or The development
of The national wealth, or that The properly has
been converted inTo patrimonial. The land Rigor
has occupied was declared no longer intended for
public use or public sen/ice only in T991 and his
possession prior To This declaration connoT be
Tacked Tor purposes of computing The Thirty-year
prescriptive period.
Josef owns a piece of land in Pampanga.

The National Housing Authority (NHA) sought to
expropriate the property for its socialized housing
project. The trial court xed the just compensation
for the property at P50 million. The NHA immediately
deposited the same at the authorized depository
330 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
bank and led a motion for the issuance of a writ

of possession with the trial court. Unfortunately,
there was delay in the resolution of the motion.
Meanwhile, the amount deposited earned interest.
When Josef sought the release of the amount
deposited NHA argued that Josef should only be
entitled to P50 million.
Who owns the interest earned? (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Josef owns the interest on the just compensation.

Ideally, just compensation should be immediately
made available to the property owner so that he
may derive income from this compensation, in the
same manner that he would have derived income
from his expropriated property.
compensation is not paid for the property
If full
taken, the State must pay tor the shortfall in the
earning potential immediately lost due to the
taking, and the absence of replacement property
from which income can be derived. lnterest on the
unpaid compensation becomes due as compliance
with the constitutional mandate on eminent
domain and as a basic measure of fairness. Thus,
interest in eminent domain cases runs as a matter
of law and follows as a matter of course from the
right of the landowner to be placed in as good a
position as money can accomplish, as ot the date
of taking (Evergreen Manufacturing Corporation vs.
Republic of the Philippines (GR. No. 2l8<S28,
September 6, 2017).
IV.
(0) Disnguish qnchresis from usufrucf. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
AnTichresis is d conTrocT which gives The crediior

The righT To receive The fruils of on immovoble of his
debTor, wiTh The obligoon To opply Them To The
pdymenT of The inTeresT, if owing, dnd TheredTTer To
The principol of his crediT (ArTic|e 2132, Civil Code).
While usufrucT gives The righT To enjoy The properTy of
dnoTher wiTh The obligoiion of preserving iTs form
dnd subsTdnce, unless The TiT|e consTiTuTing iT or The
low oThervvise provides. (ArTicle 562, Civil Code).
AnTichresis is on oiccessory conTrdcT, while usufrucT is
o principdl conTrocT. In onTichresis, There is no
obligoTion on The porT of The crediior To file o bond
upon enTering inTo The possession of The properTy;
whereds in usufrucT, The generol rule is ThoT The
usuTrucTuory musT Tile C1 bond (Article 583, Civil
Code). In oniichresis, The credilor does noT hove The
righi To iniroduce improvemenTs on The properTy,
while o usufruciuory mdy mdke on The properTy held
in usuTrucT useful improvemenTs or expenses for mere
pleosure provided he does noT dlTer iTs form dnd
subsTdnce (ArTicle 579, Civil Code).
(b) DisTinguish commodofum from mufuum. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Commodoium isC1 conTrocT whereby one of The
pdres delivers To dnoTher eiTher somelhing noT

consumoble so ThdT The ldTTer moy use The some for Cl
332 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
cerlain Time dnd reTurn iT. Cornnnodaiunn is essenTidlly

grdTuiTous. ln muTuum, one delivers To dnoTher money
or oTher consumable Thing upon The condiiion ThaT
The some drnounT of The same kind and quoliiy shall
be paid (Article i933, Civil Code). Muluum may be
grdTulTous or onerous. CommoddTum is o loan for
Temporary use of The Thing; while muTuum is a loan
for consumpTion. There is no Transfer of ownership
To The bdilee in commodaTum while in muTuum,
ownership is Transferred To The borrower. The risk of
loss of The Thing remains wiTh The owner in c1
conTrdcT of commodaTurn, unless There is TaulT or
negligence on The pdrT of The bdilee. However, in
rnuTuurn The borrower bears The risk of loss.
V.
Jacob has owned a farm land in Ramos, Tarlac.

In 2012, Liz surrepTiTiously enTered and culTivaTed
The properly. In 2014, Jacob discovered Liz's presence
in and culTivaTion of The properly. Due To his being
busy aending To his business in Cebu, he ToleraTed
Liz's culTivaTion of The properTy. SubsequenTly,
December 2016, Jacob wanTed To regain possession
of The properTy; hence, he senT a leTTer To Liz
demanding ThaT she vacaTe The properTy. Liz did
noT vacaTe despife The demand.
Jacob comes To enlisT your legal assisfance
To bring an acTion againsT Liz To recover The possession
of The properTy.
WhaT remedies are available To Jacob To recover
possession of his properTy under The circumsTance?
Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
There are Three (3) remedies available To one

who has been dispossessed of properly, To wif: (l)
an acTion for ejecfmenf To recover possession,
whefher for unlawful defainer or forcible enfry; (2)
accion publiciana or accion plenaria de posesion, or
a plenary acfion To recover The righT of -possession;
and (3) accion reivindicaforia, or an acfion To
recover ownership (Republic v. Guerrero, 520 Phil.
296, 307 (2006).
I will advise Jacob To file an acfion for recovery

of possession or an accion publiciana againsf Liz
which is a plenary acfion To recover physical posses-
sion of The properly. If is an ordinary civil proceeding
To deTermine The beTTer righf of possession of really
independenfly of Tifle. IT refers To an ejecfmenf suiT
filed affer The expirafion of one year from The
accrual of The cause of acfion or from The unlawful
wifhholding of possession of The realfy (Gabriel v.
Crisologo GR. No. 204626 June 9, 2014).
The possession by Liz was unlawful from The sTarT
and The facT ThaT Jacob seems To have ignored The
illegal enfry by Liz on his land does noT make a case
for unlawful defainer. ln unlawful defainer, The acfs
of Tolerance on The parf of The plainfiff musf have
been presenf righT from The sTarT of The possession by
The defendanf. Since The possession was illegal from
The sTarT, The proper remedy should have been a
forcible enfry case (Zacarias v. Anacay GR. No.
202354 Sepfember 24, 2014). However, since
Jacob's dispossession lasfed for more Than one year,
334 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
he can no longer avail of The remedy of forcible

enTry buT he could sTill recover possession by an
accion publiciana and he may Therefore avail
of The remedy of accion publiciana. ln accion
publiciana, The objecfive is To recover possession
only, noT ownership.
VI.
Tyler owns a loT ThaT is enclosed by The loTs of

Riley To The NorTh and EasT, of Dylan To The SouTh,
and of Reece To The WesT. The currenT rouTe To The
public highway is a kilomeTer’s walk Through The
norfhern loT of Riley, buT The rouTe is a rough road
ThaT geTs muddy during The rainy season, and is
inconvenienT because iT is only 2.5 meTers wide.
Tyler’s nearesT access To The public highway would
be Through The souThern loT of Dylan.
May Dylan be legally required To afford To Tyler
a righT of way Through his propey? Explain your
answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Dylan may noT be legally required To afford

Tyler a righT of way Through his properfy. The
esfablishmenf of an easemenT of righT of way over
The sen/ienT esTaTe has The following reauisifesz
The dominanf esTaTe musf be surrounded by

ofher immovables and is wiThouT adeauafe ouTleT
To a public highway;
The isolafion of The dominanf esTaTe musf noT

be due To The proprieTor‘s own acfs;
The easement must be established at a point

least prejudicial to the servient estate where the
distance from the dominant estate to the public
highway may be the shortest;
There must be payment of proper indemnity.
The true test of whether the easement of right of
way must be established on another’s property is
adequacy ot the outlet to the public highway and
not the convenience of the dominant estate. The
facts state that Tyler has a right of way through Riley’s
property and the circumstance that it may be
inconvenient because it is a rough road and it
becomes muddy does not justify the establishment ot
the easement on another's property.
Vll.
Alice agreed to sell a parcel of land with an

area of 500 square meters registered in her name
and covered by her TCT No. 12345 in favour of
Bernadette for the amount of P900,000.00. Their
agreement dated October 15, 2015 read as follows:
I, Bernadette, agree to buy the lot owned by
Alice covered by TCT-No. 12345 for the amount of
P900,000.00 subject to the following schedule of
payment:
Upon signing of agreement P100,000.00
November 15, 2015 P200,000.00
December 15, 2015 P200,000.00
January 15, 2016 P200,000.00
336 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
February 15, 2016 P200,000.00

Title to the property shall be transferred upon
full payment of P900,000.00 on or before February
15, 2016.
After making the initial payment of P100, 000.00

on October 15, 2015, and the second installment of
P200,000.00 on November 15, 2015, Bernadette
defaulted despite repeated demands from Alice.
December 2016, Bernadette offered to pay
In
her balance but Alice refused and told her that the
land was no longer for sale. Due to the refusal,
Bernadette caused the annotation of her adverse
claim upon TCT No. 12345 on December 19, 2016.
Later on, Bernadette discovered that Alice had sold
the property to Chona on February 5, 2016, and that
TCT No. 12345 had been cancelled and another
one issued (TCT No. 67891) in favour of Chona as
the new owner.
Bernadette sued Alice and Chona for specic
performance, annulment of sale and cancellation
of TCT No. 67891. Bernadette insisted that she had
entered into a contract of sale with Alice; and that
because Alice had engaged in double sale, TCT
No. 67891 should be cancelled and another title be
issued in Berncadett'e’s favour.
(a) Did Alice and Bernadette enter into a con-
tract of sale of the lot covered by TCT No. 12345?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Alice and Bernadette entered into a contract

to sell and not a contract of sale. ln a contract of
sale, ownership passes to the buyer upon delivery as
the seller agrees to transfer title even if the price has
not been fully paid. In contrast, in a contract to sell,
the seller does not thereby agree to transfer title but
reserves ownership over the properly until after full
payment of the purchase price. Based on the
narration of facts, Alice reserved ownership of the
land as she only agreed to transfer the title to
Bernadette upon full payment of the purchase price
by the latter. Hence, their contract is not a sale but
a contract to sell.
(b) Did Alice engage in double sale of the
property? Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Alice did not engage in a double sale of

the property. The first contract entered into by Alice
with Bernadette is a contract to sell, she did not
thereby transfer ownership to Bernadette because
she only agreed to do so after the fulfillment by the
latter of the positive suspensive condition which is
the full payment of the price. In a contract to sell,
title to the property will only transfer to the buyer
after registration and there being no previous
sale of the property, the rule on double sale cannot
apply (Roaue v. Aguado GR. No. l93787 April
7, 2014).
338 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Vlll.
Pedro had worked for 15 years in Saudi Arabia

when he nally decided to engage in farming in his
home province where his 10-hectare farmland
valued at P2,000,000 was located. He had already
P3,000,000 savings form his long stint in Saudi Arabia.
Eagerly awaiting Pedro’s arrival at the NAIA
were his aging parents Modesto and Jacinta, his
common-law spouse Veneranda, their three children,
and Alex, his child by Carol, his departed legal
wife. Sadly for all of them, Pedro suffered a stroke
because of his over-excitement just as the plane was
about to land, and died without seeing any of them.
The farmland and the savings were all the
properties he left.
(a) State who are Pedro’s legal heirs, and the
shares of each legal heir to the estate? Explain your
answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Pedro‘s legal heirs are the following: Alex,

his legitimate child by his predeceased wife and
his three illegitimate children with Veneranda.
Pedro's parents are excluded by the presence of
his legitimate child, Alex; (Article 887, Civil Code).
Veneranda, being merely a common-law wife is
not his legal heir. Since Pedro left a P5M estate
consisting of the farmland and his savings, his
legitimate child Alex will get ‘/2 of his estate which is
P2.5M (Article 888, Civil Code), and his 3 illegitimate
children will get the other half which they will divide
among Themselves such that each of them will get
P833,333.33. (Article 895, Civil Code; Article T76,
Family Code). The intestate share of the heirs
should not be less than their legitimes except that if
the remaining balance after satisfying The legitime
of The legitimate child is insufficient to cover The
legitime of The illegitimate children, Then They will
have to suffer The reduction.
(b) Assuming that Pedro's will is discovered
soon after his funeral. In The will, he disposed of half
of his estate in favour of Veneranda, and The other
half in favour of his children and his parents in equal
shares. Assuming also that The will is admitted to
probate by The proper court. Are The testamentary
dispositions valid and effective under the law on
succession? Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the testamentary dispositions made by

Pedro cannot be given effect. The testator’s freedom
of disposition is always subject to the rules on legitime
of the compulsory heirs. This means that the testator
can only bequeath that portion of his estate which
remains after satisfying the legitimes of his compulsory
heirs. Since Pedro was sun/ived by his legitirnate son,
Alex and his illegitimate children, he can only dispose
by will the remainder of his estate after he has
satisfied the legitimes of his compulsory heirs.
Therefore, the disposition in favor of \/eneranda is
inoperative as it encroaches upon the legitimes of
Pedro's children.
340 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
IX.
Danny and Elsa were married in 2002. In 2012,

Elsa letl the conjugal home and her two minor
children with Danny to live with her paramour. In
2015, Danny sold without Elsa’s consent a parcel of
land registered in his name that he had purchased
prior to the marriage. Danny used to proceeds of
the sale of pay for his children's tuition fees.
the sale valid, void or voidable? Explain your
ls
answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The sale made by Danny void. The parties

is
were married after the effectivity of the Family
Code where the default property regime is absolute
community of property. The facts did not mention
whether the parties executed a marriage settlement,
hence, it is safe to assume that they are governed
by absolute community of property. Under this
property regime, all properties which each of the
spouses own at the time of the celebration of the
marriage as well as whatever they may acquire
thereafter shall form part of the absolute
community. The separation de tacto between the
parties or the abandonment by Elsa does not
dissolve their ACP nor permit one of the spouses to
convey any property without the consent of the
other or the without the authority of the court
(Article 96, Family Code).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
On The assumpfion ThaT The parfies are go-

verned by The regime of conjugal parTnership of
gains, The sale would be considered valid. Under
The regime of conjugal parTnership of gains, The
spouses refain ownership of all The properfies They
bring info The marriage and only The proceeds,
fruifs and income of Their separafe properfies shall
form parT of The conjugal parTnership including
whaT They acquire during The marriage by Their
work, indusTry, or profession. (ArTicle llO, and ll7,
Family Code). Since The land was purchased by
Danny before his marriage To Elsa, if is deemed his
exclusive properly and he may Therefore sell or
alienaTe if wiThouT The consenl of Elsa (ArTicle iii,
Family Code).
X.
Briey explain whefher The following confracfs

are valid, rescissible, unenforceable, or void:
(a) A conTracT of sale befween Lana and Andy
wherein 16-year old Lana agreed To sell her grand
piano for 25,000.00. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The confracf of sale is voidable. A confracf

where one of The parfies is incapable of giving
consenf is voidable under The Civil Code. Lana,
being only l6 years old is incapable of giving consenf
which renders her confracf wifh Andy voidable
under Arficle i390 of The Civil Code.
342 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(b) A conTracT of lease of The Philippine Sec

enTered by and beTween MiToy and Elsa. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The conTrocT of leose is void. A conTrdcT whose

objeci is ouTside The commerce of mon is void
under ArTicle T409 of The Civil Code. The Philippine
Seo is ouiside The commerce of mdn.
(c) A bc1rTer of Toys execuTed by 12-year old
Clarence and 10-year old Czar (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The conTrocT isunenforceable becouse boTh

|ocrrTies ore inccrpoble of giving consenT under
ArTicle i403 (3) of The Civil Code.
(d) A sale enTered by Barri and Gerri, boTh

minors, which Their pc1renTs |crTer roTied. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The conTrocT of sole enTered inTo by Bdrri cind

Gdrri isconsidered vdlid dTTer The rdiificoiion of
Their pcirenTs. If boTh poriies ore incopoble of
giving consenT, bui The conTrdcT is lcrTer rciiified by
The |oc1renT or guardian of one of The |oc1rTies, The
conTro1cT will be considered voidcrble. By poriTy of
reosoning if The poirenTs of boTh poiriies who ore
incopoble roiiied The conTrocT, Then iT becomes Cl
vdlid conTrcicT.
(e) Jenny’s sale of her car to Celestine in order

to evade attachment by Jenny's creditors. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Jenny's sale to Celestine would be considered

as a rescissible contract under paragraph 3 of
Article 1381 because it is one intended to defraud
Jenny's creditors.
XI.
Zeny and Nolan were best friends for a long

time already. Zeny borrowed 310,000.00 from Nolan,
evidenced by a promissory note whereby Zeny
promised to pay the loan “once his means permit.”
Two months later, they had a quarrel that broke
their long-standing friendship.
Nolan seeks your advice on how to collect
from Zeny despite the tenor of the promissory note.
What till your advice be? Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
lwill advise Nolan that he may file an action to

ask the court to fix the period for compliance by
Zeny of her obligation to him. The promissory note
does not mention the exact period when the
obligation becomes due and demandable. Based
on Article ll8O of the Civil Code, when the debtor
binds himself to pay when his means permit him to
do so, the obligation shall be deemed to be one
with a period subject to the provisions of Article
344 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
il97. ComplemenTing ArTicle ii8O is ArTicle ii97

which provides ThdT when The obligoTion does
noT fix a period, buT from iTs naTure and The
circumsTances iT can be inferred ThaT a period was
iniended, The courTs may fix The duroiion Thereof.
The courTs shall also fix The durdTion of The period
when if depends upon The will of The debior. Since
The promissory noTe execuied by Zeny sToTes ThdT
she will pay once her means permiT, iT is clear ThaT
The obligdTion sholl be deemed To be one wiTh d
period and noT d pure obligaTion. Hence, Nolan
may ask The courT To fix The period.
XII.
KrysTal owns a parcel of land covered by TCT

No. 12345 in Angeles CiTy. Due To severe nancial
consTrainTs, KrysTal was forced To sell The properTy To
RBP Corporafion, a foreign corporaTion based in
SouTh Korea. SubsequenTly, RBP Corporafion sold The
properly To Gloria, one of iTs mosT valued clienTs.
Wanfing her properTy back, Krysfal, learning of
The Transfer of The properTy form RBP Corporafion To
Gloria, sued boTh of Them in The Regional Trial Courf
(RTC) for annulmenT of sale and for reconveyance.
She alleged ThaT The sale by RBP Corporaon To
Gloria was void because RBP Corporaon was a
foreign corporaTion prohibiTed by The ConsTiTuTion
from acquiring and owning lands in The Philippines.
Will KrysTal’s suiT for annulmenT of sale and re-
conveyance prosper? Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, KrysTal‘s suiT for annulmenT of The sale and

reconveyance will nol prosper on The assumpfion
ThaT Gloria is a Filipino cifizen. Under our Consfifulion,
no privale land shall be Transferred, assigned, or
conveyed excepl To individuals, corporaTions, or
associafions qualified To acquire or hold lands of
The public domain. ConsequenTly, only Filipino
ciTizens, or corporaTions or associafions whose
capiTal is 60% owned by Filipinos cifizens, are
consTiTuTionally qualified To own privale lands
(Philippine Nalional Oil Company v. Keppel Philippines
Holdings, lnc. G.R. No. 2020 50 July 25, 2Ol6).
However, jurisprudence has seTTled Thaf if a land is
invalidly Transferred To an alien who subseauenfly
becomes a cifizen or Transfers iT To a cifizen, The
flaw in The original Transaclion is considered cured
and The TiTle of The Transferee is rendered valid
(UniTed Church Board of World /vlinisfries vs.
Sebasfian, l59 SCRA 446, 451-452, March 30, 1988;
Halili vs. Courf of Appeals and Guzman G.R. No.
H3539 March l2, 1998).
while The Transfer of The properTy To
Thus,
RBP which is a foreign corporafion is noT valid, The
subseauenf sale of The land by The laTTer To
Gloria who is a Filipino cifizen has cured The defecT
in The original Transacfion and Gloria’s TiTle musT
Therefore sfand.
346 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
XIII.
TRUE or FALSE
(a) All rights are considered as propeny. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
FALSE — not all rights are considered property.

Strictly speaking, property is an economic concept
which pertains to all things useful to human activity.
There are, however, rights belonging to on
individual which while protected by law, are not
considered property like the right to life, libeny, dnd
the pursuit of happiness
(b) A lessee cannot bring a case for quieting of
title respecting the property that he leases. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
TRUE - on lessee is estopped from asserting title

to the thing leased or received as against the lessor
(Article I436, Civil Code).
(c) Only the city or municipal mayor can file a
civil action to abate a public nuisance. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
FALSE —even a private person mcly bring an

action to abate a public nuisance if it is especially
injurious to himself (Article 703, Civil Code).
(d) Possession of a movable property is lost
when the location of the said movable is unknown
to the owner. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
FALSE—possession of o movoble is noT deemed

losT so long os They remoin under The conTrol of The
possessor, even Though for The Time being he moy
noT know Their whereobouTs (ArTicle 556, Civil Code).
(e) ConTinuous non-apparenT easemenTs can

be acquired eiTher Through TiT|e or by prescripTion.
(2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
FALSE - only conTinuous ond opporenT ease-

menTs con be acquired by TiTle or prescripTion
(ArTicle 620, Civil Code). ConTinuous non-opporenT
eosemenTs or disconTinuous ones can be acquired
only by virlue of o TiTle (ArTicle 622, Civil Code).
XIV.
Plufarco owned land ThaT borders on a river.

Aer several years The action of The wafer of The
river caused The deposiT of soil, and increased The
area of PluTarco's properTy by 200 square meters.
(a) If Plufarco wanTs To own The increase in
area, what will be his legal basis for doing so?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
P|uTorco moy invoke The provisions on occession

in order To cloim The increose in The dred of his
properTy. The ownership of properly gives The righT
by occession To everyThing which is produced
348 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Thereby, or which is incorporaTed or aTTached

ThereTo, eiTher naiurally or arTiTicially (ArTicle 440,
Civil Code). Since The addiTional area was broughT
abouT by The acTion of The river, as riparian owner,
PluTarco owns The accreiion which his land
gradually received from The eTTecTs of The currenT
of The waTers (ArTicle 457, Civil Code).
(b) On The oTher hand, if The river dries up, may
PluTarco validly claim a righT of ownership of The
dried-up river bed? Explain your answer. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, if The river dries up, PluTarco may noT validly

claim ownership over The dried-up river bed because
a river bed is properTy of public dominion and
remains properTy of The STaTe (ArTicle 420, Civil Code).
XV.
Kevin signed a loan agreemenT wiTh ABC Bank.

To secure paymenT, Kevin requesTed his girlfriend
Rosella To execuTe a documenT enTiTled “ConTinuing
Guaranly AgreemenT", whereby she expressly agreed
To be solidarily liable for The obligaTion of Kevin.
Can ABC Bank proceed direcT|y againsT Rosella

upon Kevin's defaulT even wiThouT proceeding
againsT Kevin rsT. Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, ABC bank may proceed direcTly againsT

Rosella in The evenT of Kevin's defaulT. The documenT
signed by Rosella, alihough denominaied as a

“connuing guaranTy“ is in realiTy a sureTyship
agreemeni because Rosella bound herself solidarily
for The obligdTion conTrdcTed by Kevin (ArTicle 2047,
Civil Code). ln d conTrdcT of gudroinTy, The
gudrcinior will only be lidble in case The debTor
co|nnoT pay The obligaiion and he is enTiTled To The
benefiT of excussion (ArTicle 2058, Civil Code).
However, in d sureTyship dgreemenl, The liabiliTy of
The sureTy is similar To Thai of a soliddry debTor in
Thai The crediTor may proceed againsT any one of
The solidary debTors or some or all of Them
simulTaneously (ArTicle l2l6, |oar. l Civil Code). In
oTher words, The crediTor may proceed direcTly
dgainsi The sureTy wiThouT being required To go
agciinsi The principal debTor To enforce The obligdTion.
XVI.
Jovencio operaTed a school bus To ferry his Two

sons and ve of Their schoolmaTes from Their houses
To Their school, and back. The parenTs of The ve
schoolmaTes paid for The sen/ice. One morning,
Porrio, The driver, Took a shorT cuT on The way To
school because he was running laTe, and drove an
unmanned railway crossing. AT The Time, Porfirio was
wearing earphones because he loved To hear loud
music while driving. As he crossed The railway
Tracks, a speeding PNR Train loudly blared iTs horn To
warn Porfirio, buT The laTler did noT hear The horn
because of The loud music. The Train ineviTably
rammed inTo The school bus. The sTrong impacT of
350 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
the collision between the school bus and the train

resulted death of one of the classmates of Jovencio's
younger son.
The parents of the fatality sued Jovencio for
damages based on culpa contractual, alleging
that Jovencio was a common carrier; Porfirio for
being negligent; and the PNR for damages based
on culpa aquiliana.
Jovencio denied being a common carrier. He
insisted that he had exercised the diligence of a
good father of a family in supervising Porfirio, clai-
ming that the latter had had no history of neg-
ligence or recklessness before the fatal accident.
(a) Did his operation of the school bus service
for a limited clientele render Jovencio a common
carrier? Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
i732 of the Civil Code avoided any

Yes, Article
distinction between a person or an enterprise offering
transportation on a regular or an isolated basis; and
has not distinguished a carrier offering his services to
the general public, that is, the general community or
population, from one offering his sen/ices only to a
narrow segment of the general population (De
Guzman v. Court of Appeals, GR. No. L-47822,
December 22, i988, 168 SCRA 612, 617-6l8). Based on
the facts, Jovencio may be considered as a common
carrier because as a school bus operator he was: (a)
engaged in transporting passengers generally as a
business, not just as a casual occupation; (b)

undertaking to cany passengers over established
roads by The method by which the business was
conducted; and (c) transporting students for a tee.
Despite catering to a limited clientele, Jovencio
operated as a common carrier because he held
himself out as a ready transportation indiscriminately
to the students of a particular school living within or
near where he operated the service and for a fee
(Perena v. Zarate, GR. No. l579l 7 August 29, 2Ol 2).
(b) In accordance with your answer to the
preceding question, state the degree of diligence
to observed by Jovencio and the consequences
thereof. Explain your answer. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As a common carrier, and given the nature of

the business and for reasons of public policy,
Jovencio, as a common carrier is bound to observe
extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the
goods and for the safety of the passengers
transported by them, according to all the cir-
cumstances of each case. Article i755 of the Civil
Code specifies that the common carrier should
carry the passengers safely as tar as human care
and foresight can provide, using the utmost
diligence of very cautious persons, with a due
regard for all the circumstances.
(c) Assuming that the fatality was a minor of
only 15 years of age who had no earning capacity
at the time of his death because he was still a
352 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
student in high school, and the trial court is minded

to award indemnity, what may possibly be the
legal and factual justifications for the award of loss
of earning capacity? Explain your answer. (4%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The legal justification for the award of loss or

earning capacity is the Article 2206 of the Civil Code
which provides that the defendant shall be liable for
the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased,
and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the
latter, unless the deceased on account of
permanent physical disability not caused by the
defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of
his death. Even if the fatality was a minor and un-
employed at the time of his death, the award of loss
of earning capacity is still warranted because,
compensation or indemnity is awarded not for loss of
time or earnings but for loss of the deceased's power
or ability to earn money. (People v. Teehankee, Jr.
GR. Nos. lll206-O8, October 6, i995, 249 SCRA 54).
I.
Sidley and Sol were married with one (1)

daughter, Solenn. Sedfrey and Sonia were another
couple with one son, Sonny. Sol and Sedfrey both
perished in the same plane accident. Sidley and
Sonia met when the families of those who died sued
the airtines and went through grief-counseling sessions.
Years later, Sidley and Sonia got married. At that
time, Solenn was four (4) years old and Sonny was
ve (5) years old. These two (2) were then brought
up in the same household. Fifteen (l5) years later,
Solenn and Sonny developed romantic feelings
towards each other, and eventually eloped. On
their own and against their parents‘ wishes, they
procured a marriage license and got married in church.
(a) the marriage of Solenn and Sonny valid,
ls
voidable, or void? (2.5%)
(b) If the marriage is defective, can the marriage
be ratied by free cohabitation of the parties?
(2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) The marriage between Solenn and Sonny is

voidable for lack of parental consent. While the
parties were brought up in the some household,
Solenn and Sonny have no blood relationship and
are merely step-sister and step-brother since they
353
354 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
hdve difTerenT seT of pdrenfs. The fdcTs did nof

sTdTe ThdT eiTher Sidley or Sonio opfed To ddopT The
child of The ofher which would hdve pldced The
pdrfies (Solenn dnd Sonny) dmong The pdrfies
prohibifed To conTrdcT nnorridge by redson of
public policy. (ArTicle 38, Fdrnily Code).
However, since bofh pdrfies were below The
dge of Twenfy-one dT The Time They eloped dnd
gof mdrried wiThouT The consenT of Their pdrenfs,
Their mcirridge is voiddble under The Fdmily Code.
Porenfdl consenT is required where eiTher or bofh
pdrfies ore T8 yedrs old buT below 21. (ArTicle T4,
Fdmily Code). Under Arficle 45 of The Fdrnily Code d
mdrricige confrocfed belween pdrfies who dre
eighfeen yedrs of dge buT below lwenfy-one wiThouT
The consenT of The pdrenfs, gudrdidn, or person
hciving subsTiTuTe pdrenTdl dufhorify in ThdT order, is
voiddble. Hence, The mdrridge of Solenn dnd Sonny
rndy be dnnulled eiTher of Their insTdnce, or dT The
insfdnce of Their pdrenfs.
b) Yes, since The mdrridge is nnerely voiddble,
if con be rdTified by The free cohdbifdfion of Solenn
dnd Sonny. Thus, if eiTher of Them fdiled To file The
peTiTion for dnnulmenf of Their mcirridge wiThin d
period of five yedrs dffer dTTdining The dge of
Twenfy-one, Their nncirrioge is deemed rc1TiTied cmcl
dny dcfion filed c1fTerThciT period shdll no longer be
dllowed. The low provides ThdT if The ocfion is
bdsed on lock of pcirenloil consenT, The some musf
be filed wiThin five (5) yedrs dfTer ciTTdining The oige
of TwenTy-one. (ArTicle 47, pdr. l)
After finding out that his girlfriend Sandy was

four (4) months pregnant, Sancho married Sandy.
Both were single and had never been in any serious
relationship in the past. Prior to the marriage, they
agreed in a marriage settlement that the regime of
conjugal partnership of gains shall govern their
property relations during marriage. Shortly after the
marriage, their daughter, Shalimar, was born.
Before they met and got married, Sancho
purchased a parcel of land on installment, under a
Contract of Sale, with the full purchase price payable
in equal annual amortizations over a period of ten
(10) years, with no down payment, and secured by
a mortgage on the land. The full purchase price
was PhPl million, with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum. After paying the fourth (4th) annual
installment, Sancho and Sandy got married, and
Sancho completed the payments in the subsequent
years from his salary as an accountant. The
previous payments were also paid out of his salary.
During their marriage, Sandy also won PhPl million
in the lottery and used it to purchase jewelry. When
things didn't work out for the couple, they led an
action for declaration of nullity of their marriage
based on the psychological incapacity of both of
them. When the petition was granted, the parcel of
land and the jewelry bought by Sandy were found
to be the only properties of the couple.
(a) What is the lialion status of Shalimar? (2.5%)
356 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(b) What system of property relationship will be

liquidated following the declaration of nullity of
their marriage? (2.5%)
(c) In the liquidation, who should get the parcel
of land? The jewelry? (2.5%)
(d) ls Shalimar entitled to payment of presumptive
Iegitime? If yes, how much should be her share and
from where should this be taken? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) Shalimar is a legitimate child of Sancho and

Sandy. The law provides that children conceived or
born during the marriage of the parents are
legitimate. (Art. T64) Conversely, children conceived
or born outside of a valid marriage are illegitimate,
unless otherwise provided by the Code. (Article l65,
Family Code).
Thus, a child born in a void marriage is
illegitimate except in cases expressly provided by
the Code. One such instance when a child, though
born in a void marriage, is considered legitimate is
if the marriage is void by reason of psychological
incapacity. Under Article 54 of the Family Code,
children conceived or born before the judgment or
absolute nullity of marriage uncler Article 36 has
become final and executory shall be considered
legitimate. Since Shalimar was born before the
marriage was declared void by reason of
psychological incapacity, she is considered a
legitimate child of the couple.
b) The properly relaTionship ThaT will be

liquidaTed following The declaraTion of nulliTy of The
marriage will be ThaT of a co-ownership. Since The
parTies have no impedimeni To marry each oTher aT
The Time of The celebraTion of The marriage, and
Their marriage was declared void by reason of
psychological incapaciTy, The rules on equal co-
ownership shall apply To The liquidaTion of The
properTies acquired during Their cohabiTaTion.
Under ArTicle i47 of The Family Code, The wages
and salaries of The parTies shall be owned by Them
in equal shares and The properTy acquired by boTh
of Them Through Their work or indusTry shall be
governed by The rules on co-ownership.
c) Since The co-ownership rule under ArTicle
i47 applies only To properTies ThaT were acquired
during The cohabiTaTion or during The marriage,
Sancho shall exclusively own The porTion of The land
corresponding To The four (4) annual amorlizaiions
ThaT he paid. The resT of The land which was paid
for during The marriage beTween Sancho and
Sandy shall be owned by Them in equal shares. The
same arTicle provides ThaT in The absence of proof
To The conTra|y, properTies acquired while They
lived Togeiher shall be presumed To have been
obTained by Their joinT efforTs, work or indusTry, and
shall be owned by Them in equal shares and a
parTy shall be deemed To have conTribuTed joinTly if
his or her efforls consisled in The care and
mainTenance of The household. However, The
jewelry boughl by Sandy noT having been acquired
Through Their work or indusTry buT ouT of Sandy’s
winnings, shall be owned by Sandy.
358 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
d) No, Shalimdr is enTiTled To The delivery of

her |oresumpTive legilime. ln The case of Dino vs.
Dino, (GR. No. 178044, January l9, 2011) Supreme
CourT ruled ThdT ArTicle 50 of The Family Code does
noT apply To marriages which are declared void ab
iniTio under ArTicle 36 of The Fdmily Code, which
should be declared void wiThouT waiTing for The
liquiddTion of The |oroperTies of The |oarTies. IT is
submiTTed ThaT The oTher requiremenTs of ArTicle 50
including The delivery of The presumpve legiTimes
To The children should likewise noT apply To
marriages declared void under ArTicle 36. Since
ArTicle 147 is silenl wiTh regard To The delivery of
presumpve legime of children born oul of a void
marriage covered Therein, Shalimar is noT enTiTled
The delivery of her legiTime.
Silverio was a woman Trapped in a man's body.

He was born male and his birTh cerTicaTe indicafed
his gender as male, and his name as SilverioSTalon.
When he reached The age of 21, he had a sex
reassignmenf surgery in Bangkok, and, from Then
on, he lived as a female. On The basis of his sex
reassignmenT, he led an acTion To have his rsT
name changed To Shelley, and his gender, To female.
While he was following up his case wiTh The Regional
Trial Courf of Manila, he meT Sharon STan, who also
led a similar acTion To change her rsT name To
Shariff, and her gender, from female To male.
Sharon was registered as a female upon birth.

While growing up, she developed male characteristics
and was diagnosed to have congenital adrenal
hyperplasia ("CAH") which is a condition where
a person possesses both male and female
characteristics. At puberty, tests revealed that her
ovarian structures had greatly minimized, and she
had no breast or menstrual development. Alleging
that for all intents and appearances, as well as
mind and emotion, she had become a male, she
prayed that her birth certicate be corrected such
that her gender should be changed from female to
male, and that her rst name should be changed
from Sharon to Shariff.
Silverio and Sharon fell in love and decided to
marry. Realizing that their marriage will be frowned
upon in the Philippines, they travelled to Las Vegas,
USA where they got married based on the law of the
place of celebration of the marriage. They, however,
kept their Philippine citizenship.
(a) ls there any legal bases for the court to
approve Silverio's petition for correction of entries in
his birth certicate? (2.5%)
(b) Will your answer be the same in the case of
Sharon's petition? (2.5%)
(c) Can the marriage of Silverio (Shelley) and
Sharon (Shariff) be legally recognized as valid in
the Philippines? (2.5%)
360 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
o) No. There would be no legol bosis for The

courf To opprove Silverio's peTiTion. ln Silverio v.
Republic (GR. No. 174689, 22 Ocfober 2007) wiTh
The some focfuol seTTings os The problem presenfed,
The high courf ruled Thof o chonge of home is o
privilege ond noT o righf. To be enTiTled To The
chonge of home, The peTiTioner musf show proper
ond reosonoble couse os provided in The Rules of
Courf. Unforfunofely, o chonge of nome bosed on
sex reossignmenf is noT permiTTed under The rules.
The pefifion for correcfion of The sex in The birlh
cerTificoTe of Silverio hos likewise no bosis since he
wos born onofomicolly mole, There is nofhing To
correcf. ln oddifion, To ollow The chonges proyed
for by Silverio will reconfigure The lows on morrioge
os if will ollow The morrioge of o mon To onofher
mon who hos undergone sex reossignmenf.
b) My onswer will noT be The some wiTh
respecf To The peTiTion filed by Shoron. ln Republic
v. Cogondohon, (GR. No. 166676, l2 Sepfember
2008) The Supreme Courf ollowed The enfries in The
birlh cerlificofe of The peTiTioner Jennifer Cogondohon,
porficulorly her nome ond gender, To be chonged
since she wos nofurolly on inlersex individuol ond
wos suffering from o congenifol defecf where she
possesses boTh mole ond femole chorocferisfics.
Buf os she become on odulT, The mole chorocTerisTics
become dominonT wiThouT ony medicol inTervenTion.
The Courf held ThoT in biologicolly or nofurolly
infersex individuols, The defermining focTor in his
gender clossificofion would be whof The individuol
hoving redched The age of mdjoriTy, wiTh good

redson Thinks of his/her sex. The chdnge of ndme is
likewise in order becduse iT corresponds To Shoron‘s
preferred gender.
c) No, The mdrridge of Shelley dnd Shoriff
cdnnoT be considered ds valid in The Philippines.
Mdrridges solemnized ouTside of The Philippines dnd
valid where celebroTed sholl dlso be vdlid in The
Philippines under The lex loci celebroTionis rule.
However, one excepiion To This is d mdrrioge
conTrocTed beTween pdrTies wiThouT legal cdpociTy
in ThdT even if vdlid where iT is celebroTed, iT is
considered void under Philippine low. Here, The
facT ThdT Silverio had undergone sex reossignmeni
does noT oller his sTdTus os Cl mole. The legal
capociiy and sToTus of Silverio dnd Shdron who are
boih Filipino ciiizens sholl be governed by Philippine
laws pursuoni To The ndTionoliTy principle which
provides ThdT lows reldling To family righTs and
condiiion, dnd legdl cdpociTy of
duTies, To The sTdTus,
persons are binding upon ciiizens of The Philippines
even Though living obrood. (ArTicle i5, Civil Code)
IV.
Severino died inTesTaTe, survived by his wife

Saturnina, and legiTlmaTe children Soler, Sulpicio,
Segundo and The Twins Sondro and Sandra. AT The
Time of his deaTh, The Twins were only ii years of
age, while all The older children were of age. He le
only one properTy: a 5,000 sq. m. parcel of land.
Aer his deaTh, The older siblings Soler, Sulpicio,
and Segundo sold The land To Dr. SanTos for
362 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PhP500,000 with a right to repurchase, at the same

price, within ve (5) years from the date of the sale.
The deed of sale was signed only by the three (3)
older siblings, and covered the entire property.
Before the ve (5) years expired, Soler and Sulpicio
tendered their respective shares of PhPl66,666
each to redeem the property. Since Segundo did
not have the means because he was still
unemployed, Satumina paid the remaining PhPl66,666
to redeem the property. After the property was
redeemed from Dr. Santos, the three (3) older
children and Saturnina, for herself and on behalf of
the twins who were still minors, sold the property to
Dr. Sazon, in an absolute sale, for PhPl million. In
representing the twins, Satumina relied on the fact
that she was the natural guardian of her minor children.
(a) Was the rst sale to Dr. Santos, and the
subsequent repurchase, valid? (2.5%)
(b) Was the second sale to Dr. Sazon valid?
May the twins redeem their share after they reach
the age of majority? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) The first sale to Dr. Santos is valid only with

respect to the shares of Soler, Sulpicio, and Segundo.
The land became the subject of the co-ownership
among the heirs of Saturnino upon his death
pursuant to the rule that rights to succession are
transmitted from the moment of death. (Article 777,
Civil Code). A co-owner has an absolute ownership
of his undivided and pro-indiviso share in the co-
owned property, [City of Ivlandaluyong v. Aguilar,

403 Phil. 404, 424 (2001)) and may Therefore alienate,
assign, or mortgage it. (Article 493, Civil Code)
Although co-owners have the right to sell their pro-
indiviso shares in the property owned in common,
they do not have the right to sell the shares of the
other co-owners without being expressly authorized
to do so. Hence, the sale entered into by the three
siblings is unenforceable as against the other heirs
with respect to the shares of the latter. The repurchase
of the share of Segundo is valid. However, the
repurchase by Saturnina of Segundo‘s share merely
entitles her to reimbursement but does not vest
ownership upon her of the share of Segundo.
b) The subsequent sale of the land to Dr.
Sazon is valid only with respect to the shares ot the
consenting co-owners. The law provides that no
one may contract in the name of another without
being authorized by the latter or unless he has by
law a right to represent him. A contract entered into
in the name of another who has no authority shall
be unenforceable unless it is ratified expressly or
impliedly by the person on whose behalf it has been
executed. (Article T317).
Yes, the twins may redeem their shares after they
reach the age of majority because their mother
cannot rely on her being their natural guardian for
purposes of selling their shares to Dr. Sazon. A
guardian or legal representative has no authority to
sell the real estate of his ward or the absentee merely
by reason of their general powers and the sale of the
364 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
realty belonging to The ward must have the authority

of the court. (lnton v. Quintana, 8l Phil. 97) The
guardianship of parents over the property of their
minor children only extends to The power of
administration not to acts of strict dominion like
conveyance of The properly. (Article 225, Family Code)
V.
Sol Soldivino, widow, passed away, leaving two

(2) legitimate children: a 25- year old son, Santino
(whom she had not spoken to for five [5] years prior
to her death since he attempted to kill her at that
time), and a 20-year-old daughter, Sara. She left an
estate worth PhP8 million and a will containing only
one provision: that PhPl million should be given to
"the priest who officiated at my wedding to my
children's late father." Sara, together with two (2) of
her friends, acted as an attesting witness to the will.
On the assumption that the will is admitted for
probate and that there are no debts, divide the
estate and indicate the heirs/legatees entitled to
inherit, the amount that each of them will inherit,
and where (i.e., legitime/free portion/intestate share)
their shares should be charged. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
The two children of Sol will both inherit from her

despite the attempt made by Santino against her
lite. To be cause for unworthiness, there must have
been a prior conviction oT the heir under Article
lO32 of the Civil Code. Since the facts did not state
ThaT Sanfino was convicfed, he would sTill capacifafed

To inheriT from Sol. As for Sara, she is likewise
capacifafed To inheriT even if she acfed as an
aTTesTing wifness because The disqualificafion of an
aTTesTing wifness only operafes if he or she is a
recipienf of a legacy or devise in The will of The
TesTaTor. (ArTicle 823, Civil Code). In This case, Sara is
noT a mere devisee or legafee buT is a compulsory
and inTesTaTe heir of Sol.
The priesf who officiafed The wedding of Sol

To her husband shall also be enTiTled To The Pl
million given To him by The TesTaTrlx because The
disqualificafion of a priesl To inheriT applies only if he
was The one who heard The confession of The TesTaTor
during his lasT illness. (ArTicle T027, par. T, Civil Code)
Thus, The disfribufion of The esTaTe shallbe as
follows: Sanfino and Sara shall each receive P3.5lvl,
while The priesf who officiafed The wedding of Sol
shall be enTiTled To The legacy of TM in accordance
wiTh The will of The TesTaTrlx. Based on an esTaTe of
P8l\/\, The legifime of Sanfino and Sara shall be P4lvl
which They shall divide equally. From The remaining
P4lvl for free disposal, The legacy To The priesf shall
be deducfed which leaves a balance of P3l\/l. This
balance shall also be divided equally befween
Sanfino and Sara as Their share in The free porfion of
The esTaTe.
VI.
Sammy and Sanfi are cousins who separafely

inherifed Two (2) adjoining lofs from Their grandfafher.
Sammy is based overseas but wanfs To earn
366 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
income from his inherited land, so he asked a local

contractor to build a row of apartments on his
property which he could rent out. The contractor
sent him the plans and Sammy noticed that the
construction encroached on a part of Santi‘s land
but he said nothing and gave approval to construct
based on the plans submitted by the local
contractor. Santi, based locally, and who loved his
cousin dearly, did not object even if he knew of the
encroachment since he was privy to the plans and
visited the property regularly. Later, the cousins had
a falling out and Santi demanded that the portion
of the apartments that encroached on his land
be demolished.
Can Santi successfully le legal action to
require the demolition? (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Santi cannot successfully require the demolition

of the apartment. Sammy and Santi both acted in
bad faith because they were both aware that the
apartment encroached on Santi’s land but did not
object thereto. If both the builder and the
landowner acted in bad faith, the rights of one and
the other shall be the same as though both acted
in good faith. (Article 453, Civil Code) Hence, the
provision ot Article 448 of the Civil Code shall be
applied. Under Article 448, the owner at the land
on which anything has been built in good faith has
only two options: a) to appropriate whatever is
built, planted or sown on his land after payrnent of
proper indemniiy; or b) To ask The builder To buy The

poriion of The land encrodched provided The value
of The land is noT considerably higher Than The
building or The Trees. Demoliiion of The works is noT
one of The opiions available To The owner of The
ldnd. Hence, Sdnii cannoi successfully require Thai
Sammy demolish The poriion of The dpdrTmenT
encroaching on his ldnd.
Vll.
Sydney, during her liTeTime, was a successful
lawyer. By her own choice, she remained unmanied
and devoTed all her Time To Taking care of her
nephew and Two (2) nieces: SocraTes, Saffinia, and
Sophia. She wroTe a will giving all her properiies
remaining upon her deaTh To The Three (3) of Them.
The will was admiTTed To probaTe during her lifeTime.
LaTer, she decided To make a new will giving all her
remaining properTies only To The Two (2) girls,
Saffinia and Sophia. She Then Tore up The previously
probaTed will. The second will was presenTed for
probaTe only afler her deaTh. However, The probaTe
courT found The second will To be void for failure To
comply wiTh formal requiremenTs.
(a) Will The docTrine of dependenT relaTive
revocaon apply? (2.5%)
(b) Will your answer be The same if The second will
was found To be valid buT boTh Safnia and Sophia
renounce Their inheriTance? (2.5%)
368 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
o)No, the doctrine of dependent relotive

revocotion will not opply. The doctrine stotes thot
where the dct of destruction is connected with the
moking of onother will so ds tdirly to roise the
inference thot the testotor meont the revocotion of
the old to depend upon the efticocy of o new
disposition, the revocotion will be conditiondl ond
dependent upon the etticocy ot the new disposition;
ond it, tor dny reoson, the new will intended to be
mode ds o substitute is inoperotive, the revocoition
toils ond the originol will rernoins in full force. (lvtolo v.
lvlolo, GR. No. L-2538, Septernber 2i, l95l )
ln the cdse presented, the revocdtion wos not
shown to be conditiondl upon the etficocy of the
new will os the testotor hos in toct chdnged the
heirs instituted in the second will. Hence, the intent
wos to give nothing to Socrotes who wos originolly
instituted but only to the two nieces. The toctuol
situotion is not the some os the Molo cdse where
both the first ond second will horned only the wife
of the testotor ds universol heir, ond the second will
wos executed by the testotor on the supposition
thot the rst will wos lost.
b) Yes, my onswer will still be the sonne. There
will be no room for the dpplicotion of the doctrine
of dependent relotive revocotion to give ettect to
the provisions ot the previous will which wos
revoked by the overt oict ot teoring. Even if Sdttinio
ond Sophio renounce their inheritonce, Socrotes,
who wos norned os on heir in the prior still cdnnot
inheriT because The aisposilion in his favor was

alreacly revoked by The TesTaTor. The circunnsTance
ThaT The heirs named in The subseauenl will have
renounced Their inheriTance will noT alTer The TacT
ThaT The original will was revoked and can no
longer be given effecl. NeiTher will The renunciaiion
by The heirs in The subseaueni will aTfecT iTs valiaify.
VIII.
Sofronio was a married faTher of Two when he

had a brief fling wiTh Sabrina, resulTing in her
pregnancy and The birTh of Their son Sinforoso.
Though his wife knew noThing of The affair, Sofronio
regreTTed iT, buT secreTly provided child supporf for
Sinforoso. UnforTunaTely, when Sinforoso was 10
years old, Sofronio died. Only Sofronio's faTher,
Salumbides, knew of Sabrina and Sinforoso. For The
purpose of providing supporT To Sinforoso, Salumbides
gave Sabrina usufrucTruary righTs over one of his
properlies - a house and |oT - To lasT unTi| Sinforoso
reaches The age of majorily. Sabrina was given
possession of The propey on The basis of caucion
juraforia. Two (2) years aer The creaTion of The
usufrucf, The house accidenTally burned down, and
Three (3) years Thereaer, Sinforoso died before he
could reach The age of 18.
Will The usufrucf conTinue affer The house has
burned down? If yes, will iT confinue afler Sinforoso's
deaTh? (2.5%)
370 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
Yes,the usufruct will continue on the land even

otter the house was burned. The law on usufruct
provides that if the usufruct is constituted on
immovable property of which a building forms part,
and the latter should be destroyed in any manner
whatsoever, the usufructuory shall have d right to
make use of the land and the materials. (Article
607, Civil Code).
No, the usufruct shall be extinguished after the
death ot Sinforoso. As a general rule, a usufruct
granted for the time that may elapse before a third
person attains a certain age, shall subsist for the
number of years specified even if the third person
should die before the period expires, unless the
usufruct has been granted only in consideration of
the existence of such person. (Article 606, Civil
Code) From the facts stated, the purpose of
constituting the usufruct is to provide support to
Sinforoso until he reaches the age of majority. The
real consideration why Salumbides granted usufructuory
rights to Sabrina is for the benefit of his grandson,
Sinforoso so as to give Sabrina the means to
support him. As such, the usufruct shall be
extinguished upon the death of Sinforoso.
IX.
Newlyweds Sam and Sienna had contracted

with Sangria Hotel for their wedding reception. The
couple was so unhappy with the service, claiming,
among other things, that there was an unreasonable
delay in the service of dinner and that certain items

promised were unavailable. The hotel claims that,
while there was a delay in the service of the meals,
the same was occasioned by the sudden increase
of guests to 450 from the guaranteed expected
number of 350, as stated in the Banquet and
Meeting Services Contract. In the action for
damages for breach of contract instituted by the
couple, they claimed that the Banquet and Meeting
Services Contract was a contract of adhesion since
they only provided the number of guests and chose
the menu. On the other hand, the hotel's defense was
that the proximate cause of the complainant's
injury was the unexpected increase in their guests,
and this was what set the chain of events that
resulted in the alleged inconveniences.
(a) Does the doctrine of proximate cause
apply in this case? (2.5%)
(b) Was the Banquet and Meeting Services
Contract a contract of adhesion? If yes, is the
contract void? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) No, the doctrine of proximate cause will

not apply to this case. The doctrine of proximate
cause is applicable only in actions for quasi-delicts,
not in actions involving breach of contract. The
doctrine is a device for imputing liability to a person
where there is no relation between him and
another party. In the case presented, there is a pre-
existing contractual relation between the parties
372 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
and The parfies Themselves creafe The obligafion.

Thus, if is Arficle l l70 Thai will apply which provides
ThaT Those who in The performance of Their
obligafions are guilfy of fraud, negligence or delay
and Those who in any manner conTravene The
Tenor Thereof are liable for damages. For The failure
of The hofel To exercise foresighf in nof anficipafing
The possibilify of increase in number of guesfs, iT
could be held liable for damages To The spouses
Sam and Sienna. (Spouses Guanio vs. Makafi
Shangri-la Hofel and Resorf lnc., G.R. No. 190601
February 7, 20l l)
b) Yes, TheBanauef services conTracT may be
considered a conTracT of adhesion. By definifion a
conTracT of adhesion, wherein one parTy imposes a
ready-made form of confracf on The oTher, is noT
sTricTly againsf The law. (Dio v. ST. Ferdinand Memorial
Park, Inc. 538 Phil. 944 (2006). No, The confracf is noT
void. A conTracT of adhesion is jusT as binding as
ordinary conTracTs and are noT invalid per se nor
enfirely prohibifed. Such conTracTs may only be
sfruck down as void when The parfies do noT
bargain on equal foofing. Here, The spouses Sam
and Sienna do noT appear To be The weaker parTy
or ThaT The hofel is The dominanf parfy or ThaT The
former had no alfernafive buT To Take if or leave IT.
Hence, The conTracT is valid even if if was enfirely
prepared by only one parTy. (Cabanng vs. BPl
GR. No. 201927 February 17,2016)
X.
Sinclair and Stef had an illicit relationship while

Sinclair was married to another. The relationship
produced a daughter Sabina, who grew up with her
mother. For most parts of Sabina's youth, Stef spent
for her support and education. When Sabina was 21
years old, Sinclair's wife of many years died.
Sinclair and Steffi lost no time in legitimizing their
relationship. After the 40-day prayers for Sinclair's
late wife, Sinclair and Steffi got married without a
marriage license, claiming that they have been
cohabiting for the last 20 years.
After graduating from college, Sabina decided
to enroll in law school. Sinclair said that he was not
willing to pay for her school fees since she was no
longer a minor. Sinclair claimed that, if Sabina
wanted to be a lawyer, she had to work and spend
for her law education.
(a) What is Sabina's liation status? (2.5%)
(b) ls Sinclair legally required to nance
Sabina's law education? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) Sabina is an illegitimate child of Sinclair and

Steffi because she was conceived and born
outside of wedlock. The Family Code provides that
children conceived and born outside a valid
marriage are illegitimate. (Article T65, Family Code)
The subsequent marriage of Sinclair to Sabina's
mother, Steffi will not have the effect of legifimlzing
374 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Sabina because Tor legiTimaTion To Take place, The

child musT have been conceived dT o Time when
her parenis were noT suffering from an impedimenT
To marry each oTher. (ArTicle l77, Family Code).
Here, Sinclair was legally mdrried To anolher dT The
Time ThaT Sabina was conceived.
b) Yes, Sinclair legally obliged To finance
is
Sobina‘s law educaTion. SupporT is ordained
beTvveen parenTs and Their legiTimaTe and illegiTimoTe
children. (ArTicle 195, Family Code) Under The law,
supporT comprises The educaTion of The person
enTiTled To be supporied which shall include his or
her schooling or Training for some profession, Trade
or vocaTion even beyond The age of majoriiy.
(ArTicle l9-4, Family Code)
XI.
SamanTha sold all her business inTeresT in a sole

proprieTorship To Sergio for The amounT of PhPl
million. Under The sale agreemenT, SamanTha was
supposed To pay for all prior unpaid uTiliTy bills
incurred by The sole proprielorship. A monTh aer
The ConTracT To Sell was execuTed, Samanfha sTill
had noT paid The PhP50,000 elecTriciTy bills incurred
prior To The sale. Since Sergio could noT operaTe The
business wiThouT elecTriciTy and The ulify company
refused To resTore elecTriciTy services unless The
unpaid bills were seTTled in full, Sergio had To pay
The unpaid eIecTriciTy bills. When The daTe for
paymenT arrived, Sergio only Tendered PhP950,000
representing the full purchase price, less the amount

he paid for the unpaid utility bills. Samantha refused
to accept the tender on the ground that she was
the one supposed to pay the bills and Sergio did
not have authorization to pay on her behalf.
(a) What is the effect of payment made by
Sergio without the knowledge and consent of
Samantha? (2.5%)
(b) ls Samantha guilty of mora accipiendi? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) The payment made by Sergio without the

knowledge and consent of Samantha extinguished
the latter’s obligation to the utility company but it
would entitle Sergio to recover what he had paid
from Samantha to the extent that the latter may
have been benefited by his payment. Payment
made by a third person without the knowledge and
consent of the debtor entitles the third person payor
to recover only insofar as the payment has been
beneficial to the debtor. (Article i236, Civil Code)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
a) Sergio‘s payment to the utility company

extinguished Samantha's obligation but Sergio will
be subrogated to the rights of the utility company
against Samantha.
Sergio is deemed a person interested in the
fulfilment of Samantha’s obligation since he cannot
continue operating the business without paying the
utility company. As such there is legal subrogation
376 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
and Sergio became The new creditor of Samantha

for The amount of PhP 50,000.00. (Article 1302(3),
Civil Code)
b) Yes, Samantha is guilty of mora accipiendi.
The principle of mora accipiendi refers To delay on
The part of The obligee in accepting The performance
of The obligation by The obligor. For There To be
mora accipiendi, There must be an offer of
performance by The debtor who has The required
capacity; The offer must be To comply with The
prestation as it should be performed; and The
creditor refuses The performance without just cause.
(Pantaleon v. American Express, lnc., GR. No. 174269
May 8, 2009) Sergio signified his readiness To
perform his obligation by making The Tender of
950,000. This Tender of payment is valid because
Sergio became a creditor of Samanfha with
respect To The amount of 50,000.00 he paid To The
utility company, hence The parties became mutual
creditors and debtors of each other and legal
compensation Took place. Samantha had no just
cause To refuse Sergio’s payment which renders her
guilty of mora accipiendi.
XII.
Saachl opened a savings bank account with

Shanghainese Bank. He made an initial deposit of
PhP100,000. Part of the bank opening forms that he
was required to sign when he opened the account
was a Holdout Agreement which provided that,
should he incur any liability or obligation to the
bank, the bank shall have The right to immediately
and automatically take over his savings account

deposit. After he opened his deposit account, the
Shanghainese Bank discovered a scam wherein the
funds in the account of another depositor in the
bank was withdrawn by an impostor. Shanghainese
Bank suspected Saachi to be. the impostor, and
led a criminal case of estafa against him. While
the case was still pending with the Prosecutor's
ofce, the bank took over Saachi's savings deposit
on the basis of the Holdout Agreement.
(a) What kind of contract is created when a
depositor opens a deposit account with a bank?
(2.5%)
(b) In this case, did the bank have the right to
take over Saachi's bank deposit? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) The contract created when a depositor

opens a deposit account with a bank is that of
simple loan or mutuum. The law provides that xed,
savings, and current deposits of money in banks
and similar institutions shall be governed by the
provisions concerning simple loan. (Article T980,
Civil Code)
b) No, the bank had no right to take over
Saachi’s bank deposit. The reliance by the bank
on the hold-out clause as the justification for taking
over the bank deposit of Saachi is misplaced
because the clause can only be invoked it the
depositor has incurred any liability or obligation to
the bank. Based on the facts, there is as yet no
378 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
obligaTion on The parT of Saachi To The bank as The

criminal case Tiled by The laTTer is sTill pending and
he has noT yeT been convicTed of The crime
charged. For The bank To legally invoke an
obligdTion on The parT of Saachi, iT musT be derived
from any of The sources under ArTicle H57 of The
Civil Code which are law, conTrdcTs, quasi-
conTracTs, delicTs and quasi-delicTs. The bank Tailed
To show Thai Saachi has an obligaiion To ii because
The crimindl case was sTill pending and There has
been no final judgmenl yeT holding ThaT Saachi
was liable Tor The crinne. (MeTrobank vs. Rosales
and Yo Yuk To GR. No. 183204 January l3, 20l4)
XIII.
Sonny, Inc. (SI) purchased several heavy

machineries from Single EquipmenT Philippines, Inc.
(SEP) for PhP10 million, payable in 36 monThly
insTalmenTs. A chael morTgage was consTiTuTed on
The same machineries as securiTy for The amounT.
As addional securiTy, The Presidenf of SI, STan
SmiTh, morTgaged his house and loT. SI failed To pay
The 16"‘ and succeeding monThly insTallmenTs. SEP
Then commenced a co|lecTion suiT againsT Sl, and
in The course of The proceedings, a wriT of
aachmeni was issued againsT S|‘s properes,
including The mortgaged machineries. The aflached
properlies were subsequenTly sold aT public acTion,
but The proceeds Thereof were insufficient To sasfy
The judgmeni crediT.
(a) Can SEP legally recover The deciency? (2.5%)
(b) lnsfead of collecfing The deciency, can

SEP commence exlrajudicial proceedings To foreclose
The mongage on STan's house and lof in order fo
recover The deciency? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) Yes. SEP can recover The deficiency from SI.

As a rule, if movable properfy is sold on insTallmenT
and a chaTTel morTgage was consTiTuTed over The
same To secure The balance of The purchase price,
The seller may exercise any of The following
remedies if The buyer defaulTs in Two or more
insfallmenlsz l) To exacT fulfillmenf of The obligalion;
2) To foreclose The chaTTel morlgage on The Thing
sold; 3) To cancel The sale. lf The seller opfs To
foreclose The morTgage and The proceeds are noT
sufficienl To cover The balance of The obligalion he
can no longer recover The deciency.
Here, SEP opTed To exacT fu|fillmenT by filing a
suiT for co|lecTion and while The morigaged
properTy was sold af public auclion, iT was noT by
virfue of foreclosure bul by virlue of The execuTion
sale in The colleciion suil. ( lnduslrial Finance
Corporalion vs. Ramirez GR. No. L-43821 May 26,
i977) In insiallmenl sales, if The acfion insTiTuTed is
for specific performance and The morfgaged
properTy is subseauenfly alfached and sold, The
sale Thereof does nof amounl To a foreclosure of
The morTgage. Hence, The seller-credifor is enTiTled
To a deficiency judgmeni (SouThern MoTors, Inc. vs.
Moscoso, l l2 Phil. 94)
380 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
b) No, SEP cannoT foreclose The morfgage on

STan’s house To recover The deficiency. SEP as a
credifor has a single cause of acfion againsf The
debfor. The remedies sTaTed in Arficle i484 are
alTernaTive and nof cumulafive and The elecfion of
one remedy precludes The selecfion of The oTher
remedies. Since SEP has already elecfed The
enforcemenf of The debf by filing The collecfion
suiT, iT is barred from enforcing The morfgage even
if if may be furnished by a Third barfy To secure The
same debf. Though The debT and The morlgage
consTiTuTe sebarafe agreemenfs, The laTTer is
subsidiary To The former, and boTh refer To one and
The same obligafion. Conseaueny, There exisTs only
one cause of acTion for a single breach of ThaT
obligafion. SEP cannoT splif ifs single cause of acTion
by Tiling a complainf for baymenf of The debf, and
Thereaffer anofher acfion for foreclosure of The
morlgage. If he does so, The filing of The firsT
comblainf will bar The subseauenf complainf. To say
ofhen/vise would be aufhorizing The credifor To seek
|olural redress for a single breach of conTracT.
(Bachrach Mofor Co., Inc, vs. lcarangal 68 Phil. 287)
XIV.
Socorro is The regisfered owner of LoT A while

Segunda ls The registered owner of The adjoining LoT
B. LoT A is locafed aT an elevafed plaTeau of abouT
15 feef above The level of LoT B. Since Socorro was
allegedly removing poions of The land and cemenT
ThaT supporfed The adjoining properly, Segunda
caused The annoTaTion of an adverse claim againsf
50 sq. m. on Lot A's Transfer Certicate of Title,

asserting the existence of a legal easement.
(a) Does a legal easement in fact exist? If so,
what kind‘? (2.5%)
(b) If a legal easement does in fact exist, is an
annotation of an adverse claim on the title of the
servient estate proper? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
o) Yes, there exists o legal easement in favor

of Segundo under the Civil Code which provides
that no proprietor sholl make such excavations
upon his lond os to deprive ony odjocent lond or
building of sufficient loterol or subjocent support.
(Article 684, Civil Code) Although on owner of o
parcel of lond is the owner of its surfoce ond
everything under it ond moy make excovotions on
his lond, (Article 437, Civil Code) this right is subject
to the limitation thot he sholl not deprive ony
odjocent lond or building of sufficient loterol or
subjocent support.
b) No, the onnototion of on odverse cloim on
the title of the servient estote is not proper ond
would be unnecessory. An odverse cloinn over
registered lond necessitotes thot the registront rnust
hove o cloim on the title of the disputed lond
odverse to thot of the registered owner arising
subsequent to the dote of the originol registrotion.
(Presidential Decree i529, Section 70). Annotation
is done only to opprise third persons thot there is o
382 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
conTroversy over The ownership of The land and To

preserve and proTecT The righT of The adverse
cldimdni during The pendency of The conTroversy.
(Cdsiro vs. Monsod GR. No. l837l9 February 2, 201 l)
In The cdse presenTed, Segundo does noT have
d claim on The TiTle of Socorro buT is merely cisserling
The exisTence of The edsemenT, hence, The dnnoTdTion
was improper. In addiiion, since whaT is involved here
is a legal edsemeni of laierol and subjdceni supporT,
iT exisTs even wiThouT The dnnoTaTion on The TiTle of The
servienT esTaTe.
XV.
Simon owned a Townhouse Thaf he renTed ouT

To Shannon, a flighf aTTendanT wiTh Soleil Philippine
Airlines (SPA). They had no wrii-Ten conlracf buT
merely agreed on a Three (3)-year lease. Shannon
had been using The Townhouse as her base in
Manila and had been paying renfals for more Than
a year when she accepfed a beTTer job offer from
Sing Airlines. This meanT ThaT Singapore was going
To be her new base and so she decided, wiThouT
informing Simon, To sublease The Townhouse To
Sylvia, an office clerk in SPA.
(a) Can Simon compel Shannon To reduce The
lease agreemenf info wrifing? (2.5%)
(b) Does The sublease wiThouT Simon's knowledge
and consenf consTiTuTe a ground for Terminafing The
lease? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) Yes, Simon may compel Shannon to reduce

the agreement into writing. Contracts shall be
obligatory in whatever form they may have been
entered into provided all the essential requisites for
their validity are present. (Article I356, Civil Code)
However, there are certain contracts which are
required to be in a particular form to be valid or
enforceable and one such contract is a lease for more
than one year. (Article 1403, Civil Code) Since the lease
here has been perfected and in fact partially
executed, Simon may compel Shannon to observe the
form required by law. (Article I357, Civil Code)
b) No, the subleasing of the property leased
will not constitute a ground for terminating the
lease unless there is an express prohibition by the
lessor. When in a contract of lease, there is no
express prohibition, the lessee, may sublet the thing
leased in whole or in part, without prejudice to his
responsibility for the performance of the contract
toward the lessor. (Article I650, Civil Code). The
contract between the parties has not been reduced
into writing and there appears to be no prohibition
upon Shannon against subleasing the unit. Therefore,
the act of subleasing will not constitute a ground to
terminate the lease agreement.
XVI.
Selena was a single 18-year old when she got

pregnant and gave birth to Suri. She then left to
work as a caregiver in Canada, leaving Suri with
her parents in the Philippines. Selena, now 34 years
384 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
old and a permanent resident in Canada, met and

married Sam who is a 24-year old Canadian citizen
who works as a movie star in Canada. Sam's
parents are of Filipino ancestry but had become
Canadian citizens before Sam was born. Wanting
Suri to have all the advantages of a legitimate child,
Selena and Sam decided to adopt her. Sam's
parents, already opposed to the marriage of their son
to someone signicantly older, vehemently objected
to the adoption. They argued that Sam was not old
enough and that the requisite age gap required by
the Inter-Country Adoption Act between Sam as
adopter and Suri as adoptee was not met.
Are Sam's parents correct? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Sam's parents are incorrect. Under the

Inter-Country Adoption Act an alien or Filipino
citizen permanently residing abroad may file an
application for inter-country adoption of a Filipino
child provided that the applicant is at least twenty-
seven (27) years of age and at least sixteen (16)
years older than the child to be adopted. The
requirement of sixteen year age gap does not
apply if the adopter is the parent by nature of the
child, or the spouse of such parent. (Section 9 (0),
Inter-Country Adoption Act) Since Sam is the
spouse of Suri’s parent, the age-gap requirement
does not apply and he is qualified to adopt Suri.
Act provides
NOTA BENE: The lnter-Country Adoption
that only a child below l5 years of age who is
voluntarity or, involuntarily committed to the
Department (Republic Act 9523) may be adopted.

The question, however, is specifically directed to the
age gap between the adopter and adoptee.
XVII.
Soa and Semuel, both unmarried, lived together

for many years in the Philippines and begot three
children. While Soa stayed in the Philippines with
the children, Semuel went abroad to work and
became a naturalized German citizen. He met
someone in Germany whom he wanted to marry.
Semuel thereafter came home and led a petition
with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for partition of the
common properties acquired during his union with
Soa in the Philippines. The properties acquired
during the union consisted of a house and lot in
Cavite worth PhP2 million, and some personal
properties, including cash in bank amounting to
PhPl million. All these properties were acquired
using Samuel's salaries and wages since Soa was
a stay-at-home mother. In retaliation, Sofia led an
action, on behalf of their minor children, for support.
(a) How should the properties be partitioned?
(2.5%)
(b) Should Semuel be required to support the
minor children? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) The properties acquired during the cohabitation

of Sofia and Semuel must be partitioned in
accordance with the rules on co-ownership under
386 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
ArTicle T47 of The Family Code. Since The parfies

were capaciTaTed To gel married
aT The Time of
Their cohabiTaTion, Thelaw provides ThaT Their
wages and salaries shall be owned by Them in
equal shares and The properfy acquired by Them
Through Their work or indusTry shall be governed by
The rules on co-ownership. The same provision
sTaTes ThaT The properfies acquired while They lived
Togefher, in The absence of proof To The conTrary,
shall be presumed acquired by Their joinT efforfs,
work or indusTry shall be owned by Them in equal
shares even if one of The spouse's conTribuTion
consisTed merely in The care and The mainfenance
of The household. Thus, even if Sofia was a sTay-aT-
home moTher, she is enTiTled To an equal share in
The properfies acquired during Their cohabiTaTlon.
b) Yes, Semuel is required To supporf his Three

children even if They were all born ouTside of
wedlock. SupporT is ordained noT only beTween
parenTs and Their legilimafe children and The
legiTimaTe and illegiTimaTe children of The laTTer, buT
also belween parenTs and Their illegiTimaTe children
and The legiTimaTe and illegiTimaTe children of The
laTTer. (ArTicle T95, Family Code). The supporl ThaT
Semuel has To provide comprises everylhing indispensable
for susTenance, dwelling, clofhing, medical affendance,
educaTion and Transportafion including The children‘s
schooling or Training for some profession, Trade or
vocafion. (ArTicle T94, Family Code)
Even if Semuelis already a German cifizen and
on The assumpfion ThaT German law does noT
require The naTural faTher To supporf his illegiTimaTe
children, his denial of financial support is considered

a criminal offense under Philippine law. (Republic
Act, 9262 VAWC Act). Since he currently in the
Philippines, the territoriality principle in criminal law
will apply to render him liable for violation of our
law on violence against women and children.
(Article l4, Civil Code; Del Socorro v. \/an Wilsem,
GR. No. l93707 December lO, 2014)
XVIII.
Shasha purchased an airline ticket from Sea

Airlines (SAL) covering Manila-Bangkok- Hanoi-
Manila. The ticket was exclusively endorsable to
Siam Airlines (SMA). The contract of air transportation
was between Shasha and SAL, with the latter
endorsing to SMA the Hanoi-Manila segment of the
journey. All her flights were conrmed by SAL before
she left Manila. Shasha took the flight from Manila to
Bangkok on board SAL using the ticket. When she
arrived in Bangkok, she went to the SAL ticket
counter and conrmed her return trip from Hanoi to
Manila on board SMA Flight No. SA 888. On the date
of her return trip, she checked in for SMA Flight No.
SA 888, boarded the plane, and before she could
even settle in on her assigned seat, she was off-
loaded and treated rudely by the crew. She lost her
luggage and missed an important business meeting.
She thereafter led a complaint solely against SAL
and argued that it was solidarily liable with SMA for
the damages she suffered since the latter was only
an agent of the former.
388 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(a) Should either, or both, SAL and SMA be held

liable for damages that Shasha suffered? (2.5%)
(b) Assuming that one is an agent of the other,
is the agency coupled with interest? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) SAL should be held liable for damages to

Shasha on the basis of its breach of the contract of
carriage. SAL is clearly the principal in the contract
of carriage with Shasha regardless of the
circumstance that the actual carriage was to be
performed by various carriers. The issuance of a
confirmed SAL ticket in favor of Shasha covering
the entire leg of her trip abroad serves as proof that
SAL in effect guaranteed that the successive air
carriers such as SMA would honor her ticket and
assure her of a space therein and transport her on
a particular segment of her trip. (Lufthansa German
Airlines vs. Court of Appeals and Antiporda GR. No.
83612, November 24, i994) A contract of a common
carrier is imbued with public interest and generates
a relation attended with a public duty. Neglect or
malfeasance of the carrier's employees gives rise to
an action for damages. Thus, bumping off a
passenger despite her confirmed reservation entitles
her to the award of moral and exemplary damages.
(Air France v. Carrascoso GR. No. L-2i 438, September
28, i966)
b) Yes, it may be considered as an agency
coupled with an interest. An agency is deemed as
one coupled with an interest where it is established
for the mutual benefit of the principal and of the
dgenf, or if d biloferol confrdcf depends upon if, or

if ifis The means of fulfilling on obligdfion already
confrocfed. This kind of agency cdnnof be revoked
by The principdl so long ds The inTeresT of The dgenf
or of a Third person subsisfs. (Arficle i927, Civil
Code) In an agency coupled wiTh an inTeresT, The
dgenT‘s inTeresT musT be in The subjecf moTTer of The
power conferred and noT merely on inferesf in The
exercise of The power because iT enfifles him To
cornpensofion. (Linn vs. Sdbon GR. No. 163720
December lé, 2004) ln The cdse presenTed, The
agency was creafed as a means of fulfilling an
obligdfion already conTrocTed ond The Ticl<eT is
exclusively endorsable only To SMA. As such, if was
esfdblished for The mufudl benefif of The pclrfies.
(Sevi|la vs. Courf of Appeals GR. Nos. L-4i 182-3, l6O
SCRA l7l (1988).
XIX
Sebasfian, who has a pending assessmenf from

The Bureau of Infernal Revenue (BIR), was required
To posT a bond. He enfered info an agreemenf wiTh
Solid Surefy Company (SSC) for SSC To issue a bond
in favor of The BIR To secure paymenf of his Taxes, if
found To be due. In considerafion of The issuance of
The bond, he execufed an indemnify AgreemenT
wiTh SSC whereby he agreed To indemnify The laTTer
in The evenT ThaT he was found liable To pay The Tax.
The BIR evenfually decided againsf Sebasfian, and
judicially commenced aclion againsf boTh Sebasfian
and SSC To recover SebasTian‘s unpaid Taxes.
Simulfaneously, BIR also iniTiaTed acfion To foreclose
on The bond. Even before paying The BIR, SSC
390 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
sought indemnity from Sebastian on the basis of the

Indemnity Agreement. Sebastian refused to pay
since SSC had not paid the BIR anything yet, and
alleged that the provision in the Indemnity
Agreement which allowed SSC to recover from him,
by mere demand, even if it (SSC) had not yet paid
the creditor, was void for being contrary to law and
public policy.
Can Sebastian legally refuse to pay SSC? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No. Sebastian cannot legally refuse to pay SSC.

The agreement here sued upon is not only one of
indemnity against loss, but of indemnity against
liability. While the first does not render the
indemnitor liable until the person to be indemnified
makes payment or sustains loss, the second
becomes operative as soon as the liability of the
person indemnified arises irrespective of whether or
not he has suffered actual loss. (Associated Insurance
& Surety Co., Inc. vs. Chua L-i5656, January 3i,
1963, 7 SCRA 52, 54). Based on their stipulation,
Sebastian agreed to indemnity the SSC in the event
that he was found liable to pay the tax. In other
words, SSC is entitled to recover from Sebastian as
soon the latter becomes liable and not from the
time SSC has actually paid. The stipulation is valid
and is not contrary to public policy since it does not
contravene some established interest of society or
undermine security of individual rights.
XX.
Simeon was returning to Manila after spending a

weekend with his parents in Sariaya, Quezon. He
boarded a bus operated by the Sabbit Bus Line
(SBL) on August 30, 2013. In the middle of the
journey, the bus collided with a truck coming from
the opposite direction, which was overtaking the
vehicle in front of the truck. Though the driver of the
SBL bus tried to avoid the truck, a mishap occurred
as the truck hit the left side of the bus. As a result of
the accident, Simeon suffered a fractured leg and
was unable to report for work for one week. He
sued SBL for actual and moral damages. SBL raised
the defense that it was the driver of the truck who
was at fault, and that it exercised the diligence of a
good father of a family in the selection and
supervision of its driver.
(a) ls SBL liable for actual damages? Moral
damages? (2.5%)
(b) Will be liable to pay interest if it is required
SBL
to pay damages, and delays in the payment of the
judgment award? What is the rate of interest, and
from when should the interest start running? (2.5%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
a) On the assumption that Simeon was able to

substantiate his claim for actual damages, SBL shall be
liable for the same. (Article 2199, Civil Code) As a
common carrier, SBL has the obligation to transport its
passengers safely as tar as human foresight can
provide. The diligence required from a common
392 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
carrier is noT merely ThaT of a good faTher of a family

buT exTraordinary diligence. (Arlicle i733, Civil Code).
NeiTher can SBL invoke The negligence of The driver of
The Truck To escape liabiliTy To iTs passengers.
However, moral damages are generally noT

recoverable in acTions for damages predicaTed on
breach of conlracT. (ArTicle 22i 9, Civil Code) By way
of excepTion moral damages are recoverable in an
acTion for breach of conTracT: (l) in cases in which
The mishap resulls in The dealh of a passenger, as
provided in ArTicle i764, in relaTion To Arlicle 2206(3)
of The Civil Code; and (2) in cases in which The
carrier is guiliy of fraud or bad failh, as provided in
Ariicle 2220. Since SebasTian merely susTained injuries
from The mishap, he cannoT recover moral damages.
(EsTrada vs. Philippine Rabbii Bus Lines, inc. G. R. No.
203902, July i9, 20l7; Darines v. Quinones, G.R. No.
206468, AugusT 2, 2Oi 7)
b) Yes, SBL may be held liable for inTeresTs on
The moneTary awards if ii delays The paymenT of
The same. The rale of inTeresT ThaT should be
imposed is 6% per annum reckoned from The finaliTy
of The judgmenT unTil iTs saTisTacTion. Jurisprudence
insTrucTs ThaT when The judgmenT of The courT
awarding a sum of money becomes final and
execuTory, The raTe of legal inTeresT shall be 6% per
annum from such finaliTy unTil ils saTisfacTion, This
inTerim period being deemed To be by Then an
eauivalenT To a forbearance of crediT. (EasTern
Shipping Lines vs. CourT of Appeals G.R. No. 974l2.
July i2, i994, 234 SCRA 78; Odiamar vs. Valencia G.R.
No. 2i3582, SepTember l2, 2018; Nacar v. Gallery
Frames G.R. No. 189871, AugusT 13,2013)
A.1.
ln January 2018, Mrs. A, a married woman on

her sixth (6th) month of pregnancy, was crossing a
street when she was suddenly hit by a car being
recklessly driven by Mr. X. As a result, Mrs. A
sustained serious injuries and further, suffered an
unintentional abortion. Mrs. A was hospitalized for
two (2) months, during which she incurred
P400,000.00 in medical fees. Her expenses were all
duly substantiated by ofcial receipts. During the
two (2)-month period of her connement, she was
unable to report for work and earn any salary,
which was established at the rate of P50,000.00 per
month. Mrs. A then led a civil case for damages
against Mr. X.
(a) Based on the case filed by Mrs. A, what is
the source of Mr. X's obligation to her as a result of
his acts? Explain. (2%)
(b) May Mrs. A claim actual damages from Mr.
X? If so, how much can Mrs. A claim? Explain. (2%)
(c) May Mrs. A claim damages on behalf of her
unborn baby? Explain. (3%)
(d) What must Mrs. A prove if she wants to
recover moral damages from Mr. X? (2%)
(e) Assuming that Mrs. A is awarded actual and
moral damages by the trial court, may she also
393
394 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
claim interest if the nal and executory judgment

award remains unpaid by Mr. X? If so, when should
the interests be reckoned and what is the rate of
interest? Explain.
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.'l .
a) Mr. X‘s obligation to Mrs. A is based on

quasi-delict which occurs when one by his act or
omission there being fault or negligence causes
damage to another. (Article 2176, Civil Code) The
reckless manner by which Mr. X drove his car is the
proximate cause of the injuries sustained by Mrs. A
and the unintentional abortion of the fetus in her
womb for which he must be held liable. A quasi-
delict is one of the sources of obligations under
Article ii57 of the Civil Code.
b) Yes, Mrs. A may claim actual damages
from Mr. X based on what she has duly proved.
Under the Civil Code, one is entitled to adequate
compensation for pecuniary loss as he has duly
proved. (Article, 2199, Civil Code) Thus, Mrs. A may
claim the hospitalization expenses of P400,000.00
which were substantiated by receipts and the loss
of her income during her two-month confinement
at the rate of P50,000.00 per month. The total
actual damages Mrs. A may claim from Mr. X is
P500,000.00.
c) No, Mrs. A may not claim damages on
behalf of her unborn baby because although a
fetus has a presumptive personality for purposes
fdvordble To if, The low requires Thdf if The fefus hod

on infrouferine life of less Thon seven monfhs, os in
This cdse, if musf survived for The full 24 hours from
complefe sepdrdfion from The moTher’s womb
before if moy considered born dnd possessed of civil
persondlify. In This cdse, The fefus hod on infrouferine
life of less Thdn seven monfhs dnd The fdcfs indicdfe
Thdf The fefus wds noT born olive dnd Therefore, if did
noT comply wifh The requiremenf of Arlicle 4i of The
Civil Code. (Geluz v. Courf of Appeols, GR. No. L-
16439, July 20, T961)
d) To recover mordl ddmdges, Mrs. A musf

prove Thof she suffered menfdl dnguish, frighf,
serious dnxiefy, wounded feelings, morol shock, ds
Cl resulf of The injuries she susfoined by redson of Mr.
A’s negligenf ocf. Since The source of Mr. A’s

liobilify To Mrs. X is Thdf of on qudsi-delicf which
resulfed in physicdl injuries, mordl ddmoges ore
recoveroble pursudnf To The provisions of Arficle
2219 of The Civil Code.
e) Yes, if The Triol courf owdrded ocfuol dnd
mordl domdges To Mrs. A, she con likewise recover
inferesf on The sums dwdrded from The Time of
findlify of The judgmenf unfil fully pdid of The rdfe of
6% per dnnum. When The judgmenf of The courf
becomes finoil and execufory, inferesf QT The rdfe
of 6% shdll be imposed on The dmounf odjudged
from such finolify unfil ifs sdfisfocfion ds This inferim
period is deemed To be by Then equivolenf To o
forbeordnce of credif. (Nocor v. Gdllery Frdmes,
GR. No. 189871 Augusf 13,2013)
396 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
A.2.
and W were married in 1990. H, being a

H
member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP),
was deployed to a rebel-infested area in 1992. Since
then, W has not heard from her husband, H.
One day, the AFP informed W that H had been

declared missing since 1995. In consequence, W
diligently pursued all available means to ascertain
her husband's whereabouts, but to no avail.
Firmly believing that H had already died, W
led a claim before the AFP in 2008 for the death
benefits of the missing serviceman. However, the
AFP, despite being cognizant of H's status, would
not act on the claim, contending that H could not
be presumed dead unless a judicial declaration to
this effect is issued by the proper court.
In what instance/s is a judicial declaration of
presumptive death necessary? In this case, is the
contention of the AFP correct? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A.2.
The judicial declaration of presumptive death is

only necessary for purposes of remarriage under
Article 41 ot the Family Code. The present spouse
who has a well-founded belief that the absent
spouse is already dead and wishes to rennarry must
first tile a petition for declaration of presumptive
death of the absent spouse.
No, The contention of The AFP is not correct. ln

The case of Tddeo-Matias v. Republic (G.R. No.
230751, April 25, 2Oi8), the Supreme Court ruled
That Ci petition whose sole purpose is to declare o
person presumptively dead is not on authorized suit
in This jurisdiction and no court should Tdke
cognizdnce of The some. The presumption of death
under Article 390 or 391 of The Civil Code arises
by operation of law without need of judicial
declaration once The factual conditions in said
articles are established.
A.3.
Mr. Reyes is legally married to Mrs. Reyes.

During The subsistence of Their marriage, Mr. Reyes
cohabited with another woman, Ms. Cruz. Out of Mr.
Reyes and Ms. Cruz's illicit relationship, a child
named C was born. In C's birth certicate, "Cruz"
appears as The child's surname, although Mr. Reyes
expressly acknowledged C as his child.
ln 2018, Mr. Reyes and Ms. Cruz ended Their
relationship. Mr. Reyes thereafter lodged a petition
in court for parental custody and change or correction
of C's surname in The child's birth certicate from
"Cruz" to "Reyes." AT that Time, C was only ten (10)
years old.
(a) Should Mr. Reyes be granted custody of C?
Explain. (2.5%)
(b) Can Mr. Reyes validly compel the change or
correction of C's surname from "Cruz" to "Reyes"?
Explain. (2.5%)
398 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.3.
d) No, Mr. Reyes should not be grdnted

custody of C. C is on illegitimdte child since he wds
born outside of wedlock to Mr. Reyes dnd Ms. Cruz.
An illegitimdte child shdll be under the sole pdrentol
duthority of the mother unless the mother is unfit to
hove custody of her child. (Tonog vs. Court of
Appedls, G.R. No. l22906, Februdry 7, 2002). Here,
there dppedrs to be no dllegdtion or showing thdt
Ms. Cruz is suffering from disdbilily or disqudlicdtion to
hove custody dnd exercise pdrentdl duthority over
her child. Mr. Reyes’ recognition of the child mdy be
d good ground to order him to support C, but not to
grdnt him custody. (Briones v. Miguel, G.R. No. 156343
October l8, 2004)
b)No, Mr. Reyes cdnnot compel the chdnge or
correction of C’s surndme from Cruz to Reyes. ln
Gronde v. Antonio,(G.R. No. 206248 Februdry l8,
20l4) the Supreme Court ruled thdt on illegitimdte
child recognized by the fdther moy use the
surndme of the lotter. The use of the word “mo|y"
under Republic Act 9255 indicdtes thot the use of
the surndme of the fdther by on illegitimdte child is
not mc1nddtory.Thus, there is no compulsion for the
illegitimote child to use the surndme of his fcither
even if he wds duly recognized by the ldtter.
A.4.
F,a Filipina, married J, a Japanese, in the Philippines.

After three (3) years, they had a falling out and
thus, separated. Soon after, F initiated a divorce
petition in Japan which was not opposed by J
because under Japanese law, a grant of divorce
will capacitate him to remarry. F's divorce petition
was then granted by the Japanese court with nality.
May the legal effects of the divorce decree be
recognized in the Philippines, and consequenlty,
capacitate F to remarry here‘? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A.4.
Yes, the divorce obtained by F in Japan may

be recognized here in the Philippines and
capacitate F to remarry provided that she files the
appropriate petition before Philippine courts for the
recognition of the divorce decree. In Morisono v.
Morisono, (GR. No. 226013, July 2, 2Ol8) the
Supreme Court ruled there is no real and substantial
difference between a Filipino who initiated a
foreign divorce proceedings and a Filipino who
obtained a divorce decree upon the instance of
his or her alien spouse. Hence, to make a distinction
between them based merely on the superficial
difference of whether they initiated the divorce
proceedings or not is utterly unfair. Foreign divorce
decrees obtained to nullify marriages between a
Filipino and an alien citizen may already be
recognized in this jurisdiction, regardless of who
400 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
between the spouses initiated the divorce; provided,

of course, that the party petitioning for the recognition
of such foreign divorce decree - presumably the
Filipino citizen -- must prove the divorce as a fact
and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law
allowing it. (Republic v. Manalo, GR. No. 22lO29, April
24, 2018)
A.5.
X and Y were in a live-in relationship for the

longest time, and were already blessed with a child,
Z. They nally decided to get married on March 15,
2020. When X's parents found about the news, they
were thrilled and thus, donated in favor of Z, the
family heirloom, particularly, a gold ring valued at
P250,000.00, which X and Y orally accepted on behalf
of their minor child. One day, X and Y got into a
serious quarrel, which resulted in them setting aside
their marriage plans.
(a) ls the donation to Z valid? Explain. (3%)
(b) Assuming that the donation to Z is valid,
may X's parents revoke the donation on the ground
that the marriage of X with Y did not push through?
Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.5.
a) No, the donation to Z is not valid. A child

although unborn has a presumptive personality for
purposes favorable to it and may be a recipient of a
donotion. The low provides that donations made to

conceived dnd unborn children may be accepted
by those persons who would legally represent them
if they were dlreddy born. (Art. 742) However, the
low provides thdt it the vdlue of the movable
property donoted exceeds five thousond pesos it
must be in writing otherwise, it is void. (Art. 748).
Since the volue of the property donoted is
P250,000.00 the donotion dnd occeptonce must
hove been reduced into writing.
b) On the assumption that the donotion is
volid, X's parents may not revoke the donation on
the ground of the non-celebration of the marriage
between X dnd Y. The donotion may not be
considered o donation propter nuptios or o
donotion by reason of marriage becouse it was not
mode in fdvor of one or both the contracting
parties but in fdvor of Z. (Article 83, Family Code)
Hence, even if the marriage did not push through,
the donotion connot be subject to revocation
based on Article 86 which only pertoins to grounds
tor revocation of donations by reason ot mdrrioge.
A.6.
Name at least two (2) exclusions from the

followlng property regimes as enumerated under
the Family Code:
(a) Absolute community of property (2%)
(b) Conjugal partnership of gains (2%)
402 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.6.
o) Under ArTicle 92 of The Fdnnily Code, The

following dre excluded from The dbsoluie communiTy
of properTy:
i) Properly for persondl or exclusive use of
eiTher spouse, excepT jewelry;
2) Properly dcquired by grdTuiTous Tille by
eilher spouse during The mdrridge including The
fruiTs ds well ds The income Thereof, if dny, unless
expressly provided by The TesTdTor or grdnTor ThdT
iT shdll Torm pdri of The communily properTy;
3) ProperTy dcquired before The mdrridge by

eiTher spouse who hds legiTimdTe descenddnTs by
Cl former mdrridge, dnd The fruils ds well os The
incorne, if dny, of such properTy.

On The oTher hdnd, The following ore
b)
excluded from The conjugdl pdrlnership of gdins:
l) ProperTy which is broughl inTo The mdrridge ds
his or her own;
2) ThdT which is purchdsed wiTh The exclusive
money of wife or The husband;
The
3) Those dcquired by grdTuiTous TiTle during

The nndrridge;
4) ThdT which is dcquired by righT of redernplion,

by borier or by exchdnge wiTh properTy belonging
To only one of The spouses (Article lO9, Fdmily Code)
A.7.
Believing that he owned a certain parcel of

land and completely unaware of any defect in his
title thereto, Mr. A started to build a house thereon.
When Mr. P, the real owner of the land learned of
Mr. A's actions, Mr. P immediately demanded Mr. A
to leave the premises. However, Mr. A refused to
leave, and instead, asserted that as a builder in
good faith, Mr. P is obliged to sell the land to him.
(a) ls the claim of Mr. A correct? Explain. (3%)
(b) Assuming that Mr. P all the while, knew but
did not object to Mr. A's construction of the house
on his property, may Mr. A compel Mr. P to
purchase the said improvement due to Mr. P's bad
faith? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.7.
a) No, the claim of Mr. Ais not correct because

even if he a builder in good faith, it is the landowner
is
who is given the option either to appropriate the
works after payment of proper indemnity or to sell the
land to the builder if its value is not considerably
higher then the building or the trees. (Article 448, Civil
Code)lt is the owner of the land who is authorized to
exercise the option, because his right is older, and
because, by the principle of accession, he is entitled
to the ownership of the accessory thing. (Tecnogas
Philippines Mfg. Corp. vs. Coun‘ of Appeals, GR. No.
lO8894 February lO, 1997)
404 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
b) landowner acTed in bad faiTh and

Yes, if The
The builder acTed in good faiTh, The provisions of
ArTicle 447 shall apply. Under The provisions of arTicle
aforemenlioned, The landowner who makes Thereon
personally or Through anoTher, planngs consTrucTion
shall pay Their value. Mr. P shall be considered in bad
faiTh because The law provides ThaT iT is undersTood
Thai There is bad TaiTh on The parl of The landowner
whenever The acT was done wiTh his knowledge and
wiThouT opposiTion on his parT. (ArTicle 454, Civil
Code) In such a case, The landowner shall be
deemed To have builT on his land using The maTerials
of anoTher and shall pay Their value.
A.8.
Mr. E leased a piece of land from Mr. F To be

used for his sawmill business for a period of Ten (10)
years. Consequenlly, Mr. E placed heavy machineries
Thereon To be used for his aforemenTioned business,
wiTh The inTenTion of removing Them aer The
expiraTion of The lease period.
Are Mr. E's heavy machineries considered real
properlies under The Civil Code? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A.8.
No, The machineries placed by Mr. E shall

noT be considered real properTies under The Civil
Code. For machineries To be considered as real
properTies, They musT have been placed by The
owner of the tenements ond intended to be used

tor on industry or works which may be carried on in
a building or on Cl piece of idnd. (Article 415, Civil
Code) Mr. E is not the owner of the building and
the facts cledrly stated that he intended to remove
them otter the terminotion of the ledse. Thus, the
machineries did not become immovdble property
by destinotion. (Ddvdo Sawmill Co. vs. Castillo, G.R.
No. L-4041 l , August 7, 1935)
A.9.
Ms. U a usufructuary of a piece of land

is
owned by Mr. L. During the existence of the usufruct,
Ms. U introduced various useful improvements on
the land. Upon termination of the usufruct, Mr. L
requested Ms. U to remove the said improvements,
but Ms. U refused, demanding instead that Mr. L
reimburse her the value of the same.
(a) What is a usufruct? (2%)
(b) ls Ms. U's demand proper? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
A.9.
Cl) Usufruct is c1 contrcict which gives the
person the right to enjoy the property of dnother
with the obligation of presen/ing its form dnd
substdnce, unless the title constituting it or the low
otherwise provides. (Article 562, Civil Code; Moroliddd
v. Pernes, 497 SCRA 532 [2006]). ln essence, usufruct
406 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
is the right to temporarily enjoy the property of

another with the right to the use as well as to the
fruits Thereof while the owner retains the power to
dispose of the Thing.
b) No, Ms. U's demand is not proper. Under
The low, if The usufructudry introduced useful
improvements on The property held in usufructuary, he
shall not have The right to be indemnified Therefore
but he can only remove such improvements if The
property will not suffer damage Thereby. (Article
579 dnd Article 580, Civil Code) Thus, Ms. U has no
right to seek reimbursement for The value of The
improvements from Mr. L but she may remove The
improvements provided it is possible to do so
without causing injury to The property.
A.10.
Village Hand Village L are adjoining residential

villages in a mountainous portion of Antipolo City,
Rizal, with Village L being lower in elevation than
Village H. In an effort to beautify Village H, its
developer, X, |nc., constructed a clubhouse which
included an Olympic-sized swimming pool and an
articial lagoon on a portion of land overlooking
Village L.
During the monsoon season, the continuous
heavy rains caused Village H's swimming pool and
articial lagoon To overow, resulting into a massive
spillover that damaged various properties in Village L.
Aggrieved, the homeowners of Village L led a
complaint for damages against X, Inc. In defense,

X, Inc.contended that pursuant to the Civil Code,
Village L, as the lower estate, was obliged to
receive the waters descending from Village H, the
higher estate. Hence, it cannot be held liable for
damages.
ls X, lnc.'s position tenable? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
A10.
No, X lnc.'s position untenable. While it is true

is
that lower estates are obliged to receive the waters
that descend from higher estates, this pertains only
to the waters which naturally flow from the higher
estates and without intervention of man. (Article 50,
Water Code) The facts clearly state that the waters
that descended from Village H is a result of an
artificial lagoon constructed by X Inc. In other words,
the massive spillover was not brought about by
nature but by the man-made constructions made
by X. In addition, the law also provides that the
owner of the higher estate cannot make works
which will increase the natural flow ot waters.
Hence, X is liable for the resulting damage to the
properties of the residents of Village L.
408 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
PART ll
B.ll.
Mr. Rthe registered owner of a parcel of land
is
located in Cebu City covered by Transfer Certicate
of Title (TCT) No. 1234 issued in 1955. Since his
acquisition of the lot, Mr. R and his family had been
in continuous, open, and peaceful possession
thereof. Mr. R died in 1980, resulting in the land being
transferred in the names of his heirs, i.e., A, B, and C,
who became registered owners thereof as per TCT
No. 5678. During the entire time, said land had never
been encumbered or disposed, and that its
possession always remained with them.
Sometime in 1999, A, B, and C wanted to build
a concrete fence around the parcel of land, but they
were opposed by Mrs. X, who started claiming
ownership over the same propeny on the strength
of a Deed of Absolute Sale purportedly entered into
by her with Mr. R during the time that he was still
alive. Aggrieved, A, B, and C intend to le a
complaint for quieting of title against Mrs. X.
(a) What are the substantive requisites for the
action to prosper? Do they obtain in this case?
Explain. (3%)
(b) Within what period should A, B, and C tile
the complaint for quieting of title? Explain. (2%)
(c) Assuming that B and C are residing abroad,
may A, without the knowledge of B and C, le the
complaint for quieting of title on behalf of all the
heirs? Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B.1 1.
a) To make a case for quieTing of TiTle, The

iniTiaTory pleading has only To seT TorTh al|egaTions
showing ThaT (T) The plainTiff has "TiTle To real properTy
or any inTeresT Therein" and (2) The deTendanT claims
an inTeresT Therein adverse To The plainTifT‘s arising
from an "insTrumenT, record, claim, encumbrance, or
proceeding which is apparenTly valid or eTTecTive buT
is in TruTh and in TacT invalid, ineTTecTive, voidable, or
unenTorceab|e." (ArTicle 476-477, Civil Code) and
may be prejudicial To said TiTle. (Ocampo v.
Ocampo, Sr. GR. No. 227894, July 5, 2017; Sr. Ragasa
v. Roa GR. No. l4l964 June 30, 2006)
Yes, The requisiTes for auieng of TiTle are

presenT in The case. A, B, and CZ being heirs and
successors-in-inTeresT of R, are now The regisTered
owners and Therefore have The legal TiTle over The
land. The Deed of AbsoluTe Sale presenTed by Mrs.
X appears To be valid and may casT a cloud on The
TiTle of A,B,C such ThaT They may Tile To acTion To
prove ThaT The deed in favor of Mrs. X is in facT
invalid or inoperaTive.
b) A,B, and C may file The acTion Tor auieTing
anyTime since an acTion To auieT TiTle is
imprescripTib|e if The plainTiTTs are in possession of
The properTy. The righT of a p|ainTiTT To have his TiTle
To land auieTed, as againsT one who is asserTing
some adverse claim or lien Thereon, is noT barred
while The plainTiff or his granTors remain in acTual
possession of The land. This is so because a person
410 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
may wait until his possession is disturbed or his Title is

attacked before taking steps to vindicate his right.
(Sapto v. Fabiano 103 Phil. 683 (1958).
c) Yes, Band C may file the complaint on
behalf of all the heirs. The land is subject of co-
ownership among Them and in a co-ownership,
and as co-owners They may bring an action for The
benefit of The co-ownership or all of The co-owners.
This is similar to The right of a co-owner to bring an
action for ejectment against another without
necessarily joining The other co-owners as co-
plaintiffs provided that The suit is brought for The
benefit of all. (Article 487, Civil Code; Celino v.
Alejo, GR. No. 161817, July 30,2004).
B.12.
D, an Overseas Filipino Worker, was on his way

home to The Philippines after working for so many
years in The Middle East. He had saved P100,000.00
in his local savings account which he intended to
use to start up a business in his home country. On
his flight home, Tragedy struck as a suicide bomber
blew up the plane. All the passengers, including D,
died. He left behind his widowed mother M; his
common-law wife, W, who is the mother of his twin
sons, T and S; and his brother, B. He le no will, no
debts, no other relatives, and no other properties
except the money in his savings account.
Who are the heirs entitled to inherit from D and
how much should each receive? Explain. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B.12.
Only D’s twin sons T and S and his mother M are

entitled to inherit from him. W, will not inherit
because she is not the legal spouse of the
decedent, being merely a common-law wife. D‘s
brother B, shall also not inherit because he is
excluded by the presence of relatives in the direct
line ofD.
In intestate succession, the legitimate parent or
ascendant inherit together with illegitimate children
of the deceased child. Since D and W are not
legally married, their children T and S are illegitimate.
The legitimate parent (M) concurs with illegitimate
children (T & S) of the deceased and shall divide
the estate equally such that ‘/2 of the estate goes
to the legitimate parent or ascendant and the
other ‘/2 goes to the illegitimate children. Thus, M will
get 50,000 and the two children T and S will get the
other halt which they will divide equally. (Article
991, Civil Code)
B.13.
M, single, named his sister N in his will, as a

devisee over a certain parcel of land that he owned,
with the obligation of preserving the land and
transferring it, upon N's death, to her illegitimate
daughter 0, who was then only a year old.
412 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
ls the condition imposed on N to preserve the

land and to transmit it upon her death to O a valid
case of deicommissary substitution? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B.l3.
Yes,the condition imposed upon N to preserve

the property for her illegitimate daughter O, is a
valid tideicommissary substitution because the law
requires that the fiduciary and tideicommissary
must be one degree apart. The requirement in
Article 863 that the substitution must does not go
beyond one degree from the heir originally
instituted means that second heir must be one
generation from the first heir. (Palacios v. Ramirez,
ill SCRA 704 [l982]) This type of substitution also
requires that the fiduciary must also presen/e and
transmit the property to the second heir and that
they must be both living at the time of the testator’s
death. Hence, on the condition that both N and
O are living at the time of lvl‘s death, the condition
imposed by the latter in the tideicommissary
substitution is valid.
B.'l4.
Prior to his death, H, married to W, with children

X, Y, and Z, executed a holographic will entirely
written, dated, and signed by him. In his will, H
instituted W, X, and Y as his heirs, and consequently,
made testamentary dispositions in their favor. H,
however, expressly disinherited Z on the ground
that the latter once led a civil case against him in

order to collect a particular sum of money he
previously owed Z.
(a) Was the disinheritance of Z proper? Explain. (3%)
(b) Assuming that the disinheritance of Z was
improper, how will it affect the institution of heirs
and testamentary dispositions made in H's will?
Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B.14
a) No, the disinheritance of was not proper

Z
because the cause for his disinheritance is not one

of those grounds listed by law as grounds to disinherit
a child or descendant. (Article 919, Civil Code) The
ground for disinheritance contemplated by law is if
the child or descendant has accused the testator of
a crime for which the law prescribes imprisonment for
six years or more if the accusation has been found
groundless. Based on the facts, what Z filed was a
mere civil case to collect a debt of H.
b) The imperfect disinheritance of Z shall annul
the institution of heirs only to the extent that the
imperfectly clisinheritecl heir is prejudiced. Thus, Z will
still be entitled to his legitime. The institution of heirs
shall remain valid insofar as they do not impair the
legitime of Z. (Article 9T8, Civil Code)
414 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
B.15.
Mr. P offered to sell his Manila Polo Club shares

to Ms. Q for P2,500,000.00. Ms. Q accepted on the
condition that their agreement will not take effect
until after one (1) year. Mr. P then acceded and
both of them shook hands. Excited about the
prospect of acquiring Mr. P's shares, Ms. Q approached
the former and offered to pay him an earnest
money equivalent to 1 % of the purchase price,
which Mr. P accepted. After one (1) year, Ms. Q
approached Mr. P seeking the enforcement of their
agreement for Mr. P to sell his shares to her. Mr. P
refused to honor their agreement, claiming that the
same was covered by the Statute of Frauds
because it was not reduced into writing and hence,
unenforceable.
ls the position of Mr. P correct? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B.l 5.
No, the position of Mr. P is not correct. The

Statute of Frauds applies only to purely executory
contracts. In executory contracts, there is a wide
field for fraud because unless they be in writing
there is no evidence of the intention of the
contracting parties. (Carbonnel v. Poncio, lO3 Phil.
655 (i958). The exclusion of parol evidence in
totally of partially executed contracts would
promote fraud or bad faith, for it would enable the
defendant to keep the benefits already derived by
him form the transaction in litigation, and, at the

same time, evade the obligations, responsibilities or
liabilities assumed or contracted by him thereby.
(Swedish Match, et. al. vs. Court of Appeals, GR.
No. l28l2O October 20, 2004).
In the case presented, there was already
payment of l% as earnest money which is part of
the purchase price. Hence, the contract was
partially executed on the part of Ms. Q and the
agreement, though not in writing is enforceable.
Partial execution is enough to bar the application of
the statute. (Almirol v. lvlonserrat, 48 Phil. 67)
B.16.
C Corp. entered into a contract with Inc. for

D,
the construction of the latter's production warehouse.
In consideration thereof, D, lnc. was obliged to pay
C Corp. the amount of P50,000,000.00 within a
period of one (1) month from the time of the project's
completion. To secure the payment of the said
sum, D, Inc. entered into a surety agreement with
S Company.
After more than a month from the completion

date of the project, C Corp. remained unpaid.
Claiming that it was suffering from serious nancial
reverses, D, Inc. asked C Corp. for an extension of
three (3) months to pay the P50,000,000.00 it still
owed, to which C Corp. agreed. However, after more
than three (3) months, D, Inc. still refused to pay.
Hence, C Corp. proceeded to collect the above sum
from the surely, S Company.
416 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
For its part, S Company refused the claim and

raised the defense that the extension of time
granted by C Corp. to D, Inc. without its consent
released it from liability.
(a) Will the defense of S Company against the
claim hold water? Explain. (3%)
(b) Assuming that S Company instead refused
the claim on the ground that C Corp. has yet to
exhaust D, lnc.'s property to satisfy the claim before
proceeding against it, will this defense prosper?
Explain. (2%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B.1 6.
a) Yes, the defense is tenable. As a rule, an

extension granted by the creditor to the debtor
without the knowledge and consent of the
guarantor extinguishes the guaranty. (Article 2079,
Civil Code.). This provision of the law has been held
to be applicable to a surety. (Autocorp Group v.
lntra Strata Assurance Corporation, GR. No. l66662,
June 27, 2008 citing Ivlanila Surety and Fidelity Co.,
lnc. vs. Batu Corporation and Company, l0l Phil.
494 [l957]). An essential alteration in the terms of
the loan agreement without the consent of the
surety extinguishes the latter‘s obligation. Thus, any
agreement between the creditor and the principal
debtor which essentially varies the terms of the
principal contract, without the consent of the
surety, will release the surety from liability. (Security
Bank and TrusT Co. vs. Cuenca GR. No. l38544

Ocfober 3, 2000) By agreeing To exfend The Term of
The loan D wiThouT The knowledge of S, The laTTer is
released from liabilify.
b) No, The defense of S company will noT
prosper. The liabilify of a surefy is differenf from ThaT
of a guaranfor because while The laffer is enTiTled
To The benefif of excussion, The former is noT.
Hence, The crediTor may proceed direcfly againsT
The surefy wiThouT The need of going againsT The
principal debfor. Under The law, if a person binds
himself solidarily wifh The principal debfor, The
conTracT is one of surefyship and as such The
provisions of The Code on solidary obligalions shall
apply. ln a solidary obligafion, The crediTor may
proceed againsT anyone of The solidary debTors or
some or all of Them simulfaneously. (ArTic|e l2l 6, Civil
Code). Thus, There is no need for C To exhausT The
properfies of D before proceeding againsT S.
B.17.
In 2015, O, The original regisfered owner of a

300-square mefer properly covered by Original
Cerficafe of Tifle (OCT) No. 0-1234, appoinfed F as
iTs carefaker. A year aer, while O was abroad, F
surrepously broke open O's safe clnd sToIe The
duplicafe copy of The said OCT. F Then forged a
Deed of Absolufe Sale and made iT appear ThaT O
sold The properfy To him. Consequenfly, F was able
To have OCT No. 0-1234 cancelled and in lieu
Thereof, a new Tifle, Transfer Cerficafe of Tifle (TCT)
No. T-4321, was issued in his name.
418 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
A few monfhs afler, F offered fhe properly for sale

fo X. Afler conducfing fhe required due diligence fo
verify fhe fifle of F, and nding no occupanf in fhe
properly during ocular inspecfion, X signed fhe
conlracf of sale, and fhereupon, fully paid fhe
purchase price. A few days lafer, X was able fo
obfain TCT No. T-5678 under his name.
When O discovered F's fraudulenf acfs upon his
refurn in 2017, O immediafely led a complainf for
reconveyance againsf F and X, principally poinfing
ouf fhaf F merely forged his signafure in fhe Deed of
Absolufe Sale purporfedly made in F's favor and
fhus, F could nof have validly fransferred fhe fifle
fhereof fo X. Consequently, he soughf fhe refurn of
fhe subjecf properly fo him.
(a) Will fhe prayer of O for fhe refurn of fhe
subjecf properly prosper? Explain. (3%)
(b) Assuming fhaf O could no longer recover fhe
subjecf properly in view of X's regisfrafion fhereof in
his name, may a claim againsf fhe Assurance Fund
pursuanf lo fhe provisions of fhe Properly Regisfrafion
Decree be insfifufed? Explain. (3%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B.17.
a) No, fhe case filed by O will nof prosper. X

acfed in good faifh when he purchased fhe land
from F because before enlering info The confraci
of sale wiih fhe laller, X verified fhe lifle properly
and conducled an ocular inspecfion fhereof.
Since F is The regisTered owner of The land and was

also The one in possession Thereof, X had The righT
To rely on whaT is wriTTen on The cerTificaTe of TiTle
naming F as The owner. A forged or fraudulenT
documenT may become The rooT of a valid Tille, if
The properTy has already been Transferred from The
name of The owner To ThaT of The Torger. (Fule vs.
Legare li7 Phil. 367 (T963). Thus, a person who
deals wiTh regisTered properTy in good TaiTh will
acquire good TlTle from a Torger and be absoluTely
proTecTed by a Torrens TiTle. (ErasusTa vs. CourT of
Appeals, GR. No. T492131 July 17,2006)
b) Yes, O may recover under The Assurance
Fund because under The provisions of The ProperTy
RegisTraTion Decree (SecTion 95, P.D. T529) if a
person who is noT guilTy of negligence susTains loss
or damage or is deprived of land or any esTaTe in
consequence of The bringing oT The land under The
operaTion of The Torrens sysTem arising aTTer original
regisTraTion of land, Through fraud or in consequence
of any error, omission, misTake or misdescrlpTion
in any cerTiflcaTe of TlTle or in any enTry or
memorandum in The regisTraTion book, and is
barred or precluded from bringing an acTion for
recovery of such land may bring an acTion in any
courT of compeTenT jurisdicTion Tor The recovery of
damages To be paid ouT of The Assurance Fund.
In The case presenTed, The properTy is already
regisTered in The name of an innocenT purchaser for
value and O may no longer recover The land from
The purchaser, an acon for recovery againsT The
Assurance Fund is warranTed.
420 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
B.18.
In light of a new business venture, Mr. A entered

into a lease contract with Mr. B involving one of the
latler's warehouses. One day, Mr. B, who was then
encountering nancial difculties, approached Mr.
A and sought for a loan, which Mr. A readily granted
to him. ln order to secure the loan obligation, Mr. B
mortgaged the leased warehouse in favor of Mr. A.
ln addition, Mr. B executed a promissory note in favor
of A, wherein prior demand was waived by him.
When Mr. B defaulted on his loan obligation,
Mr. A simply stopped paying rentals due to Mr. B on
the ground that legal compensation had already
set in up to the concurrent amount. Furthermore,
since there was still a balance due on the
promissory note, Mr. A foreclosed the real estate
mortgage over Mr. B's property, without any prior
demand furnished to Mr. B.
Aggrieved, Mr. B opposed the foreclosure due
to the lack of prior demand, contending that the
waiver of prior demand was stipulated in the
promissory note and not in the mortgage instrument.
Mr. B likewise argued that when Mr. A invoked legal
compensation between the unpaid rentals and the
loan arrearages, it amounted to a novation that
resulted in the extinguishment of the loan contract
between them. As such, the real estate mortgage,
being a mere accessory contract to the principal
loan, was necessarily extinguished.
(a) May Mr. A validly claim legal compensation?
Explain. (2%)
(b) May Mr. A validly foreclose on the real

estate mortgage even without prior demand to Mr.
B? Explain. (2%)
(c) ls Mr. B's claim of novation correct? Explain.

(2%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B.l 8.
a) Yes, A may validly claim partial legal

compensation against B with respect to the unpaid
rentals and the sum due from B under the
promissory note. The law provides that when all the
requisites for legal compensation are present, it
takes place by operation of law and extinguishes
both debts to the concurrent amount, even if the
creditor and debtor are not aware of the
compensation. (Article i279 & l29O, Civil Code).
Here, A and B are mutual creditor and debtor of
each other; both debts consists in the payment of
money; both debts are due, liquidated and demandable;
and there is no retention or controversy commenced
by third persons and communicated in due time
to either A or B. Thus, all the requisites of legal
compensation are present.
b) Yes, A may validly foreclose without the
need of prior demand. The general rule is that
there must be a demand to put the debtor in
default. However, one of the recognized exceptions
to the necessity of demand before default may set
in is if the obligation or law expressly so states that
demand is not necessary. (Article ll<S9, Civil Code).
422 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Based on The promissory note executed by B, he

expressly waived need of demand. Thus, when B
failed to pay the amounts due under The note, A
has the right To foreclose The mortgage without
prior demand. (Cabanng v. BPI, GR. No. 2Ol927,
February l7, 2016)
c)No, B's claim of novation is not correct.
Novation requires The following requisites: (l) a
previous valid obligation; (2) The agreement of all
The parties To The new contract; (3) The
extinguishment of The old contract; and (4) validity
of The new one. There must be consent of all The
parties to The substitution, resulting in The extinction
of The old obligation and The creation of a valid
new one. (CCC Insurance Corporation vs. Kawasaki
Steel Corporation and Manacop, GR. No. 156162,
June 22, 2015) There was no new contract entered
into between A and B which precludes The
occurrence of novation. Instead, what occurred here
is partial compensation.
B.19.
Mr. A entered into a lease contract covering

one of his commercial buildings with XYZ Company, a
partnership composed of X, Y, and Z, as lessee, for
use as an office space. Upon failure to receive the
rental payments when they fell due, Mr. A
immediately sought payment of the same from X, Y,
and Z, asserting that the individual partners are solidaiily
liable together with the partnership for its debts.
X, Y, and Z disagreed with Mr. A's contention,

arguing further that in any event, rentals should not
be paid up until Mr. A makes the necessary
arrangements for the repair of the defective electrical
wirings in the ofce that caused power outages and
hence, made it difcult, if not impossible, for them to
conduct their usual business operations.
Rule on the parties’ respective arguments. (5%)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
B.19.
The contention of Mr. A is not correct because

under Article 1816, all partners including industrial
ones, shall be liable pro rata with all their property
only after all the partnership assets have been
exhausted, for the contracts which may be
entered into in the name and for the account of
the partnership. The liability will not attach to the
individual partners until after the partnership assets
have been exhausted. Such liability is only pro rata
and not solidary except if the obligation falls under
Article 1822 and 1823.
Neither isthe contention of X, Y, and Z tenable.
The lessor is under obligation to make all the
necessary repairs on the property leased in order to
keep it suitable for the use to which it has been
devoted, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary.
If the lessor fails to comply with this obligation, the
lessee may ask for rescission of the contract with
424 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
damages or he may opT To confinue wifh The lease

and ask only for damages from The lessor. (Arficle
1654 & 1659, Civil Code)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
X, Y, and may suspend The paymenf of

Z
renTals if They opT To confinue wiTh The lease if The

lessor fails To make The necessary repairs on The
properfy leased. (Arficle 1658, Civil Code)
B.2O.
Disfinguish The following:

(a) ConTracT of sale and conTracT To sell (2%)
(b) lnferrupon and Tolling of prescripfion of
acTions(2%)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
B. 20.
a) A conTracT of sale is one where of The seller

obligafes himself To Transfer The ownership and To
deliver a deTerminaTe Thing, and The ofher To pay
Therefor a price cerTain in money or iTs eauivalenf.
In a confracf of sale, The ownership is Transferred To
The buyer upon delivery.
On The oTher hand, a conTracT To sell has been
defined as "a bilaferal conTracT whereby The
prospecfive seller, while expressly reserving The
ownership of The subjecf properfy despife delivery
Thereof To The prospecTive buyer, binds himself To

sell The sdid properly exclusively To The prospeclive
buyer upon fulfillmenT of The condiTion dgreed
upon, ThoT is, Tull pdymenT of The purchose price. In
o conTrocT To sell, ownership is reTdined by The seller
dnd is noT To pdss unTil The Tull poiymenT of The price.
IT is commonly enTered inlo so os To proTecT The
seller cigdinsl o buyer who inlends To buy The

properTy in insTdllmenTs by wiThholding ownership
over The properly unTil The buyer effecTs Tull
pdymenT. (Tumibdy vs. Lopez GR. No.l7l692, June
3, 2013).
b) lnTerrupTion of The period

prescripTive
occurs upon or wriTTen demond mode by The
crediTor. When The prescriplive period is Thus
inTerrupTed by such demond, The sdid period would
commence dnew from The receipT of The demond.
On The oTher hdnd, Tolling of The prescripTion
merely suspends The period ThoT hos elopsed bul
does noT gronl o full new period. (Overseos Bonk of
lvldniloi vs. Geroildez, 9-4 SCRA 937 [l979]).
2020-2021 BAR EXAMINATION
I.
A couple executes a prenuptial agreement
which principally provides that their marriage shall
be valid for only ve years but that it can be renewed
through mutual consent negotiated at least six months
before its expiration.
ls this contract valid? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the contract not valid. A pre-nuptial

is
agreement or marriage settlement is a contract
between the future spouses where they agree on
the property relationship that would govern them
during the marriage. (Family Code, Art. 74 &75) ln
the problem, the prenuptial agreement contains
nothing about the properly relationship of the parties
and instead provides for the term of the marriage.
The stipulation providing for the termination of the
marriage based on the will of the contracting
parties is void for being contrary to law. A marriage
is a special contract of permanent union between
a man and a woman and is an inviolable social
institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents
are governed by law and not subject to stipulation
except that marriage settlements may fix the
property relations during the marriage within the
limits provided by this Code. (Family Code, Art. l).
Thus, the contract is not valid.
426
2020-2021 BAR EXAMINATION 427
2.
A corporation which owns a hospital was sued

along with a physician tor medical malpractice.
The corporation moved to dismiss the case, arguing
that it was only the physician, as the natural person,
who could be the subject of any kind of suit. In
other words, the corporation argued that it was not
a legal person.
ls the position of the corporation owning the
hospital legally tenable? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the position of the corporation is not

tenable. A person may be natural or juridical. A
corporation is a juridical person vested with the
personality as soon as it is duly constituted in
accordance with law. (Civil Code, Art. 44) As such,
it may acquire property and incur obligations and
may sue and be sued in its corporate name. (Civil
Code, Art. 46) Moreover, in medical malpractice
cases, the duty of providing quality medical service
is no longer the sole prerogative and responsibility
of the physician based on the vicarious liability of
the hospitals under the theories of respondeat
superior, apparent authority, or agency by estoppel.
(Professional Sen/ices, Inc. vs. Agana, GR. No.
126297, January 3i, 2007)
428 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
3.
A wife was able to validly obtain a judicial

declaration of her husband's presumptive death
after he had disappeared for 10 years. She then
remarried in accordance with law.
a few years after her remarriage,
To her surprise,
her rst husband reappeared.
Does the rst husband’s reappearance automatically,
without need of any further act, terminate the second
marriage? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the mere reappearance of the first husband

shall not automatically terminate the second marriage
contracted by the wife. The law provides that the
subsequent marriage is automatically terminated
by the recording of the affidavit of reappearance
of the absent spouse in the civil registry of the
residence of the parties to the subsequent marriage
at the instance of any interested person. (Family
Code, Art. 42). Hence, the rst husband's reappearance
will not suffice to terminate the second marriage.
Also, the Court in SSS v. Vda. De Bailon (485 SCRA 376,
March 24, 2006) ruled that if the absentee spouse
reappears, but no step is taken to terminate the
subsequent marriage, either by affidavit or court
action, such absentee‘s mere reappearance, even
if made known to the spouses in the subsequent
marriage will not terminate such marriage.
4.
Two college sweethearts were married inside a

Roman Catholic church in the Philippines with a
Supreme Court Justice serving as solemnizing ofcer.
A few years following the ceremony, one of the
two led an action for the declaration of nullity of
marriage on the ground that the marriage was void
ab initio because it was solemnized inside a Roman
Catholic church by a Supreme Court Justice, and
not by a Roman Catholic priest.
ls the position legally tenable? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the position of the couple is not legally

tenable. Under the Family Code, a marriage may
be solemnized among others by any incumbent
member of the judiciary within the coun“s jurisdiction.
(Family Code, Art. 7)lt must be mentioned that the
authority of a Supreme Court Justice to solemnize
marriages is all over the Philippines. Although the
law provides that the marriage shall be solemnized
publicly in the chambers of the judge or in open
court, or in the church, chapel or temple and not
elsewhere, (Family Code, Art. 8) it is submitted that
the solemnization of the marriage by a member of
the judiciary inside the Roman Catholic church shall
not affect the validity of the marriage because the
venue of the celebration of the marriage is neither
an essential nor a formal requisite of marriage.
430 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
5.
A 12-year-old seventh grade student living in

the company of their parents brought a gun owned
by the father to school. With it, the student shot a
classmate who had been a bully. The student missed,
sparing the bully.
The bully’s parents, incensed by the event,
sued the parents of the 12-year-old seventh grade
student for damages.
The defendant parents moved to dismiss the
suit, claiming that they could never be held liable
for damages since they did not shoot the bully
themselves.
Should the motion to dismiss be granted on this
ground? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the motion to dismiss filed by the parents

should not be granted. The argument that no liability
attached to them because they were not the ones
who shot the bully does not hold water. Under the
Family Code, parents and other persons exercising
parental authority shall be civilly liable tor the
injuries and damages caused by the acts or
omissions of their unemancipated children living in
their company and under their parental authority
subject to the appropriate defenses provided by
law. (Family Code, Art. 221). The Civil Code on
quasi-delict provides that the obligation imposed
by arTicle 2176 is demandable noT only for one's

own acTs or omissions, buT also for Those of persons
for whom one is responsible. However, since The
shoong happened inside The school, The child was
under The special parenTal auThoriTy of The school,
(Family Code, ArT. 218) iT could be argued ThaT The
liabiliTy of The school is primary while ThaT of The
parenTs is subsidiary. (Family Code, ArT. 219)
6.
A 100-year-old Tree inside a universily was

uprooTed by sirong winds caused by a super Typhoon.
This was despiTe The universiTy's prior efforfs To
mainTain The sTrengTh of The Tree's rooTs.
The Tree was blown away unTi| iT hiT a nearby
fasT-food resTauranT where a Bar candidaTe was
reviewing for The Bar Examinaons. The Bar candidaTe,
who was Then The only person dining inside The fasT-
food resTauranT, suffered physical injuries.
The super Typhoon was enabled by climaTe
change.
Can The universily be held liable for The physical
injuries suffered by The Bar candidaTe? Explain briey.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The universiTy cannoT be held liable for The

injuries suffered by The bar candidaTe. The facTs
clearly sTaTe ThaT despiTe The efTorTs of The universiTy
To mainTain The sTrengTh of The rooTs of The Tree, iT
was sTill blown away due enTirely To The occurrence
432 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
of d Torluilous evenl which is The super Typhoon.

Under The low no person shdll be liable for Those
evenls which could noT be foreseen or even if
foreseen were inevildble. (Civil Code, Arl. i T74) The
evenl which coiused dclmdge To The bor cdndidcile
wds enlirely independenl of hurndn will dnd neilher
wos There pdrlicipcllion of The universily in The
oggrdvdlion of The injury. To be lidble for The ddrndges
cclused, There musl be Tdull or negligence concurring
wilh The TorTuiTous evenl which is dbsenl in This cdse.
7.
Four siblings co-own a Two-heclare, commercially

viable properly localed nexl To a major road. The
siblings have equal shares bul none of Them have
exerled any efforl To parlilion The properly.
A large reTail conglomerale Then offered To
purchase The enlire properly. Three of The siblings
were willing To sell, bul one refused, wanling To hold
on To The land in memory of Their deparled parenls.
The Three willing siblings proceeded To sell Their
respecTive shares in The properly To The large relail
conglomerale, afler The sale, The conglomerale led
a case in courl To pallilion The properly.
Should The court allow The parlilion? Explain
briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The courT should allow The parTiTion of The

properfy. As a rule, no co-owner shall be obliged To
remain in The co-ownership. Each co-owner may demand
aT any Time The parTiTion of The Thing owned in
common, insofar as his share is concerned. (ArT.
494, CC)
Also, each co-owner shall have The full

ownership of his parT and of The fruifs and benefs
perfaining ThereTo, and he may Therefore alienafe,
assign, or morfgage if, and even subsTiTuTe anofher
person in iTs enjoymenf, excepT when personal righfs
are involved. Buf The effecf of The alienafion or The
morfgage, wiTh respecT To The co-owners, shall be
limiTed To The porTion which may be alloTTed To him
in The division upon The Terminafion of The co-
ownership. (ArT. 493, CC). The reTail conglomerafe
who boughf The undivided shares of The Three
siblings sTepped inTo The shoes of The laffer and
may Therefore ask for parfifion of The properfy.
8.
Believing ThaT a parcel of land was public land,

a farmer builf a Two-sTory concreTe house on if. Five
years lafer, a person showed up bearing an original
cerTicaTe of Tifle over The loT which had been
regisTered for more Than 10 years. The person asked
The farmer To vacaTe The parcel of land.
The farmer refused To vacaTe unless The Titled

owner pays The fair markef value of The house builT
on The parcel of land.
434 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Does The farmer legal ground To demand

paymenl for The house before vacang The parcel
of land? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, The farmer does noT have legal ground To

dennand paymenT of The house before vacaTing
The land. The facTs sTaTe ThaT The farmer was aware
righT from The sTarT ThaT he has no TlTle whaTsoever
To The land because he believed iT To be a public
land. As such, The farmer was a builder in bad faiTh.
A builder in bad TaiTh loses whaT is buill, planTed, or
sown on The land of anoTher wiThouT The righl To
indemniTy. (Civil Code, ArT. 449) The owner of The
land may also ask for The demo|iTion of The house
To replace Things in Their Tornner condiTion aT The
expense of The farmer wiThouT any righT on The
parT of The laTTer To ask Tor indernniTy. (Civil Code,
ArT. 450)
9.
Your signicanf oTher shows you a lapTop

screen on which a mandafory queslion for The
insTalIaTion of an app appears.
The quesTion reads: “Do you agree To The Terms

and condions of use?" There are Two buTTons
indicaTing alTernaTive responses: one is labeled
“Agree”; The oTher is labeled "Disagree."
The terms and conditions of use are not shown

on the screen. Neither is there a hyperlink that can
be clicked that would reveal the terms and
conditions of use of the app being installed.
Curious why the terms and conditions of use
are not available, you search the internet and come
across media articles revealing that the terms and
conditions of use allow the app provider to access
a user's contact list, emails, and browsing history.
These pieces of information are sold to advertisers
who, in turn, tailor their emails to users so that they
can engage in targeted advertising based on the
users‘ proles.
Knowing that you cre taking the #BeslBa'Ever2020_2l ,
your signicant other asks you this legal question:
By clicking on “Agree”, will there be a “meeting of
the minds” between the user and the app provider
enabling access to the user's contact list, emails,
and browsing history? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, there will be no meeting of the minds

between the app provider and the user even if the
latter clicked the “Agree” button. A contract is
defined as a meeting of the minds between two
persons whereby one binds himself with respect to
the other to do something or to render some sen/ice.
(Art. 1305, CC). It has three essential requisites
namely: consent, object, and cause or consideration.
Consent is manifested by the meeting of the offer
and acceptance upon the thing and the cause
which are to constitute the contract. (Art. l3l8,
436 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
CC). Thus, The consent should pertain To The

acceptance of The object and the cause. Based
on These requisites, there could have been no valid
consent on The part of The user To Terms and
conditions that are not even made known by The
app provider. lf at all, The consent given by The user
pertains only To The use of The app and not for The
app provider To gain access To The contact list,
emails, and browsing history.
10.
A Japanese national was able to obtain a

divorce decree concerning his marriage with his
Filipino wife. The decree capacitated the Japanese
national to remarry.
Can the Filipino wife now avail of Article 26 of
the Family Code and then remarry? Explain briefly.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
wife may avail of Article 26 of

Yes, The Filipino
The Family Code after an appropriate petition for
The recognition of The foreign divorce has been
granted by The Philippine court. In a mixed marriage,
where a valid divorce is obtained abroad which
capacitates the alien spouse to rennarry, the Filipino
spouse shall likewise be capacitated to remarry
under Philippine law. However, a mere grant of
divorce by a foreign Tribunal does not automatically
give effect To The divorce until if is recognized
before Philippine courts. The starting point in any
recognition of a foreign divorce judgment is The
acknowledgment that our courts do not take

judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws.
(Sakai v. Republic, GR. No. 224015, July 23, 2018)
This means that the foreign judgment and its
authenticity must be proven as facts under our rules
on evidence, together with the alien's applicable
national law.
11.
A bride declined to appear on her wedding

day. Instead, she sent a note to her prospective groom,
saying that she needed to be honest to herself by
admitting that the institution of marriage was not
her. The bride wrote that she came to this conclusion
after contemplating on the tweets of the #LabGuru.
She also wrote that to atone for her non-appearance,
she would post a glowing recommendation of the
prospective groom as a partner on her Facebook,
Twitter, lnstagram, and Tiktok accounts.
couple had previously dated for almost
The
eight years. The whole time, the prospective groom
had been loyal and caring.
lt was the bride who covered all the wedding
expenses.
Heartbroken and embarrassed, the prospective
groom sued the prospective bride for moral damages,
alleging that she had breached her promise to
marry him.
Will the suit prosper? Explain briefly.
438 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
PROPOSED ANSWER:
the suit will prosper. As Cl rule, breoch of

Yes,
promise to mdrry per se is not on oictionoble wrong.
There must be on dct independent of the breoch
of the promise to mdrry like expenses incurred,
cdrndl knowledge os o result or morol seduction, or
pregnoncy to entitle the dggrieved pdrty the oiword
of ddmoges. (Wossmer v. Velez, GR. No. L-20089,
December 26, i964; Bdksh v. Court of Appeols, GR.
No. 97336, Februdry l9, i993; Hermosisimo vs. Court
of Appeols, 109 Phil. 629).
Inone cose, the Court ruled thot olthough
bredch of promise to mdrry is not dctiondble, to
formolly set o wedding ond go through dll the
obove-described prepdrotion cind publicity, only to
wolk out of it when the motrimony is obout to be
solemnized is polpobly ond unjustitiobly contrdry to
good customs for which the bride must be held
dnsweroble in ddmoges in dccordonce with Article
2i of the Civil Code. (Wdssmer v. Velez) Cleoirly, the
groom is entitled to ddmdges bdsed on Article 21
of the Civil Code which provides thot dny person
who willfully cduses loss or injury to dnother in Cl
monner thdt is contrdry to morols, good customs or
public policy shdll compensoite the lotter for the
domdge. To wolk out of the wedding on the ddy of
its solemnizdtion tcills under Article 21 of the Civil
Code ond moy justify the oword of morol domoges.
12.
A seller posted an online advertisement for a

"4-volume set of Tolentino’s Commentaries and
Jurisprudence on the Civil Code of the Philippines,
100 pesos only." A Bar candidate excitedly ordered
it and paid through GCash. However, when the set
was delivered, tears started to well in the Bar
candidate's eyes. Much to the Bar candidate’s
bewilderment, the author was not Arturo Tolentino,
the legal luminary as the candidate was made to
expect, but Lorna Tolentino, the noted actor.
The Bar candidate believes that the contract of
sale should be rescinded and that damages are
also proper.
ls the Bar candidate's position legally sound?
Explain briety.
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the bar candidates position is not legally

sound. Rescission or resolution under Art. ll9l is a
principal remedy in case of breach of a reciprocal
obligation. ln the case presented, no breach was
committed by the seller by posting an online
advertisement for the sale of the 4-volume set of
To|entino’s book. It was the bar candidate who
assumed that the author of the book was the legal
luminary Arturo Tolentino without any representation
whatsoever from the online seller. The seller complied
with the obligation to deliver the books in accordance
with the order of the bar candidate. To entitle a
440 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
pony rescind, There musT be Ci subsTcinTici| breoch

To
commiTTed by The oTher borTy ThoT goes inTo The
very essence of The coniroci beiween Them.
|\leiTher could The cldim for rescission be
grounded on ArTic|e i38i becduse iT is noT bdsed
on lesion or economic prejudice or one enTered
inTo in froiud of crediTors. The cloim for ddmoiges is
noT dlso sound becouse To enTiT|e one To ddmciges,
There musT be boTh d righT of cicTion for o legcii
wrong commiTTed ogoinsT The cioimdnT. IT wds
incumbenT upon The bcir cdndiddTe To verify or
inquire dnd noT To ossume ThdT The book‘s ouThor is
The legoi iuminory.
CIVIL LAW I
1.
Noel is the son of spouses Marie and Benedict.

Benedict has passed away. For Noel’s 7"" birthday,
his paternal grandparents offered to organize and
pay for his birthday parly. In coordination with Marie,
the grandparents booked the party venue, signed
the contracts with the caterer and the entertainers,
nalized the guest list, and paid all amount due.
Marie promised to them to bring Noel to the party.
A week before the scheduled birthday party,
Marie decided that she would not bring Noel to the
party, and that she would instead take him on an
out-of-town trip on the day of the party. Marie
could not forget that her parents-in-law initially
opposed Benedict's marriage to her because she
has a former burlesque dancer.
Marie did not notify the grandparents of her
plan to skip the birthday party. During the party, the
grandparents kept trying to get in touch with her
but she ignored all their calls. The grandparents
and the guests who went to the party were very
dismayed that Noel was not present. When the
grandparents asked Marie why she did not bring
Noel to the party, she simply replied, “I am his
mother, and I decide where he goes!". To which,
Noel’s grandmother retorted, “Anak mo Iang s'ya!
Hindi mo s'ya pag-aari!".
441
442 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
The grandparents seek your advice on whether

there is legal basis to hold Marie liable for the damages
that they have suffered as a result of her acts.
What is your advice? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
will advise the grandparents that they may

l
seek damages from Marie on the basis ot the

principle in human relations that any person who
willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner
that is contrary to morals, good customs or public
policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.
(Article 2i, Civil Code).
Although Marie has the parental authority over
her minor child, her promise to allow Noel to attend
the party arranged by his grandparents only to
renege on that promise was an act which is contrary
to good customs. In addition, the promise given by
Marie was the reason why the grandparents made
arrangements and entered into contracts with the
caterer and entertainers for which they incurred
expenses. There was evident bad faith on the part
of Marie when she did not notify the grandparents
that she would not bring Noel to the party. Hence,
there is a cause of action for damages based on
Article 2i.
2.
Ranza and Junsi got married in 2015 and were

blessed with two children, Zarah and Mica. In 2020,
because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the entire family
had to spend 24 hours together every day in their
small house. Ranza observed that although Junsi
continued to work from home to support the family,
he began to exhibit paranoia, and constantly kept
making sure that they always washed their hands
and rubbed them with alcohol ten times before
eating. Junsi also always wore a face mask, face
shield and hazmat in the house, except when he
was alone in the room. Junsi began sleeping separately
from Ranza and their children. He believed that other
people who wanted to meet him in person were actively
trying to harm him by exposing him to the virus.
In early 2022, Ranza led a petition for declaration
of nullity of her marriage with Junsi on the ground of
psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the
Family Code, citing his atypical behavior. She
presented the testimony of a doctor, who proved
that Junsi was suffering from psychotic paranoia
due to intense stress, which accounted for his belief
in things that are not real.
Should Ranza’s petition be granted? Explain
briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Razna’s petition should not be granted.

Psychological incapacity has been ruled to be a
legal concept and not a medical concept. (Tan
Andal v. Andal, GR. No. l9é359, May ll,
2021)
444 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Here, The facf Thaf

Jusni was suffering from
psychofic paranoia does noT make him aufomafically
unable To comply wiTh essenfial marifal obligafions.
Based on The Tacfs, despife his afypical behavior,
he confinues To work and supporf his family. To
sTill
be considered a ground To declare The marriage
void, The psychological incapacify musf be shown
To be "[a] durable or enduring [aspecf] of a person's
personalify, called ‘personalify sTrucTure,' which
manifesfs ifself Through clear acTs of dysfuncfionalify
Thai undermines The family. The spouse's personalify
sTrucTure musf make if impossible for him or her To
undersfand and, more imporfanf, To comply wiTh
his or her essenfial marifal obligafions. (ld.). The
supposed behavior of Jusni was sfress-induced and
does noT form parf of his personalify sfrucfure. Thus,
based on The sfandards in Tan-Andal, Jusni is noT
psychologically incapacifafed.
3.
Before They married in 2000, Nonoy and Daday

signed a marriage selemenf wherein They agreed
ThaT Their properfy relafions as husband and wife
would be governed by The conjugal parfnership of
gains. While The marriage was subsisng, They acquired
a parcel of land using conjugal funds. The Regisfer
of Deeds issued a Transfer ceificafe of TiTle over The
said land in The name of “Nonoy, married To Daday”.
Nonoy sold The parcel of land To Barby wiThouT
Daday’s consent. Daday was noT aware of The sale
and did noT sign The conTracT of sale. A year affer
Nonoy and Barby signed The conTracT of sale.
Daday died. When the children of Nonoy and Daday

learned about the sale to Barby, they questioned its
validity since Daday had not consented to the sale.
Nonoy's position is that Daday’s consent was not
required because the property was registered in
his name.
ls the sale to Barby valid? Explain briefly.

(5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the sale to Barby is not valid. There is a

presumption that all properties acquired during the
marriage belong to the conjugal partnership
whether the acquisition appears to have been made,
contracted, or registered in the name of only one
of the spouses. (Article H6, Family Code) The tact
that a spouse is identified as the sole vendee in the
deed, and registered owner in the certificate of
title does not destroy the conjugal nature of the
property as the registration is not conclusive evidence
of the exclusive ownership of either the husband or
the wife. Even if the property appears to be
registered solely in the name of either spouse, it has
the inherent character of conjugal property if it was
acquired for valuable consideration during the marriage.
(Cordovo v. Ty, GR. No. 246255. February 3, 2021)
As part of the conjugal property of Nonoy ancl
Daday, any disposition or encumbrance thereof
must be made with the consent of both spouses.
Hence, when Nonoy sold the land to Barby without
the consent of Daday, the disposition is voicl under
Article l24 of the Family Code.
446 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
4.
[This item has two questions.] In 2013, Agaton,

then 70 years old, executed a will wherein he
bequeathed his entire estate to his acknowledged
illegitimate son Karl. Agaton entrusted the original
copy of the 2013 will to Karl. In 2014, Karl joined a
group of mercenaries to ght in Crimea alongside
the Russians. After Russia’s annexation of Crimea,
Karl did not return to the Philippines and was never
heard of. Five years later, in 2019, Agaton executed
a codicil which provided the following: “Because of
the death of Karl, I revoke my 2013 will. I hereby
recognize Gian as my other illegitimate son. and
hereby bequeath to him my entire estate.” Agaton
died in 2020.
During the probate of Agaton’s 2019 codicil,
Karl appeared in court, presented the 2013 will,
contested the validity of its revocation, opposed
the probate of the 2019 codicil, and sought the
probate of the 2013 will. Both the 2013 will and 2019
codicil were immaculate as to form.
(a) Did the 2019 codicil revoke the 2013 will?
Explain briefly.
(b) Distribute the estate of Agaton. Explain briey.
(5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
4a) No, the 2019 Codicil did not revoke the

2013 will. The revocation of a will based on a false
cause, or an illegal cause is null and void. (Article
833, Civil Code). ln addition, the statement of a false

cause tor the institution ot an heir shall be
considered as not written, unless it appears from
the will that the testator would not have made
such institution it he had known the falsity of such
cause. (Article 850, Civil Code)
Based on the facts presented, Agaton revoked
the 2013 will and executed the 2019 will on the
mistaken belief that Karl is already dead. This is
evident in the words ot the will itself which states
that “Because of the death of Karl, revoke my
l
2013 wi|l." Hence, the revocation is not valid.

4b) The estate ot Agaton shall be distributed in
accordance with the rules on intestacy. Hence,
Karl and Gian will get equal shares.Despite the
invalidity ot the revocation of the 2013 will, the
preterition of Gian in the 2013 will shall annul the
institution of Karl because Gian is also a compulsory
heir in the direct line, and he was totally omitted in
the 2013 will of Agaton. Hence, with the preterition
of Gian, the 2013 will is intrinsically void and intestacy
shall govern the distribution of Agaton's estate.
5.
Joey was the legitimate son of Ron and May.

Joey died intestate and was survived by his wife Kathy
and their legitimate children, Luis and Clarisse. Several
months after Joey died, Ron also died intestate. Ron
was survived by his wife May, daughter Mercy (full-
sibling of Joey), and the children of Joey (Luis and
Clarisse).
448 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Distribute the estate of Ron. Explain briefly. (5

points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Under the rules on intestate succession, it a

widow or widower and legitimate children or
descendants are left, the surviving spouse has in the
succession the same share as that of each of the
children. (Article 996, Civil Code). Also under Article
982, grandchildren and other descendants shall
inherit by right of representation.
Here, Ron’s surviving wife May, his daughter Mercy,
and the children of his predeceased son Joey, shall
divide the estate in three equal portions. The
grandchildren Luis and Clarisse shall inherit by right
of representation and will only get the portion
pertaining to Joey.
6.
[This item has two questions.] Jungkook, who

owns a building, leases the same to Gel with the
following terms: (i) the lease is for a period of ten
years; (ii) the yearly rental is Php 1,200,000.00
payable within the rst ten days of the current year;
and (iii) in case of breach of any of the provisions of
the lease, Gel is liable to pay Jungkook ve monthly
rentals and attorney's fees. Five years into the lease,
Gel sends a notice to terminate the lease and offers
to pay ve monthly rentals. Despite Jungkook's
objections, Gel vacates the premises. Jungkook
sues Gel for the rentals due for the remaining ve
years of the lease. Gel takes the positions that her

liability should only be limited to ve monthly
rentals and attorney's tees.
(a) ls there a penalty clause in the lease
agreement? Explain briefly.
(b) As between Jungkook and Gel, who is
correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
a) Yes, there is a penalty clause in the lease

agreement. The penalty clause here consists of the
liability of Gel to pay Jungkook five monthly rentals
and attorney‘s fees in case of breach of the terms
of the lease. This is clearly a penalty clause as it is
intended to substitute the indemnity for damages
and the payment of interests in case of non-compliance
with the obligation. (Article i226, Civil Code)
b) Gel is correct. Generally, it the lessor or the
lessee should not comply with their obligations, the
aggrieved party may ask for either the rescission of
the contract and indemnification for damages, or
only the latter, allowing the contract to remain in
force. Since the parties have already provided for
the penalty clause that should be paid by the
lessee in case of non-compliance, the penalty
clause shall be the measure of the indennnity to be
paid to the lessor in case the lessee commits a
breach of the terms of the lease. (D./vi. Ragasa
Enterprises vs. Banco de Oro, G.R. No. l905i2, June
20, 2018)
450 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
7.
Brenda saw the online advertisement of Evelyn,

who sells limited edition sneakers. Through an exchange
of text messages, Evelyn and Brenda agreed that:
(i) Evelyn will sell to Brenda a pair of brand-new
sneakers for Php 25,000.00: (ii) Brenda will deposit
the purchase price in Evelyn's bank account; and
(iii) Evelyn will deliver the sneakers within ten days
from deposit. Brenda deposited the purchase price
and Evelyn acknowledged receipt thereof.
Before the delivery of the sneakers. Evelyn received
an offer from Rosela to buy the same sneakers for
Php 35,000.00. Evelyn candidly tells Brenda that she
is selling the sneakers at a higher price to another
buyer, and sends this next message to Brenda:" Sizt,
may iba pala akong buyer na mas malaki yung
offer, sorry! Balik ko nalang bayad mo, keri?" Evelyn
claims that since the sneakers have not yet been
delivered to Brenda, she can still withdraw the otter.
Evelyn's contention tenable? Explain briefly.
ls
(5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, Evelyn's contention is untenable. A contract

of sale is a consensual contract as it is perfected by
mere consent. Consent is manifested by the meeting
of the offer and the acceptance upon the thing
and the cause which are to constitute the contract.
(Article 1319, Civil Code).
ln the case presented, upon Brenda's acceptance

of the Evelyn‘s offer to sell the sneakers and the
communication of such acceptance to Evelyn, the
contract of sale is already perfected. Upon
perfection of the contract the parties are bound
not only to the fulfilment of what has been expressly
stipulated but also to all the consequences which,
according to their nature, may be in keeping with
good faith, usage, and law. (Article l3l5, Civil
Code) ln this case, Brenda has already paid the
price which Evelyn accepted.
Hence, Evelyn‘s contention that she can still
withdraw the offer is without merit.
8.
In 2017, Alma orally sold a parcel of

unregistered land to the spouses Ray and Shane for
Php 500,000.00. Upon receipt of the initial payment
of Php 350,000.00, Alma delivered possession of the
land to the spouses. Shortly thereafter, Alma died.
In order to fom1alize the sale, Ray and Shane convinced
Josie, one of Alma's children, to sign a notarized
deed of conrmation of sale. In consideration thereof,
Josie received Php 150,000.00 representing the
balance of the purchase price. On the strength of
the notarized conrmation of sale, the spouses were
able to transfer the tax declaration of the properly
in their names. Later, Josie died.
In 2020, the surviving children of Alma discovered
the oral sale of the land to Ray and Shane. They
demanded the return of the property on the following
grounds: (i) the oral contract of sale is void because
452 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
it does not appear in a public instrument; and (ii)

assuming the sale is not void, it is unenforceable
under the Statute of Frauds. Ray and Shane insisted
that the sale of the land to them was both valid and
enforceable.
Are the contentions of the heirs of Alma tenable?
Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the contentions of the heirs of Alma are

untenable.
an oral contract of sale is considered valid
First,
and binding between the contracting parties for as
long as the three essential requisites of consent,
object, and cause or consideration are present.
Thus, even it the contract of sale was not reduced
into writing, it does not render it void because
contracts shall be obligatory in whatever form they
may have been entered into provided all the
essential requisites tor their validity are present.
(Article 1356, Civil Code).
As to the contention that the contract is
unenforceable, the same is likewise untenable.
Although under the Statute of Frauds, the sale of
real property or any interest therein must be
evidenced by some note or memorandum, the rule
has been settled that the Statute oi Frauds only
applies to executory contracts. In the case presented,
the price has actually been fully paid and the
possession of the property has been delivered, thus
the contract has been fully performed rendering

the Statute of Frauds inapplicable. (Heirs of Villeza
v. Aliangan, GR. No. 244667-69, December 2, 2020
9.
Aida, for the consideration of Php 5,000,000.00,

sold her parcel of land to Lorna, as evidenced by a
notarized Deed of Sale. Lorna, however, tailed to
deliver the amount in full, paying only Php
500,000.00 as down payment. Because of the non-
payment of the balance, Aida simply sold the same
parcel of land to Fe with the intention of returning to
Lorna the Php 500,000.00 down payment.
Who among Aida, Lorna, and FE owns the
property? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
As among Aida, Lorna, and Fe, it is Lorna who

owns the property.
A contract of sale coupled with delivery to the
buyer transfers the ownership of the thing sold to
the buyer. [Article 1496, Civil Code] Under the law
on Sales, delivery may be actual or constructive.
When the sale is made through a public instrument,
the execution thereof shall be equivalent to the
delivery of the thing which is the object of the
contract, it from the deed the contrary does not
appear or cannot clearly be inferred. (Article i498,
Civil Code)
454 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Here, The conTrocT of sole beTween Aldo dnd

Lornd wds coupled wiTh consTrucTive delivery of The
ldnd To Lornd, since The sole wds execuTed in d public
insTrumenT. Thus, ownership wds dlreddy Trdnsferred
To Lornd. The nonpdymenT of The Tull purchdse price is
irrelevdnT since iT is noT required for The Trdnsfer of
ownership To The buyer in on dbsoluTe sole. AldOl,
being no longer The owner dfier The sole dnd delivery
To Lorno, could noT Trdnsfer ownership To Fe.
Hence, iT is Lorno who owns The properTy.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The cdse dppedrs To be one of double sdle.

The owner of The properTy will be The buyer who firsT
regisTered The sole in The RegisTry of ProperTy. Under
The rules on double sole, if The some imrnovdble
properTy be sold To diTferenT vendees, The ownership
shdll belong To The person dcduiring iT who in good
fdiTh TirsT recorded iT in The RegisTry of ProperTy. IT
There is no regisTroTion, The ownership shdll perTdin
To The person who in good TdiTh wds Tirsi in
possession; dnd in The dbsence Thereof To The
person who presenTs The oldesT TiTle provided There
is good fdiTh. (ArTicle T544, Civil Code)
Bdsed on The TdcTs, There ore Two soles

TrdnsdcTions perlciining To The sdnne subjecT mdTTer
effecTed by The some vendor. The TocTs do noT
sTdTe however wheTher There wds regisTrdTion or
wheTher eiTher of The buyers Took possession of
The lond.
Hence, based on the rules on double sale,

ownership shall pertain to the buyer who rst registered
the sale in good faith.
10.
Laica and Jessica, who are best friends, are

both engaged in money lending at predatory interest
rates. Running out of funds, Laica borrows Php
2,000,000.00 from Jessica for Two months at a
monthly interest rate of 10%. Jessica releases The
borrowed amount after Laica signs a promissory
note. Laica Then relends to Monica The borrowed
amount of Php 2,000,000.00 for Two months, at an
interest rate of 30%. After two months, Laica tails to
pay Jessica, prompting Jessica to le a collection suit
against the former, for the Php 2,000,000.00 principal
and 10% interest per month pursuant to their
agreement. Laica counters that the monthly interest
rate of 10% is exorbitant and should be reduced To
the legal rate of interest at 6% per annum.
Which between the positions of Laica and
Jessica is tenable? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Laica‘s position is tenable.

The imposition ot an unconscionable rate ot
interest on a money debt, even it knowingly and
voluntarily assumed, is immoral and unjust. Interest
rates must be viewed merely as compensation to
The creditor for money lent to another which he or
she could have otherwise used Tor his or her own
456 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
purposes at the time it was lent. As such, the interest

rates must be reasonable and should not be a
means for predatory gain. (/vlegalopolis Properties
Inc. v. D'Nhew Lending Corporation, GR. No. 243891,
May 7, 2021)
The interest rate of IO% per month imposed by

Laica which translates to I20 percent per annum or
twenty times the legal rate of interest is clearly
excessive and unconscionable and while it may
not be contrary to law, it is contrary to morals.
Thus, Laica should be held liable for legal
interest from the date of default.
11.
Leon is the owner of a condominium unit

located directly above the condominium unit
owned by Anj. In 2014, Leon undertook renovations
in his unit's bathroom, which caused water to leak
from his bathroom down to Anj's unit, and caused
extensive damage to Anj's belongings. As Anj had
obtained properly insurance on her unit and its
contents from Proverbial Insurance Co. (PIC), Anj
was able to recover the value of the damage in
September 2016.
In October 2022, PIC, as subrogee of An], sued
Leon to recover the insurance proceeds it paid to
Anj. Leon interposed prescription to dismiss the suit
of PIC. PIC counters that the payment of the
insurance proceeds in 2016 created, by way of
legal subrogation, a I0-year period within which to
le the suit against Leon.
ls PIC correcl? Explain briefly. (5 poinTs)

PROPOSED ANSWER:
is noT correcT. PIC here is claiming The

No, PIC
righT which Anj originally had againsT The person
causing The damage and such cause of acTion is
based on a quasi-delicT. AcTions based on a quasi-
delicT musT be insTiTuTed wiThin a period of Tour
years which musT be reckoned from The Time of The
commission of The TorT. (ArTicle H46)
On The oTher hand, subrogalion Transfers To The
person subrogaled The crediT wiTh all The righTs
ThereTo apperlaining, eiTher againsT The debTor or
againsT Third persons. (Arlicle 1303, Civil Code)
Following The principles of subrogalion, PIC, as
The insurer, only sTeps inTo The shoes of The insured
An] and Therefore, for purposes of prescriplion,
inheriTs only The remaining period wiThin which The
insured may Tile an acTion againsT The wrongdoer.
The indemnificaTion of The insured by The insurer
only allows iT To be subrogaled To The Tormer's righTs
and does noT creaTe a new reckoning poinl for The
cause of acTion ThaT The insured originally has
againsT The wrongdoer. (Henson vs. UCPB General
Insurance, GR. No. 223l34 AugusT 14,2019)
Thus, since The quasi-delicT was commiTTed in
2014, PlC’s acTion againsT Leon should have been
Tiled wiThin four yearsand The acTion Tiled in 2022
was Tiled ouT of Time.
458 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
12.
Gio, single, joined a marathon organized by

Takbo Co. For lack of alternative routes, the
marathon course included a public road which was
not blocked-off from vehicles. Takbo Co. solicited
the sponsorship of Kotse Corp. for added nancial
support. Gio was hit by a jeepney driven by JD on
the public road and died. The parents of Gio sued
Takbo Co. and Kotse Corp. for damages. The court
ruled that Kotse Corp. is solidarily liable for damages
with Takbo Co. for being one of the principal movers
of the event due to its sponsorship.
ls the court correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the court not correct. To be liable for

is
damages, the act or omission of the defendant
must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury
to the plaintiff. There must be proof ot negligence
and that the damage caused was the consequence
of the negligence of the defendant.
case, Kotse Corporation merely sponsored
In this
the event. Kotse Corporatlon‘s mere sponsorship of
the marathon was, legally speaking, too remote to
be the efficient and proximate cause of the
injurious consequences. (Abrogar vs. Cosmos Bottling
Corp., GR. No. i647-49, March l5, 20l7) There was
no statement in the facts of the case that Kotse
Corporation was involved in the actual conduct of
the race or that it was guilty of negligence. Thus, it
cannot be held liable for the resulting death of Gio.

death may be attributed solely
The liability for the
to the organizer Takbo Co. for its negligence in
tailing to put up measures to ensure the safety of
the participants in The marathon.
‘I3.
Eka, a Filipina, and Du-guil, a Korean, married

in The Philippines. Thereafter, Theymoved to Seoul,
South Korea. While There, Du-guil began to ignore
Eka. He was always out with his friends and usually
came home drunk. When Eka could not take Their
marital situation anymore, she asked for a divorce.
Du-guil agreed on The condition that Eka would be
The one to le for divorce, and that The ground
should be “no fault", meaning, neither of Them is at
fault or neither would be accused of any wrongdoing.
After The divorce, Eka went back to The Philippines
and filed a case to have The judgment of divorce
recognized. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) denied
Eka’s petition because she alone led for divorce,
in violation of The second paragraph of Article 26 of
the Family Code. According to the RTC, Article 26
requires that either the foreign spouse alone initiates
the filing of the divorce or, at the very least, Eka
and Du-guil should have filed for divorce jointly.
ls the RTC correct? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the RTC not correct. As ruled by the Court

is
is irrelevant if the foreign or
in Republic v. lvlanalo, it
the Filipino spouse initiated the foreign clivorce
460 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
proceeding. Once d divorce decree is issued, The

foreign spouse is deemed To hove ‘obToined' o divorce
which cdpdciTdTes him or her To remdrry.
FurTher in Abel v. Rule, (GR. No. 234457, lvldy
12, 2021) reiTerdTing Gdldpon v. Republic, (GR. No.
243722, 22 Jdnudry 2020) The CourT clarified ThdT
ArTicle 26 of The Family dpplies To mixed mdrridges
where The divorce decree is:
(i) obidined by The foreign spouse;
(ii) obTdined joinTly by The Filipino dnd foreign
spouse; dnd
(iii) obldined solely by The Filipino spouse.
Thus, The RTC commiTTed on error in denying
The peTiTion.
14.
During Remy's pregnancy, her faTher Gavin

execufed a will bequeaThing his resT house in
CalaTagan, BaTangas To Remy's unborn child. While
Gavin and Remy, who was Then seven monThs
pregnanT, were on Their way To Calafagan, They
gured in a car accidenT on December 1, 2021
which resulTed in The insTanTaneous deaTh of Gavin
and The premaTure delivery of Remy on The same
day. AT 8:30 a.m. on December 3, 2021, The newborn
baby died.
ls The devise in favor of The baby valid? Explain
briefly. (5 poinTs)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, The devise in favor of The baby is valid.

Under The law birTh deTermines persondliTy, buT The
conceived child shall be considered born for all
purposes favorable To The child provided iT be born
under The condiiions specified in ArTicle 4i. A feTus
is considered born if iT is alive al The Time iT is
compleTely delivered from The moTher‘s womb.
However, if The feTus had an inTrduTerine life of less
Than seven monThs, for iT To be considered born
and possessed of juridical capaciTy, iT musT survive
for TwenTy-Tour hours from complele separaTion
from The moTher’s womb.
Based on The focis, Remy was already seven
monThs pregndnT aT The Time she premaiurely gave
birTh To her bdby and ThdT The baby was born alive
and only died Two days laTer. Hence, The baby
acquired juridical capacily enTiTling iT To The devise
lefT by Gavin.
15.
[This iTem has Two quesTions.] Miguel, who died

single and childless, was survived by his Two legiTimaTe
brothers Romy and Rolly, and his nephews Arno
and Pabs, The legifimafe sons of his predeceased
|egiTimaTe broTher Edgar. Before his deaTh, Miguel
execuTed a one-page noTariaI will, inclusive of an
alTesTaTion clause and a nolaal acknowledgement
wiTh only one TesTamenTary disposiTion bequeaThing
his enTire esTaTe To Romy and Rolly. The will was noT
paginated and was aT"lesTed by four wilnesses: Uno,
462 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Dos, Tres, and Quatro. It was the eve of Quatro’s

17*" birthday when the will was executed. The will
was written in the llocano dialect which Miguel
knew and understood, but the witnesses did not.
Miguel and the witnesses signed at the end of the
testamentary disposition. The attestation was also
written in the llocano dialect which, when translated
to the English language, read as follows:
“This will of Miguel was written in ONE page.
We, the attesting witnesses, signed at the end of the
will and at the bottom of this attestation in the
presence of Miguel and of each of us."
Each of the four witnesses signed below the

attestation clause. Because none of the witnesses
knew and understood the llocano dialect, the
attestation was interpreted to them by Miguel’s
lawyer who was present to notarize the will.
(a) Does the fact that the will was written in a
dialect known only to Miguel invalidate the will?
What about the absence of the marginal signatures
of the testator and the witnesses? Explain briefly.
(b) May the will nonetheless be admitted to
probate? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
l5a. No. The law requires that the will must be

written in a language or dialect known to the testator
(Article 804), but it does not require that the language
of the will be known to the attesting witnesses.
On The oTher hand, The lack of marginal

signaTures will noT invalidaTe The will because The
will was conTained in only one page and since The
TesTaTor and The wiTnesses signed aT The boTTom of
The insTrumenT, iT would be superfluous To sTill require
ThaT They marginally sign The one page will.
l5b. No, The will may noT be admiTTed To

probaTe because of The defecTive aTTesTaTion
clause. The aTTesTaTion clause musi sTaTe The
number of pages used in The will and The facT ThaT
The TesTaTor signed The will in The presence of The
aTTesTing wiTnesses and ThaT The wiTnesses signed
The will noT only in The presence of one anoTher buT
also in The presence of The TesTaTor.
The aTTesTaTion clause in Miguel‘s will failed To
sTaTe ThaT The aTTesTing wiTnesses signed The will in
The presence of The TesTaTor. Thus, The aTTesTaTion
clause is TaTally deTecTiye which renders The will
void. (Caneda y. Courl of Appeals, GR. No. T013554
May 28, T993 )
CIVIL LAW 2
1.
[This ifem has Two quesTions.] Pepe and Pilar

are adjoining |oT owners. Suppose Pepe’s loT is Tiiled
and wiThouT his knowledge, iT was encroached upon
by Pilar whose loT is unTiTled buT who honestly believed
ThaT The encroached poion, where she built a
small bungalow house, is sTi|| wiThin her propen‘y.
464 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
(a) ls Pilar a builder in good faith? Discuss Pepe's

right as against Pilar. Explain briefly.
(b) Suppose it is Pilar’s lot that is titled, and
Pepe’s lot is untitled, would Pilar be a builder in
good faith? Discuss Pepe’s right as against Pilar.
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
(a) Yes, Pilar is considered a builder in good

faith. To be deemed a builder in good faith, it is
essential that a person asserts title to the land on
which he builds, i.e., that he be a possessor in the
concept of owner, and that he be unaware that
there exists in his title or mode of acquisition any
flaw which invalidates it. (Department of Education
vs. Casibang, GR. No. l92268, January 27, 2016) Here,
the facts cleaity state that Pilar honestly believed that
the encroached portion was still within her property.
Hence, Pilar is considered a builder in good faith.
Since Pilar is considered a builder in good faith,
Pedro may exercise the following options available
to the landowner if the builder is in good faith, to
wit: l) to appropriate the structure built by Pilar after
payment of proper indemnity; 2) to compel Pilar to
buy the encroached portion if its value is not
considerably higher than the building or the trees.
3) the right to lease the land encroached by Pilar if
the value of the land is considerably higher than the
value of the bungalow. (Article 448; Pleasantville
Development Corporation vs. Court of Appeals,
253 SCRA l0, 18, February l, 1996.)
(b) Yes, Pilor would sTill be considered o builder

in good foiTh. The fdci ThoT her properTy is covered
by o TiTle does noT mean ThoT she knows The exocT
meTes and bounds of her properTy. In one case
decided by The Supreme Courl, iT ruled Thol unless
one is versed in The science of surveying, "no one
con deiermine The precise exTenT or locoTion of
his properTy by merely examining his pdper TiTle."
Co Too vs. Chico [83 Phil. 543 (i949)]
Since Pilor is in good can dpproprioTe
fdiTh, Pepe
The encrooching porTion of Pilor’s bungolow oTTer
poymenT of proper indemniTy or compel The |oTTer
To buy The porTion of his ldnd encrooched by The
bungolow provided ThoT ils volue is noT considerably
higher Thon The building.
2.
[This iTem has Two quesTions.] Thea, Vanessa,

and Sophia are siblings who are co-owners of a
600-sq. m. parcel of land covered by TCT No. 12345
siTuaTed along Bangkal Road, MakaTi CiTy. Thea
decided To sell her share, an undivided 200-sq.m.
porTion of The properTy, To Alyssa, a Filipino nurse
who has been living in Canada for The lasT Ten
years. Alyssa, wiThouT The knowledge of Sophia and
Vanessa, bul|T a modesT house on The 200-sq.m.
porTion abuing The road and leased iT To Sell for
Php 15,000.00 per monTh.
(a) Could Thea legally Transfer her share of The

properTy To Alyssa wiThouT The consenT of Vanessa
and Sophia? Explain briefly.
466 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
(b) Can Vanessa and Sophia respectively

legally demand from Alyssa a one-third share in the
rentals? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
(a) Yes, Thea could legally transfer her share of

the property to Alyssa even without the consent of
Vanessa and Sophia. Each co-owner shall have full
ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits
pertaining thereto, and he may therefore alienate,
assign, or mortgage it, and even substitute another
person in its enjoyment except when personal rights
are involved. (Article 493, Civil Code) However, Thea
can only transfer her undivided share or interest in
the land since the sale was made prior to the
partition of the property. Alyssa obtains by virtue of
such sale, the same rights as Thea had as co-owner,
in an ideal share equivalent to the consideration given
under their transaction.
(b) No, Vanessa and Sophia cannot demand
the one-third share in the rentals because the sale
rnade by Thea validly transferred ownership of the
undivided portion. By virtue of the valid sale of
Thea‘s share to Alyssa, the latter steps into the shoes of
the vendor as a co-owner (Torres v. Lapinia, GR. No.
l87987, November 26, 2014) and is therefore entitled
to the fruits or rentals obtained from the property.
3.
[This item has two questions.] With the intent to

develop a subdivision, Oliver bought a parcel of
land adjacent to a subdivision owned by Phil.
Oliver's land had no direct access to the highway,
as it was blocked by a kamote plantation owned
by Josh. Phil's subdivision, on the other hand, already
has a direct access to the highway. To facilitate the
release of the license from the Department of
Human Settlements and Urban Development, Oliver
presented a contract to sell between him and Josh
over the kamoteplantation, on the representation
that he would construct an access road thereon.
Pending approval of the license, Oliver sought
the consent of Phil to connect the road that would be
built by him with the main road of Phil's subdivision.
Phil allowed him to do this pending their negotiation
on the compensation to be paid. With the eventual
grant of the license, Oliver began the development
of his subdivision. To present the right of way over
Phil’s subdivision, Oliver was able to cause an
annotation of adverse claim on Phil's property.
However, when Oliver's subdivision was already
completed, and with the adverse claim annotated,
Oliver believed that he no longer needed to buy
the kamoteplantation and accordingly rescinded
the contract to sell with Josh.
When Oliver and Phil failed to arrive at an
agreement on the consideration for the easement,
Phil built a wall blocking the road constructed by
Oliver that connected Oliver's subdivision with his.
468 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
Oliver led a complaint seeking the establishment

of an easement of right of way through Phil's
subdivision which Oliver claimed to be the most
adequate and convenient access to the highway.
On the other hand, Phil led a petition to have the
adverse claim cancelled.
(a) ls Oliver entitled to a right of way through
Phil's subdivision? Explain briefly.
(b) there basis to have the adverse claim
ls
cancelled? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
(a) No, Oliver is not entitled to a right of way

over Phil's property. To be entitled to the right of
way the dominant estate must prove that it is
surrounded by other immovables without adequate
outlet to a public highway; there must be payment
of proper indemnity, the isolation was not due to
the proprietor's own acts, and the easement is
established at a point least prejudicial to the servient
estate where the distance from the dominant
estate to the public highway may be the shortest.
Oliver has not proven the concurrence of these
requisites for him to be entitled to the right of way
over Phil’s estate.
(b) Yes, there is a basis to cancel the adverse
claim annotated by Oliver. Under the law, an
annotation of adverse claim is proper it one claims
any part or interest in registered land adverse to
the registered owner arising subsequent to the date
of the original registration. (Section 70, P.D. 1529).
An adverse claim is proper To apprise Third persons

ThaT There is a conTroversy over The ownership of
The land. Here, Oliver does noT claim an inTeresT
adverse To ThaT of The regisTered owner Phil. ln TacT,
even if he is granTed The easemeni, The servienT
owner reTains ownership of The porTion over which
The easemeni is esTablished.
Hence, There is basis To have The adverse claim

cancelled.
4.
The spouses SanTos are The regisTered owners

of LoT 2 locaTed in Umaga Subdivision, Caramoan,
Camarines Sur, covered by TCT No. 1369. LoT 2,
which has been occupied by The spouses SanTos
for abouT TT years, has a one-sTorey residenTial house
which was already erected Thereon when LoT 2 was
purchased by Them from The spouses Cruz in 2005.
AT The Time of The acquisiTion of LoT 2, The adjoining
|oT, LoT T, which was also owned by The spouses
Cruz, was an idle land wiThouT any improvemenfs.
LoT T remained empTy unTil The spouses Cruz sTarTed
The consTrucTion of a Two-sTorey residenTia| house
Thereon in 2018.
The house consfrucfed on LoT ‘I being Taller Than
The spouses SanTos' one-sTorey residential house, The

spouses Cruz’s Two-sTorey residenal house obsTrucTed
The lighT, air, and view of The spouses SanTos’
residenal house. The spouses SanTos bemoaned
how, prior To The consTrucTion on LoT 1, They received
enough brighT and naTura| |ighT from Their windows.
470 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
The construction rendered their house dark such

that they are unable to do their normal activities in
their house without switching on their lights.
Have the spouses Santos acquired an easement
of light view with respect to Lot l owned by the
spouses Cruz? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, the Spouses Santos have acquired an

easement of light and view with respect to Lot l
owned by Spouses Cruz. As a general rule, a
negative easement of light and view cannot be
acquired by prescription except where a sufficient
time of possession has elapsed after the owner of
the dominant estate, by a formal act, has prohibited
the owner of the servient estate from doing
something which would be lawful but for the
easement. However, under Article 624 the existence
of an apparent sign of easement between two
estates, established or maintained by the owner of
both, shall be considered, should either of them be
alienated, as a title in order that the easement may
continue actively and passively, unless, at the time
the ownership of the two estates is divided, the
contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance
of either of them, or the sign aforesaid should be
removed before the execution of the deed.
Hence, in accordance with Article 624 of the
Civil Code, from the time the Sps. Cruz transferred
the subject property to the Sps. Santos, there arose
by title an easement of light and view, placing a
burden on the sen/ient estate, Lot i, to allow the

Sps. Santos‘ residence unobstructed access to light
and view. [Spouses Garcia vs. Santos and Tan, GR.
No. 228334, June 17,2019]
5.
In 2014, awealthy young couple, the spouses

Tan, moved by the spirit of generosity and love for
their hometown in Siquijor, decided to donate a
one-hectare lot in favor of the province of Siquijor.
The Deed of Donation pertinently provides:
"The herein DONORS hereby voluntarily and

freely give, transfer and convey, by way of
unconditional donation, unto said DONEE, all of
the rights, title and interest which the aforesaid
DONORS have or which pertain to them and
which they owned exclusively in the above-
described real property over a one hectare
portion of the same, solely for hospital site only
and for no other purpose, where a provincial
government hospital shall be constructed."
The donation was recorded in the Registry of
Deeds, and a certicate of title to the property was
transferred to the province of Siquijor. In accordance
with the Deed of Donation, the construction of a
hospital building was started in the following year.
However. For reasons unknown, only the foundation
of the hospital building has, to this day, been
completed.
472 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
Do The spouses Ton hcrve valid grounds To

revoke The donc1Tion? Explain briefly. (5 poinTs)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, There is ground To revoke The dondlion.

As sToTed in The foicls, The dono|Tion To The
province is o donoiion subjecT To o condiTion — The
condiTion being The consTrucTion of d governmenT
hospilol ond The use of The subjecT properTy solely
for hospiTdl purposes. When The donor irnposed
ThciT condiTion, iT con be inferred Tho|T The inTenTion
wos To hove d compleTed ond fully funcTioning
governmenT hospiiol. Cerloinly, The consTrucTion of
The foundoTion is for from complionce wiTh The
condilion imposed by The donor.
Upon The non-fulfillmenT of The condiTion, The
donoTion may be revoked, ond Cl|| The righTs
olreody ocquired by The donee shdll be deemed
losT ond exTinguished. This is Cl resoluTory condiTion
becouse iT is demonddble oT once by The donee
buT The non-fu|fillmenT of The condiTion gives The
donor The righT To revoke The dondiion. (Clemenfe
v. Republic of The Philippines, GR. No. 220008
Februdry 20, 2019)
Thus, The Spouses Ton hove volid grounds To
revoke The donoiion.
6.
Being an overseas worker, Salvador issued to

Ronaldo a duly notarized Special Power of Attorney
(SPA) authorizing the latter to enter into a contract
of lease over Salvador’sproperty covered by TCT No.
122433 for a period of three years with SISI Corp.
Salvador entrusted to Ronaldo the owner's duplicate of
the TCT in case SISI Corp. needed to verify the same.
Hearing rumors that the subject property was
sold, Salvador went to the Register of Deeds and
was shocked to nd out that TCT No. 122433 had
been cancelled and TCT No. 334388 had been
issued in Eduardo's name. To vindicate his property
rights, Salvador led a complaint for cancellation of
title and reconveyance. Salvador was able to
prove that he was out of the country when the
purported sale was executed.
On the other hand, Eduardo claims to be an
innocent purchase for value, stating that he paid
the fair market value to Ronaldo and that he relied
on the fact that Ronaldo presented the original
owner’s duplicate of Salvador’s TCT. He likewise
inspected the property and determined that Salvador
was indeed the owner.
lf you were the judge, decide. Explain briefly.
(5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
I will rule in favor of Salvador.

474 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
While iT is True ThdT Eduardo inspecTed The

properTy prior To his purchase of The same, he
connoT be considered on innocenT purchaser Tor
vdlue. The TdcTs are clear ThdT The properTy was sTill
regisTered in The name of Salvador oT The Time
Rondldo sold The sdrne To Eduardo. A prudenT man
who buys regisTered properTy frorn o person oTher
Than The regislered owner should have inquired
as To o|uThoriTy of The seller To convey The properTy.
(BouTisTo vs. CourT of Appeals, GR. No. lO6042,
February 28, 1994, 230 SCRA 446).
ln dddiTion, while Ronoldo was given o Speciol
Power of ATTorney by Salvador To lease The land,
such power does noT include The power To sell The
land. ln fdcT, if The sale of d piece of land is mode
Through on agenT, The duThoriTy of The ogenT musT
be in wriTing, oTherwise The sole is void. (ArTicle
i874, Civil Code)
Hence, will declare ThoT The sole rnode by
l
Rondldo in fdvor of Edudrdo is void.
7.
AToy is one of The five children of Jawo. Jawo

was The regisTered owner of a four-hecTare parcel
of land in STa. Cruz, Laguna covered by TCT No.
77347. When Jawo died, The owner's duplicaTe of
The TCT was kepT by Jawo’s daughTer, Akiko (sisTer
of AToy), who resided in The said properly. WanTing
To have The said four-hecTare properTy regisTered
under his name, AToy goT in Touch wiTh Franz who
had special connecTions wiTh The RegisTer of Deed
of Sta. Cruz, Laguna TCT No. 77347 was then cancelled

and TCT No. 84660 was issued in Atoy's name on
January 29, 2013. Atoy immediately mortgaged the
properly to the Rural Bank of Sta. Cruz (RBSC). Upon
default and after being declared the winning
bidder in the extrajudicial foreclosure sale, RBSC
consolidated ownership with the issuance of TCT
No. 94477 in its name.
How will Akiko and the other heirs of Jawo be
able to successfully argue that RBSC is not an innocent
purchase for value? Explain briefly. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Akiko and the other heirs of Jawo may argue

that the bank is not an innocent purchaser for
value based on the following:
While it is true that a forged instrument may be
the root of a valid title in tavor of an innocent
purchaser for value, the doctrine does not apply it
the owner still holds a valid and existing title over
the land in which case the earlier certificate of title
prevails over the latter one. (Torres vs. Court of
Appeals, GR. No. L-63046 June 2i, 1990)
Moreover, the bank should have exercised a
greater degree of diligence in ascertaining the
status ot the property. The bank should have
conducted an ocular inspection and they would
have discovered that the Akiko was the one in
possession of the property. It the land purchased is
in the possession of a person other than the vendor,
476 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
The purchaser musT be wary and musi invesTigaTe

The righTs of The aclual possessor. (SanTiago v.
Vil/amor, GR. No. l68499, November 26, 2Ol2, 686
SCRA 313) WiThouT such inquiry, The purchaser
cannoT be said To be in good TaiTh and cannoi
have any righT over The properTy.
8.
How does The New Civil Code disnguish belween

immovable and movable properes? Explain briefly
and give Two examples for each. (5 poinTs)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
An immovable properTy cannoT be TransporTed

from place To place whereas movable properTy
can be Transporied from place To place wiThouT
impairmenl of The real properTy To which They are
fixed. lmmovable properiy includes lands, buildings,
and consTrucTion of all kinds adhered To The soil, and
Teriilizer acTually used on a piece oT land. On The
oTher hand, some examples of movable properTy are
forces of nalure which are broughT under conTrol
by science and obligaTions and acTions which have
for Their objeci movables or demandable sums.
9.
[This iTem has Two quesTions.] This case involves

Two compeTing TiTles: TCT No. 23456 in The name of
Flor and TCT No. 65432 in The name of de Luna.
Flor’s TiTle was derived from Rodrigo. Rodrigo's TiTle
was originally obTained Through a judicial conrmaon
of TiTle in 1950 based on a survey plan approved in
1931. On the other hand, de Luna derived her TCT

No. 65432 from Diaz who obtained an original title
through judicial conrmation of title at a much later
date, in 1970, on the basis of a survey plan approved
in 1921. It turned out that Flor's TCT No. 23456,
although titled prior in time, was based on a survey
plan that was married with numerous blatant,
obvious, and serious defects, to the point that the
trial court found it dubious, irregularly approved
and was therefore fake.
(a) Discuss the principle of “qui prior est
tempore, prior est jure" in the torrens system of land
registration.
(b) As between Flor and de Luna, whose title
should be declared valid and whose title should be
voided? Explain briey.(5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWERS:
(a) The principle of ‘“qui prior est tempore,

potlor est jure" literally means he who is before in
time is better in right. (Benavldes vs. Salvador, GR.
No. 173331 December ll, 2013). Under the Torrens
System of land registration it means that in case of
conflict between two certicates of title purporting
to cover the same land, the earlier in date will
prevail ( Yu vs. Ayala Land, Inc., GR. No. 173120: 10
April 2019)
(b) it submitted that de Luna’s title should be
is
declared valid while Flor‘s title should be declared
void. In a similar case decided by the Supreme
Court, it ruled that in case of conflict between two
478 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
certificates of title purporting to cover the sarne

land, the later certificate of title should prevail and
be declared valid if the earlier title was sourced
from a void survey.
Inthe case presented, while Flor's certificate of
title was issued earlier, the facts clearly state that it
was sourced from a void survey since such survey
was marred by numerous and serious defects and
which turned out to be fake. Thus, when the
technical description appearing in the title is clearly
erroneous, the courts have no other recourse but to
order its cancellation.
Hence, de Luna's title should be declared valid
and must prevail over Flor's title even it it was issued
much later that the latter‘s title. (Yu v. Ayala Land,
lnc., GR. No. 173120; TO April 2019)
10.
In 2008, a re razed the Register of Deeds of

San Fernando, Pampanga (RD). Several titles on le
were burned. Long before the fire, Tito, Vic, and
Joey had been living in a 350-sq.m. lot covered by
TCT No. 49933, which they inherited from their parents.
The original of TCT No. 49933 on le with the RD was
among the titles which were burned. To effect the
partition agreed among them, the siblings filed a
veried petition for reconstitution of the TCT before
your court.
To support the petition, the siblings presented:
(i) a notarized affidavit of loss duly recorded and
registered with the RD; (ii) a photocopy of TCT No.
49933; (iii) real property tax declarations and receipts

to evidence payment of real property taxes,
together with the sketch and subdivision plan; (iv) a
Land Registration Authority (LRA) Report which
states that the survey and subdivision plans and the
technical description of the property may be used
as a basis for inscription of the technical description
of the reconstituted property; (v) a microlm copy
of the plans and technical description on le with
the LRA; and (vi) the Extrajudicial Settlement of
Estate executed among them.
The public prosecutor, duly deputlzed by the
Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), prays for the
denial of the petition, and argues that the foregoing
documents are insufcient for reconstitution of TCT
No. 49933.
Should the petition for reconstitution be granted?
PROPOSED ANSWER:
No, the petition for reconstitution should not be

granted.
ln a petition for reconstitution, the quantum of
evidence needed to grant it is clear and convincing
evidence. Evidence is clear and convincing if it
produces in the mind of the trier of tact a firm belief
or conviction as to the allegation sought to be
established. (Dela Paz vs. Republic, GR. No. 195726,
November 20, 2017, 845 SCRA 34)
480 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
As such, the public officer who issued the

document, such as the LRA Report pertdining to
the survey and subdivision plan must testify in court
othen/vise the report would be hedrsoy dnd bereft
of ony probdtive vdlue. At best, they may be
considered only ds primd tdcie evidence of their
due execution dnd ddte of issuance but do not
constitute primo fdcie evidence of the fdcts stated
therein. (Republic v. Mdnonsolo, G.R. No. 241890
May 3, 2021)
Bdsed on the facts, the siblings merely
presented the LRA Report but the public officer
who issued it was not called upon to testify dnd be
exdmined dbout the contents of the report. Thus,
the LRA Report which is vitdl to the reconstitution
petition has no probative vdlue.
Hence, the petition for reconstitution should
not be gronted.
11.
Ely borrows Php 2,000,000.00 from Mia and

mortgages a parcel of land to secure the loan. The
mortgage provides for a 5% monthly interest, a ve-
year maturity period, a default provision in case of
non-payment of interest or principal, and an
extrajudicial foreclosure provision. On the fourth
year, Ely fails to pay interest for three consecutive
months. After sending a demand letter, Mia declares
Ely in default and extrajudicially forecloses the
mortgage. Mia is the highest bidder in the
foreclosure sale and consolidates ownership upon
the lapse of the redemption period.
Con Ely hove The foreclosure annulled and

recover The properly? Exploin briefly. (5 poinfs)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
Yes, Ely cdn hdve The foreclosure sdle dnnulled

dnd recover The properly.
Here, Ely wds noT given on opporTuniTy To seTTle
his debT, dT The correcT dmounl dnd wiThouT The
iniquiTous inTeresT imposed. A judgmenT ordering d
foreclosure sole is condiiioned upon d finding on
The correcT drnounT of The unpdid obligdon dnd
The fdilure of The debTor To pdy The sdid dmounl.
(Heirs of Espir/‘Tu v. Ldndrifo, GR. No. 169617, April 3,
2007, 520 SCRA 383, 396-397.
A foreclosure of d redl esTdTe morTgdge which
serves d securiTy for d lodn is void where The
morTgdge drnounT included on exorbiTdnT inTeresT
rdTe. (Ldnd Bonk v. Ddvid, 22 AugusT 2008)
The inTeresT rdTe of 5% per rnonTh or 60% per

dnnum is cledrly exorbiTdnT dnd unconsciondble ds
iT is Ten Times The legol rdTe of inTeresT for lodns or
forbedrdnce of money. Thus, The foreclosure of The

rnorTgdge is void.
Hence, Ely coin hove The foreclosure sole
dnnulled dnd recover The properTy.
482 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
12.
Luz isthe owner of a parcel of land consisting

of 500 square meters located in San Miguel,
Bulacan and covered by TCT No. R-248016. Luz
agreed to sell to Minda the land for Php 500,000.00
payable in ten monthly installments, with the rst
installment payable upon execution of the contract
to sell, to which Minda acceded. They also agreed
that the title to the land shall only transfer to Minda
upon full payment of the considerations, and that
any and all taxes, fees, and expenses incidental to
the sale will be paid by Minda.
Draft a notarized contract to sell between Luz
and Minda. (5 points)
PROPOSED ANSWER:
CONTRACT TO SELL
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
This Contract to Sell is made and executed by

and between:
Luz, a Filipino citizen, of legal age ancl a
resident of Soin Miguel Bulocon hereinafter
referred to as the SELLER;
-anol-
Mincla, a Filipino citizen of legal age and a

resident of San Miguel Bulacan, hereinafter
referred to as the BUYER.
WITNESSETH:
fhe SELLER is fhe absolufe, lawful,
WHEREAS
and regisfered owner in fee simple of a parcel
of land, locafed in San Miguel Bulacan,
covered by Transfer Cerfificafe of Tifle No. TCT
No. R-248016 of fhe Regisfry of Deeds for
Bulacan wifh an area of FIVE HUNDRED (500)
SQUARE METERS, more or less, fogefher wifh all
ifs erecfed residenfial improvernenfs fhereon
and more parlicularly described as follows:
TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
TRANSFER CERTIFICATE OF TITLE NO. T-248016
WHEREAS, fhe BUYER has offered fo buy from

herein SELLER fhe aforesaid properfy, inspecfed fhe
sarne fo her cornplefe safisfacfion; and fhe laffer has
accepfed fhe offer fo buy made by fhe BUYER.
Now, fherefore, for and in considerafion of fhe
foregoing and fhe Tofal Confracf Price of FIVE
HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P500,000.00) due and
payable lo fhe SELLER in fhe manner sfafed hereunder,
fhe SELLER hereby promises fo sell, cede, fransfer,
convey and assign fhe above menfioned Properly
unfo and in favor of fhe BUYER, her heirs, successors
and assigns, and fhe BUYER likewise agrees and
prornises lo purchase fhe same from fhe SELLER
subjecf lo fhe following ferms and condifions:
l. The BUYER shall pay fhe purchase price in fen
(TO) eaual monfhly insfallmenfs, fhe firsf insfallnnenf fo
be paid upon fhe signing of fhis Confracf fo Sell.
484 BAR Q 8. A
CIVIL LAW
2. Upon full poymenT of The purchdse price, The

BUYER shdll shoulder The corresponding CdpiTdl Gdins
Tdx dnd DocumenTdry STdrnp Tdx ds ossessed by The
Buredu of lnTernd| Revenue, Trdnsfer Tox, RegisTrdTion,
noTdridl fees, dnd dll oTher incidenTdl expenses necessdry
To Trdnsfer The Tile To The ndme of The BUYER.
3. The SELLER only dgrees To Trdnsfer ownership

of The subjecT properTy To The BUYER upon full pdymenT
of The purchdse price for The properTy (P500,000.00
Philippine Currency). The SELLER Thereby reserves full
TiTle dnd ownership over The dbove-described properly
unTil dfTer complidnce by The BUYER of her obligdTion
under This dgreennenT.
4. dnd represenTs
The SELLER hereby wdrrdnTs
ThoT she holds d good, volid, dnd cleon TiTle To The
Properly dnd ThoT There ore no cloinns, liens, or
encurnbrdnces on Thereon Thdl will prevenT The
BUYER from dcquiring TiTle over The Properiy.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The SELLER dnd The BUYER

hove hereunTo seT Their hdnds on This l6Th of
November 2022 in The Son Miguel Buldcdn.
LUZ MINDA
Seller Buyer
SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
CITY ) S.S.
BEFORE I\/IE, This , 2022 in The CiTy of
, MeTro Mdnilo, persondlly opbedred:
NAMES GOVERNMENT ISSUED ID

DATE OF ISSUE
LUZ
MINDA
known To me dnd To me known To be The some

persons who execuTed The foregoing documenT dnd
They dcknowledged To me ThoT The some is Their Tree
dnd volunTory ocT dnd deed.
This ConTrocT To Sell perToins To o pdrcel of ldnd
locdTed in Son Miguel Buldcdn covered by Trdnsfer
CerTificdTe of TiTle No. T- 248016 of The RegisTry of
Deeds of Buldcdn, wiTh on ored of FIVE HUNDRED
(500) SQUARE METERS, more or less, dnd iT consisTs of
Three (3) boges, including The boge on which This
Acl<nowledgmenT is wriTTen, which hos been signed
by The Pdriies dnd Their wiTnesses dT The end dnd oll
The pdges Thereof.
486 BAR Q & A
CIVIL LAW
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, have hereunto seT my

I
hand and affixed my nofary seal aT The place and

aa’re rst above written.
Notary Public
Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of
ii
:
—<>oo—

Qanda 2023 Civ

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qanda 2023 Civ

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qanda 2023 Civ

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAR Q & A

DEAN VIVIANA MARTIN - PAGUIRIGAN

DEAN VIVIANA MARTIN PAGUIRIGAN

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

No portion of this handbook may be copied or reproduced in

Published and Printed by

CENTRAL BOOK SUPPLY, INC.

2009 BAR EXAMINATION

2010 BAR EXAMINATION

2011 BAR EXAMINATION

2013 BAR EXAMINATION (MULTIPE CHOICE)

2014 BAR EXAMINATION

XXVIII. ................................... .. 254

2015 BAR EXAMINATION

2016 BAR EXAMINATION

2017 BAR EXAMINATION

- - - - ------- - - - - u -oa n n o o o - - ------------- -- - - - - - - - u o o u - - - - - - - - - on 340

2018 BAR EXAMINATION

XVI .......................................................... .. 383

XIX ............................................... .. 389

2019 BAR EXAMINATION

2020-2021 BAR EXAMINATION

2022 BAR EXAMINATION

----- --. ------ ------- - -

TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is

True. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or

False. Under the law, not all resen/atarios will in-

excludes The dscending; direcT line excludes

True. Ldw ond jurisprudence boTh supporl ThdT

An O|'Cl| promise of gudrdnly is valid and binding.

True. The volidiTy of on ordl conTrdcT of guordnTy

True. The low provides ThdT legiTimoTion of chil-

not require the child to still be alive at the time of

Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and his son

As to Dr. Lopez‘ estate: Marilyn’s claim of her

evidence To prove as To who among Them died

In December 2000, Michael and Anna, aer

secretary then told them to wait, and went out to look

The marriage is void. One of the formal requisites

The Three children of lvlichdel dnd Annd ore

WhaT properTy regime governs The properes

On The dssumpTion ThdT The porTies ore noT suf-

Harry married Wilma, a very wealThy woman.

year thereafter, Wilma and Joseph returned and

Yes, the divorce obtained by Wilma from Harry

will advise Harry to file a petition for the recog-

nition of the foreign divorce decree obtained by

Filipino cifizen aT The Time she secured The divorce

liauldafe Their properlies.

Yes, he can marry Elizabefh. However, Harry

Four children, namelyr. Alberto, Baldomero, Caridad,

No, Alberto and Baldomero are not entitled to

noTwiThsTanding The execuTion of noTarial documenl

On December 1, 2000, Dr. .luaniTo FuenTes

Yes, The holographic will ofDr. FuenTes can be

is not otherwise controry to our public policy. In this

No, Joy cdnnot volidly thot he be given

Ramon Mayaman died intestate, leaving a net

Under the law of intestate succession, if the

If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half-sisTer,