QUAMTO (1987-2016)

CIVIL LAW QUAMTO a. Yes. As stated in the problem, Swiss law does not
allow illegitimate children to inherit. Hence, Jane
cannot inherit the property of Jacob under Philippine
law.
PART I – GENERAL PRINCIPLES b. The testamentary disposition will not be valid if it
would contravene Swiss law; otherwise, the
disposition would be valid. Unless the Swiss law is
I. EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS (CIVIL CODE) proved, it would be presumed to be the same as that of
Philippine law under the doctrine of processual
Conflict of Laws (Private International Law) (1990, presumption.
1991, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001,
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2014 BAR) Q:

Q: A. The Japan Air Lines (JAL), a foreign corporation

licensed to do business in the Philippines,
1. If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino executed in Manila a contract of employment with
citizen, what law will govern if the will is executed Maritess Guapa under which the latter was hired
in the Philippines? What law will govern if the will as a stewardess on the aircraft plying the Manila-
is executed in another country? Explain your Japan-Manila route. The contract specifically
answers. provides that (1) the duration of the contract shall
2. If a will is executed by a foreigner, for instance, by be two (2) years, (2) notwithstanding the above
a Japanese, residing in the Philippines, what law duration, JAL may terminate the agreement at any
will govern if the will is executed in the time by giving her notice in writing ten (10) days
Philippines? And what law will govern if the will is in advance, and (3) the contract shall be constued
executed in Japan, or some other country, for as governed under and by the laws of Japan and
instance, the USA? Explain your answers. only the court in Tokyo, Japan shall have the
(1990 BAR) jurisdiction to consider any matter arising from or
relating to the contract.
A:
JAL dismissed Maritess on the fourth month of her
1. a. If the testator who is a Filipino citizen executes his employment without giving her due notice.
will in the Philippines, Philippine law will govern the Maritess then filed a complaint with the Labor
formalities. Arbiter for reinstatement, backwages and
b. If said Filipino testator is a foreigner executes his damages. The lawyer of JAL contends that neither
will in another country, the law of the country where the Labor Arbiter nor any other agency or court in
he may be or Philippine law will govern the the Philippines has jurisdiction over the case in
formalities. (Article 815, Civil Code) view of the above provision (3) of the contract
2. a. If the testator is a foreigner residing in the which Maritess voluntarily signed. The contract is
Philippines and he executes his will in the Philippines, the law between her and JAL. Decide the issue.
the law of the country of which he is a citizen or B. Where under a State’s own conflicts rule that
Philippine law will govern the formalities. domestic law of another State should apply, may
b. If the testator is a foreigner and executes his will in the courts of the former nevertheless refuse to
a foreign country, the law of his place of residence or apply the latter? If so, under what circumstance?
the law of the country of which he is a citizen or the (1991 BAR)
law of the place of execution, or Philippine law will
govern the formalities. (Articles 17, 816, 817, Civil A:
Code)
A. Labor Legislations are generally intended as
Q: Jacob, a Swiss national, married Lourdes, a Filipina, expressions of public policy on employer-employee
in Berne, Switzerland. Three years later, the couple relations. The contract therefore, between JAL and
decided to reside in the Philippines. Jacob Maritess may apply only to the extent that its
subsequently acquired several properties in the provisions are not inconsistent with Philippine labor
Philippines with the money he inherited from his laws intended particularly to protect employees.
parents. Forty years later, Jacob died intestate, and is
survived by several legitimate children and duly Under the circumstances, the dismissal of Maritess
recognized illegitimate daughter Jane, all residing in without complying with Philppine Labor law would be
the Philippines. invalid and any stipulation iun the contract to the
contrary is considered void. Since the law of the forum
a. Suppose that Swiss law does not allow illegitimate in this case is the Philippine law, the issues should be
children to inherit, can Jane, who is a recognized resolved in accordance with Philippine law.
illegitimate child, inherit part of the properties of B. The third paragraph of Art. 17 of the Civil Code
Jacob under Philippine law? provides that:
b. Assuming that Jacob executed a will leaving
certain properties to Jane as her legitime in “Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or
accordance with the law of succession in the property, and those which have for their object public
Philippines, will such testamentary disposition be order, public policy and good customs shall not be
valid? (1991 BAR) rendered ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or conventions
A: agreed upon in a foreign country.”

1
 CIVIL LAW
Accordingly, a state’s own conflict of laws rule may,
exceptionally be inapplicable, given public policy 1. What law governs the formality in the execution of
considerations by the law of the forum. the contract of sale? Explain your answer and give
its legal basis.
Going into the specific provisions of the contract in 2. What law governs the capacity of the Japanese to
question, I would rule as follows: sell the land?
3. What law governs the capacity of the Filipino to
1. The duration of the contract is not opposed to buy the land? Explain your answer with legal basis.
Philippine law and it can therefore be valid as (1995 BAR)
stipulated
2. The second provision to the effect that A:
notwithstanding duration, JAL may terminate her
employment is invalid being inconsistent with our 1. Under Art. 16 par. 1, NCC, real property is subject to
Labor laws; the law of the country where it is situated. Since the
3. That the contract shall be construed as governed property is situated in the Philippines, Philippine law
under and by the laws of Japan andvonly the courts of applies. The rule of lex rei sitae in Art. 16 prevails over
Tokyo, Japan shall have jurisdiction, is invalid as lex loci contractus in Art. 17 of the NCC.
clearly opposed to the aforcited third paragraph of 2. Japanese law governs the capacity of the Japanese to
Arts. 17 and 1700 of the Civil Code which provides: sell the land being his personal law on the basis of an
interpretation of Art. 15, NCC.
“Art. 1700. The relations between capital and labor are 3. Philippine law governs the capacity of the Filipino to
not merele contractual. They are so impressed with buy the land. In addition to the principle of lex rei sitae
public interest that labor contracts must yield to the given above, Article 15 of the NCC specifically provides
common good. Therefore, such contracts are subject to that Philippine laws relating to legal capacity of
the special laws on labor unions, collective bargaining, persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippine no
strikes and lockouts, closed shop, wages, working matter where they are.
conditions, hours of labor and similar subjects.”
Q: On 8 December 1991, Vanessa purchased from the
Q: X and Y entered into a contract in Australia, Manila office of Euro-Aire on airline ticket for its Flight
whereby it was agreed that X would build a No. 710 from Dallas to Chicago on 16 January 1992.
commercial building for Y in the Philippines, and in Her Flight reservation was confirmed. On her
payment for the construction, Y will transfer and scheduled departure Vanessa checked in on time at
convey his cattle ranch located in the United States in the Dallas airport. However, at the check-in counter
favor of X. she discovered that she was waitlisted with some
other passengers because of intentional overbooking,
What law would govern: a Euro-Aire policy and practice. Euro-Aire admitted
that Vanessa was not advised of such policy when she
a. The validity of the contract? purchased her plane ticket. Vanessa was only able to
b. The performance of the contract? fly two days later by taking another airline.
c. The consideration of the contract? (1992 BAR)
Vanessa sued Euro-Aire in Manila for breach of
A: contract and damages. Euro-Aire claimed that it
cannot be held liable for damages because its practice
a. The validity of the contract will be governed by of overbooking passengers was allowed by the US Code
Australian law, because the validity refers to the of Federal Regulations. Vanessa on the other hand
element of the making of the contract in this case. contended that assuming that US Code of Federal
b. The performance will be governed by the law of Regulations allowed intentional overbooking, the
the Philippines where the contract is to be airline company cannot invoke the US Code on the
performed. ground that the ticket was purchased in Manila, hence,
c. The consideration will be governed by the law of Philippine law should apply, under which Vanessa can
the United States where the ranch is located. recover damages for breach of contract of carriage.
Decide. Discuss fully.
Q: A, a Filipino, executed a will in Kuwait while there (1995 BAR)
as a contract worker. Assume that under the laws of
Kuwait, it is enough that the testator affix his signature A: Vanessa can recover damages under Philippine law for
in the presence of two witnesses and that the will need breach of contract of carriage. Philippine law should
not be acknowledged before a notary public. govern as the law of the place where the plane tickets were
bought and the contract of carriage was executed. In
May the will be probated in the Philippines? (1993 Zalamea v. Court of Appeals (GR No. 104235, Nov. 10, 1993)
BAR) the Supreme Court applied Philippine law in recovery of
damages for breach of contract of carriage for the reason
A: Yes, under Articles 815 and 17 of the Civil Code, the that it is the law of the place where the contract was
formality of the execution of a will is governed by the law executed.
of the place of execution, If the will was executed with the
formalities prescribed by the laws of Kuwait and valid Q: Michelle, the French daughter of Penreich, a
there as such, the will is valid and may be probated in the German national, died in Spain leaving real properties
Philippines. in the Philippines as well as valuable personal
properties in Germany.
Q: While in Afghanistan, a Japanese by the name of
Sato, Sold to Ramoncito, a Filipino, a parcel of land 1. What law determines who shall succeed the
situated in the Philippines which Sato inherited from deceased? Explain your answer and give its legal
his Filipino mother. basis.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 2

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
2. What law regulates the distribution of the real Mario will be recognized as valid here considering that
properties in the Philippines? Explain your answer at the time the foreign decree was granted, both Clara
and give its legal basis. and Mario are citizens of the USA., a country which
3. What law governs the distribution of his personal grants/allows absolute divorce. Since the marriage
properties in Germany? Explain your answer and between Mario and Clara has been validly terminated,
give its legal basis. (1995 BAR) Mario and Juana can freely marry each other.
b. No. The renvoi doctrine is relevant in cases where one
A: country applies the domiciliary theory and the other
the nationality theory, and the issue involved is which
1. The national law of the decedent (French law) shall of the laws of the two countries should apply to
govern in determining who will succeeed to his estate. determine the order of succession, the amount of
The legal basis is Art. 16 par. 2, NCC. successional rights, or, the intrinsic validity of
2. The distribution of the real properties in the testamentary provisions. Such issue is not involved in
Philippines shall be governed by French law. The legal this case.
basis is Art. 16, NCC.
3. The distribution of the personal properties in Q: Juan is a Filipino citizen residing in Tokyo, Japan.
Germany shall be governed by French law. The legal State what laws govern:
basis is Art. 16, NCC.
1. His capacity to contract marriage in Japan.
Q: Alma was hired as a domestic helper in Hongkong 2. His successional rights as regards his deceased
by the Dragon Services, Ltd., through its local agent. Filipino father’s property in Texas, USA
She executed a standard employment contract 3. The extrinsic validity of the last will and testament
designed by the Philippine Overseas Workers which Juan executed while sojourning in
Administration (POEA) for overseas Filipino workers. Switzerland.
It provided for her employment for one year at a 4. The intrinsic validity of said will. (1998 BAR)
salary of US$1, 000.00 a month. It was submitted to
and approved by the POEA. However, when she A:
arrived in Hongkong, she was asked to sign another
contract by Dragon Services, Ltd. which reduced her 1. Juan’s capacity to contract marriage is governed by
salary to only US$600.00 a month. Having no other Philippine law – i.e. the Family Code – pursuant to Art.
choice, Alma signed the contract but when she 15, Civil Code, which provides that our laws relating
returned to the Philippines, she demanded payment of to, among others, legal capacity of persons are binding
the salary differential of US$400.00 a month. Both upon citizens of the Philippines even though living
Dragon Services, Ltd. and its local agent claimed that abroad.
the second contract is valid under the laws of 2. By way of exception to the general rule of lex rei sitae
Hongkong and therefore binding on Alma. Is their prescribed by the first paragraph of Art. 16, Civil Code,
claim correct? Explain. (1996 BAR) a person’s successional rights are governed by the
national law of the decedent (2nd par., Art. 16). Since
A: Their claim is not correct. A contract is the law between Juan’s deceased father was a Filipino citizen,
the parties but the law can disregard the contract if it is Philippine law governs Juan’s successional rights.
contrary to public policy. The provision of the 1987 3. The extrinsic validity of Juan’s will is governed by (a)
Constitution on the protection of labor and on social Swiss law, it being the law where the will was made
justice (Sec. 10, Art. II) embody a public policy of the (Art. 17, 1st par. Civil Code), or (b) Philippine law, by
Philippines. Since the application of Hongkong law in this implication from the provisions of Art. 816, Civil Code,
case is in violation of that public policy, the application which allows even an alien who is abroad to make a
shall be disregarded by our Courts. (Cadalin v. POEA, 238 will in conformity with our Civil Code.
SCRA 762) 4. The intrinsic validity of his will is governed by
Philippine law, it being his national law. (Art. 16, Civil
Q: In 1977, Mario and Clara, both Filipino citizens, Code)
were married in the Philippines. . Three years later,
they went to the United States of America and Q: Francis Albert, a citizen and resident of New Jersey,
established their residence in San Francisco, USA, under whose law he was still a minor, being only
California. In 1987, the couple applied for, and were 20 years of age, was hired by ABC Corporation of
granted, U.S. citizenship. In 1989, Mari, claiming to Manila to serve for two years as its chief computer
have been abandoned by Clara, was able to secure a programmer. But after serving for only four months,
decree of divorce in Reno, Nevada, USA. he resigned to join XYZ Corporation, which enticed
him by offering more advantageous terms. His first
In 1990, Mario returned to the Philippines and employer sues him in Manila for damages arising from
married Juana who knew well Mario’s past life. the breach of his contract of employment. He sets up
his minority as a defense and asks for annulment of
a. Is the marriage between Mario and Juana valid? the contract on that ground. The plaintiff disputes this
b. Would the renvoi doctrine have any relevance to by alleging that since the contract was executed in the
the case? (1997 BAR) Philippines under whose law the age of majority is 18
years, he was no longer a minor at the time of
A: perfection of the contract. Will the suit prosper? (1998
BAR)
a. Yes. In relation to Art. 15 of the Civil Code, Conflict of
Laws provides that the recognition of an absolute A: The suit will not prosper under Art. 15, Civil Code, New
divorce granted in another State rests on the Jersey law governs Francis Albert’s capacity to act, being
citizenship of the parties at the time the divorce was his personal law from the standpoint of both his
granted (Paras, Phil. Conflict of Laws, p. 259). Applied nationality and his domicile. He was, therefore, a minor at
in this case, the divorce decree issued to Clara and the time he entered into the contract.
3
 CIVIL LAW
2) The law of the Philippines being the law of the
Q: Alex was born a Filipino but was a naturalized place of execution under Art. 17 of the NCC.
Canadian citizen at the time of his death on Decmber C. Philippine law will not govern the intrinsic validity of
25, 1998. He left behind a last will and testament in the will. Art. 16 of the New Civil Code provides that
which he bequeathed all his properties, real and intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions shall be
personal, in the Philippines to his acknowledged governed by the national law of the person whose
illegitimate Filipina daughter and nothing to his two succession is under consideration. California law will
legitimate Filipino sons. The sons sought the govern the intrinsic validity of the will.
annulment of the last will and testament on the ground
that it deprived them of their legitimes but the Q: Felipe is a Filipino citizen. When he went to
daughter was able to prove that there were no Sydney for vacation, he met a former business
compulsory heirs or legitimes under Canadian law. associate, who proposed to him a transaction which
Who should prevail? Why? (2001 BAR) took him to Moscow. Felipe brokered a contract
between Sydney Coals Corp. (Coals), an Australian firm,
A: The daughter should prevail because Art. 16 of the New and Moscow Energy Corp. (Energy), a Russian firm,
Civil Code provides that intestate and testamentary for Coals to supply coal to Energy on a monthly
succession shall be governed by the national law of the basis for three years. Both these firms were not
person whose succession is under consideration. doing, and still do not do, business in the Philippines.
Felipe shuttled between Sydney and Moscow to close
Q: Felipe and Felisa, both Filipino citizens, were the contract. He also executed in Sydney a
married in Malolos, Bulacan on June 1, 1950. In 1960, commission contract with Coals and in Moscow with
Felipe went to the United States, becoming a US citizen Energy, under which contracts he was guaranteed
in 1975. In 1980, he obtained a divorce from Felisa, commissions by both firms based on a percentage of
who was duly notified of the proceedings. The divorce deliveries for the three-year period, payable in Sydney
decree became final under Califronia law. Coming back and in Moscow, respectively, through deposits in
to the Philippines in 1982, Felipe married Segundina, a accounts that he opened in the two cities. Both firms
Filipino citizen. In 2001, Felipe, then domiciled in Los paid Felipe his commission for four months, after
Angeles, California, died, leaving one child by Felisa, which they stopped paying him. Felipe learned from
and another one by Segundina. He left a will which was his contacts, who are residents of Sydney and
executed in Manila under which he left his estate to Moscow, that the two firms talked to each other and
Segundina and his two children and nothing to Felisa. decided to cut him off. He now files suit in Manila
against both Coals and Energy for specific
Segundina files a petition for the probate of Felipe’s performance.
will. Felisa questions the intrinsic validity of the will,
arguing that her marriage to Felipe subsisted despite A. Define or explain the principle of “lex loci
the divorce obtained by Felipe because said divorce is contractus”
not recognized in the Philippines. For this reason, she B. Define or explain the rule of “forum non
claims that the properties left by Felipe are their conveniens”
conjugal properties and that Segundina has no C. Should the Philipine court assume jurisdiction
successional rights. over the case? Explain. (2002 BAR)

A. Is the divorce secured by Felipe in California A:

recognizable and valid in the Philippines? How
does it affect Felipe’s marriage to Felisa? Explain. A. (1) It is the law of the place where contrats, wills, and
B. What law governs the formalities of the will? other public instruments are executed and governs
Explain. their “forms and solemnities”, pursuant to the first
C. Will Philippine law govern the intrinsic validity of paragraph, Article 17 of the New Civil Code; or
the will? Explain. (2002 BAR) (2) It is the proper law of the contract; i.e. the system
of law intended to govern the entire contract,
A: including its essential requisites, indicating the law of
the place with which the contract has its closest
A. (1) The divorce secured by Felipe in California is connection or where the main elements of the contract
recognizable and valid in the Philippines because he converge, as illustrated by Zalamea v. Court of Appeals
was no longer a Filipino at the time he secured it. (228 SCRA 23 [1993]), it is the law of the place where
Aliens may obtain divorces abroad which may be the airline ticket was issued, where the passengers are
recognized in the Philippines provided that they are nationals and residents of, and where the defendant
valid according to their national law (Van Dorn v. airline company maintained its office.
Romillo, Jr., 139 SCRA 139 [1985]; Quita v. Court of B. Forum non conveniens means that a court has
Appeals, 300 SCRA 406 [1998]; Llorente v. Court of discretionary authority to decline jurisdiction over a
Appeals, 345 SCRA 592 [2002]). cause of action when it is of the view that the action
(2) With respect to Felipe the divorce is valid, but with may be justly and effectively adjudicated elsewhere.
respect to Felisa it is not. The divorce will not C. No, the Philippine courts cannot acquire jurisdiction
capacitate Felisa to remarry because she and Felipe over the case of Felipe. Firstly, under the rule of forum
were both Filipino at the time of their marriage. non conveniens, the Philippine court is not a
However, in DOJ Opinion No. 134 series of 1993, Felisa convenient forum as all the incidents of the case
is allowed to remarry because the injustice sought to occurred outside the Philippines. Neither are both
be corrected by Article 26 also obtains in her case. Coals and Energy doing business inside the
Philippines. Secondly, the contracts were not
B. The foreigner who executes his will in the Philippine perfected in the Philippines. Under the principle of lex
may observe the formalities prescribed in: loci contractus, the law of the place where the contract
1) The law of the country of which he is a citizen is made shall apply. Lastly, the Philippine court has no
under Art. 817 of the NCC, or power to determine the facts surrounding the

UST BAR OPERATIONS 4

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
execution of said contracts. And even if a proper prescriptive period should be applied: one year
decision could be reached, such would have no binding under Philippine law, two years under HI’s law, ten
effect on Coals and Energy as the court was not able to years under U.S. federal law, or none of the above?
acquire jurisdiction over the said corporations Explain. (2004 BAR)
(Manila Hotel Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 120077, October
13, 2000). A:

Q: Gene and Jane, Filipinos, met and got married in A. The civil status of PH and LV will not be adversely
England while both were taking up post graduate affected by Philippine law because they are nationals
courses there. A few years after their graduation, they of Hong Kong and not Filipino citizens.
decided to annul their marriage. Jane filed an action to
annul her marriage to Gene in England on the ground Being foreigners, their status, conditions and legal
of the latter’s sterility, a ground for annulment of capacity in the Philippines are governed by the law of
marriage in England. The English court decreed the Hong Kong, the country of which they are citizens.
marriage annulled. Returning to the Philippines, Gene Since their marriage is valid under Hong Kong law, it
asked you whether or not he would now be free to shall be valid and respected in the Philippines.
marry his former girlfriend. What would your legal
advice be? (2003 BAR) B. The US Court should apply US law, the law of the
forum, in determining the applicable prescriptive
A: No, Gene is not free to marry his former girlfriend. His period. While US law is silent on this matter, the US
marriage to Jane if valid according to the forms and Court will not apply Philippine law in determining the
solemnities of British law, is valid here (Art. 17, 1st par., prescriptive period. It is generally affirmed as a
NCC). However, since Gene and Jane are still Filipinos, principle in private international law that procedural
although living in England, the dissolution of their law is one of the exceptions to the application of
marriage is still governed by Philippine law (Art. 15, NCC). foreign law by the forum. Since prescription is a
Since, sterility is not one of the grounds for the annulment matter of procedural law even in Philippine
of a marriage under Art. 45 of the Family Code, the jurisprudence (Codal in v. POEA/ JVLRC/Broum and
annulment of Gene’s marriage to Jane on that ground is not Root International, G.R. No. L-104776, December 5,
valid in the Philippines (Art. 17, par., NCC). 1994), the US Court will apply either HI or Federal law
in determining the applicable prescriptive period and
Q: not Philippine law. The Restatement of American law
affirms this principle.
A. PH and LV are HK Chinese. Their parents are now
Filipino citizens who live in Manila. While still Q:
students in MNS State, they got married although A. A Filipino couple, Mr. And Mrs. BM Jr., decided to
they are first cousins. It appears that both in HK adopt YV, an orphan from St. Claire’s orphanage in
and MNS State first cousins could marry legally. New York City. They loved and treated her like a
They plan to reside and set up business in the legitimate child for they have none of their very
Philippines. But they have been informed, own. However, BM, Jr., died in an accident at sea,
however, that the marriage of first cousins here is followed to the grave a year later by his sick father,
considered void from the beginning by reason of BM, Sr. Each left a sizable estate consisting of bank
public policy. They are in a dilemma. They don’t deposits, lands and buildings in Manila. May the
want to break Philippine Law, much less their adopted child, YV, inherit from BM, Jr.? May she
marriage vow. They seek your advice on whether also inherit from BM, Sr.? Is there a difference?
their civil status will be adversely affected by Why? Explain.
Philippine domestic law? What is your advice? B. Mr. XT and Mrs. YT have been married for 20
B. In a class suit for damages, plaintiffs claimed they years. Suppose the wife, YT, died childless,
suffered injuries from torture during martial law. survived only by her husband, XT. What would be
The suit was filed upon President EM’s arrival on the share of XT from her estate as inheritance?
exile in HI, a U.S. state. The court in HI awarded Why? Explain.
plaintiffs the equivalent of P100 billion under the (2004 BAR)
U.S. law on alien tort claims. On appeal, EM’s
Estate raised the issue of prescription. It argued A:
that since said U.S. law is silent on the matter, the
court should apply: (1) HI’s law setting a two- A. YV can inherit from BM, Jr.
year limitation on tort claims; or (2) the
Philippine law which appears to require that The succession to the estate of VM, Jr. Is governed
claims for personal injury arising from martial by Philippine law because he was a Filipino when
law be brought within one year. he died (Art. 16, Civil Code). Under Art. 1039 of the
Civil Code, the capacity of the heir to succeed is
Plaintiffs countered that provisions of the most governed by the national law of the decedent and
analogous federal statute, the Torture Victims not by the national law of the heir. Hence, whether
Protection Act, should be applied. It sets ten years or not YV can inherit from BM, Jr. is determined by
as the period for prescription. Moreover, they Philippine law. Under Philippine law, the adopted
argued that equity could toll the statute of inherits from the adopter as a legitimate child of
limitations. For it appeared that EM had the adopter.
procured Constitutional amendments granting
himself and those acting under his direction YV, however, cannot inherit in his own right, from
immunity from suit during his tenure. the father of the adopter, BM, Sr., because he is not
a legal heir of BM, Sr. The legal fiction of adoption
In this case, has prescription set in or not? exists only between the adopted and the adopter.
Considering the differences in the cited laws, which (Teotico v. Del Val, 13 SCRA 406, [1965]). Neither
5
 CIVIL LAW
may he inherit from BM, Sr. by representing BM, a vessel of Norwegian registry, Norwegian law applies.
Jr. Because in representation, the representative If the Ship Captain has authority to solemnize the
must be a legal heir not only of the person he is marriage aboard his ship, the marriage is valid and
representing but also of the decedent from whom shall be recognized in the Philippines.
the represented was supposed to inherit (Art. 973,
Civil Code) As to the second question, if Boni is still a Filipino,
B. Under the Civil Code, the widow or widower is a Anne can file an action for declaration of nullity of her
legal and compulsory heir of the deceased spouse. marriage to him.
If the widow is the only surviving heir, there being
no legitimate ascendants, descendants, brothers, B. In so far as the properties of the decedent located in
and sisters, nephews and nieces, she gets the the Philippines are concerned, they are governed by
entire estate. Philippine law (Art. 16, Civil Code). Under the
Philippine law, the proper venue for the settlement of
Q: the estate is the domicile of the decedent at the time of
his death. Since the decedent last resided in Cebu City,
A. Boni and Anne met while working overseas. They that is the proper venue for the intestate settlement of
became sweethearts and got engaged to be his estate. However, the successional rights to the
married on New Year’s Eve aboard a cruise ship in estate of ADIL are governed by Pakistani law, his
the Caribbean. They took the proper license to national law, under Art. 16 of the Civil Code.
marry in New York City, where there is a Filipino
consulate. But as planned the wedding ceremony Q: In 1985, Sonny and Lulu, both Filipino citizens, were
was officiated by the captain of the Norwegian- married in the Philippines. In 1987, they separated,
registered vessel in a private suite among selected and Sonny went to Canada, where he obtained a
friends. divorce in the same year. He then married another
Filipina, Auring, in Canada on January 1, 1988. They
Back in Manila, Anne discovered that Boni had had two sons, James and John. In 1990, after failing to
been married in Bacolod City 5 years earlier but hear from Sonny, Lulu married Tirso, by whom she
divorced in Oslo only last year. His first wife was had a daughter, Verna. In 1991, Sonny visited the
also a Filipina but now based in Sweden. Boni Philippines where he succumbed to heart attack.
himself is a resident of Norway where he and Anne
plan to live permanently. a) Discuss the effect of the divorce obtained by Sonny
and Lulu in Canada
Anne retains your services to advise her on b) Explain the status of the marriage between Sonny
whether her marriage to Boni is valid under and Auring (2005 BAR)
Philippine law? Is there anything else she should
do under the circumstances? A:

B. In his lifetime, a Pakistani citizen, ADIL, married a) The divorce obtained by Sonny in Canada was not
three times under Pakistani law. When he died an valid because he and his wife were both Filipino
old widower, he left behind six children, two citizens. Divorce between a Filipino couple is not valid
sisters, three homes and an estate worth at least under Philippine law even though they are living
30 million pesos in the Philippines. He was born in abroad.
Lahore but last resided in Cebu City where he had b) Since the divorce obtained by Sonny was void, his
a mansion and where two of his youngest children marriage to Auring is necessarily void ab initio
now live and work. Two of his oldest children are because of his subsisting marriage to Lulu. (Art. 41,
farmers in Sulu, while the two middle-aged Family Code)
children are employees in Zamboanga City.
Finding that the deceased left no will, the youngest Q: Roberta, a Filipino, 17 years of age, without the
son wanted to file intestate proceedings before the knowledge of his parents, can acquire a house in
Regional Trial Court of Cebu City. Two other Australia because Australian Laws allow aliens to
siblings objected, arguing that it should be in Jolo acquire property from the age of 16. (2007 BAR)
before a Shari’a court since his lands are in Sulu.
But Adil’s sisters in Pakistan want the proceedings A: TRUE. Since Australian Law allows alien to acquire
held in Lahore before a Pakistani court. property from the age of 16, Roberta may validly own a
house in Australia, following the principle of lex rei sitae
Which court has jurisdiction and is the proper enshrined in Art. 16, which states "Real property as well as
venue for the intestate proceedings? The law of personal property is subject to the law of the country
which country shall govern succession to his where it is situated." Moreover, even assuming that the
estate? (2004 BAR) legal capacity of Roberta in entering the contract in
Australia is governed by Philippine Law, she will acquire
A: ownership over the property bought until the contract is
annulled.
A. If Boni is still a Filipino citizen, his legal capacity is
governed by Philippine Law (Art. 15 Civil Code). Under Q: Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and
Philippine law, his marriage to Anne is void because of employees of the U.S. State Department, got married in
a prior existing marriage which was not dissolved by the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for
the divorce decreed in Oslo. Divorce obtained abroad annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were
by Filipino is not recognized. assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first year
If Boni was no longer a Filipino citizen, the divorce is of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita
valid. Hence, his marriage to Anne is valid if celebrated filed an annulment case against Emmanuel before a
in accordance with the law of the place where it was Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s
celebrated. Since the marriage was celebrated aboard sterility at the time of the celebration of the marriage.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 6

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
probate is whether or not the will was executed in
Will the suit prosper? Explain your answer. (2009 BAR) accordance with the form prescribed by the law
observed by the testator in the execution of his will. For
A: No, the suits will not prosper. As applied to foreign purposes of probate in the Philippines, an alien testator
nationals with respect to family relations and status of may observe the law of the place where the will was
persons, the nationality principle set forth in Art. 15 will executed (Art. 17), or the formalities of the law of the
govern the relations of Emmanuel and Margarita. Since they place where he resides, or according to the formalities
are American citizens, the governing law as to the ground of the law of his own country, or in accordance with the
for annulment is not Kenyan Law which Magarita invokes in Philippine Civil Code (Art. 816). Since Dr. Fuentes
support of sterility as such ground; but should be U.S. Law, executed his will in accordance with the Philippine law,
which is the national Law of both Emmanuel and Margarita the Philippine court shall apply the New Civil Code in
as recognized under Philippine Law. Hence, the Philippine determining the formal validity of the holographic will.
court will not give due course to the case based on Kenyan The subsequent change in the citizenship of Dr. Fuentes
Law. The nationality principle as expressed in the did not affect the law governing the validity of his will.
application of national law of foreign nationals by Philippine Under the New Civil Code, which was the law used by
courts is established by precedents (Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, Dr. Fuentes, the law enforced at the time of execution of
G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989; Garcia v. Recio, G.R. No. the will shall govern the formal validity of the will (Art.
138322, October 2, 2001; Llorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. 795).
No. 124371, November 23, 2000; and Bayot v. Court of b) No, Jay cannot insist because under New York law he is
Appeals, G.R. No. 155635, November 7, 2008). not a compulsory heir entitled to a legitime. The
national law of the testator determines who his heirs
Q: If Ligaya, a Filipino citizen residing in the United are, the order that they succeed, how much their
States, files a petition for change of name before the successional rights are, and whether or not a
District Court of New York, what law shall apply? testamentary disposition in his will is valid (Art 16).
Explain. (2009 BAR) Since, Dr. Fuentes was a US citizen, the laws of the New
York determines who his heirs are. And since the New
A: New York law shall apply. The petition of change of name York law does not recognize the concept of compulsory
filed in New York does not concern the legal capacity or heirs, Jay is not a compulsory heir of Dr. Fuentes
status of the petitioner. Moreover, it does not affect the entitled to a legitime.
registry of any other country including the country of birth
of the petitioner. However, whatever judgment is rendered Q: Ted, married to Annie, went to Canada to work. Five
in that petition will have effect only in New York. The New (5) years later, Ted became a naturalized Canadian
York court cannot, for instance, order the Civil Registrar in citizen. He returned to the Philippines to convince
the Philippines to change its records. The judgment of the Annie to settle in Canada. Unfortunately, Ted
New York court allowing a change in the name of the discovered that Annie and his friend Louie were
petitioner will be limited to the records of the petitioner in having an affair. Deeply hurt, Ted returned to Canada
New York and the use of her new name in all transactions in and filed a petition for divorce which was granted. In
New York. Since the records and processes in New York are December 2013, Ted decided to marry his childhood
the only ones affected, the New York court will apply New friend Corazon in the Philippines. In preparation for
York law in resolving the petition. the wedding, Ted went to the Local Civil Registry of
Quezon City where his marriage contract with Annie
Q: The doctrine of "processual presumption" allows the was registered. He asked the Civil Register to annotate
court of the forum to presume that the foreign law the decree of divorce on his marriage contract with
applicable to the case is the same as the local or Annie. However, he was advised by the National
domestic law. (2009 BAR) Statistics Office (NSO) to file a petition for judicial
A: TRUE. If the foreign law necessary to the resolve an issue recognition of the decree of divorce in the Philippines.
is not proven as a fact, the court of the forum may presume
that the foreign law is the same as the law of the forum. Is it necessary for Ted to file a petition for judicial
recognition of the decree of divorce he obtained in
Q: On December 1, 2000, Dr. Juanito Fuentes executed a Canada before he can contract a second marriage in
holographic will, wherein he gave nothing to his the Philippines? (2014 BAR)
recognized illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the
United States, passed the New York medical licensure A: Yes, a divorce decree even if validly obtained abroad
examinations, resided therein, and became a cannot have effect in the Philippines unless it is judicially
naturalized American citizen. He died in New York in recognized through an appropriate petition filed before
2007. The laws of New York do not recognize Philippine courts. The foreigner must file a petition under
holographic wills or compulsory heirs. Rule 108 and prove therein the fact of divorce by
presenting an official copy attested by the officer having
a) Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be admitted custody of the original. He must also prove that the court
to probate in the Philippines? Why or why not? which issued the divorce has jurisdiction to issue it and the
b) Assuming that the will is probated in the law of the foreign country on divorce (Corpuz v. Sto.
Philippines, can Jay validly insist that he be given Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010).
his legitime? Why or why not? (2009 BAR)

A: II. HUMAN RELATIONS (ARTS. 19-22, CIVIL CODE)

a) Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes may be

admitted to probate in the Philippines because there is HUMAN RELATIONS (1996 BAR)
no public policy violated by such probate. The only
issue at probate is the due execution of the will which Q: Rosa was leasing an apartment in the city. Because
includes the formal validity of the will. As regards of the Rent Control Law, her landlord could not
formal validity, the only issue the court will resolve at
7
 CIVIL LAW
increase the rental as much as he wanted to, nor was void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they
terminate her lease as long as she was paying her rent. had not given their consent to the marriage of their
In order to force her to leave the premises, the son; (b) there was no marriage license; (c) the
landlord stopped making repairs on the apartment, solemnizing officer had no authority to perform the
and caused the water and electricity services to be marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing officer did not file
disconnected. The difficulty of living without an affidavit of marriage with the proper civil registrar.
electricity and running water resulted in Rosa's Does Irma have any successional rights at all?
suffering a nervous breakdown. She sued the landlord Discuss fully. (1995, 1999 BAR)
for actual and moral damages. Will the action prosper?
Explain. (1996 BAR) A: Irma succeeded to the estate of Isidro as his surviving
spouse to the estate of her legitimate child. When Isidro
A: Yes, based on quasi-delict under the human relations died, he was succeeded by his surviving wife Irma, and his
provisions of the New Civil Code (Arts. 19, 20 and 21) legitimate unborn child. They divided the estate equally
because the act committed by the lessor is contrary to between them, the child excluding the parents of Isidro. An
morals. Moral damages are recoverable under Art. 2219 unborn child is considered born for all purposes favorable
(10) in relation to Art. 21. Although the action is based on to it provided it is born later. The child was considered born
quasi-delict and not on contract, actual damages may be because, having an intra-uterine life of more than seven
recovered if the lessee is able to prove the losses and months, it lived for a few minutes after its complete
expenses she suffered. delivery. It was legitimate because it was born within
the valid marriage of the parents. Succession is favorable
to it. When the child died, Irma inherited the share of the
PART II – PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS child. However, the share of the child in the hands of
Irma is subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the
relatives of the child within the third degree of
I. PERSONS AND PERSONALITY (CIVIL CODE) consanguinity and who belong to the line of Isidro.

Civil Personality (1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2008, 2009, Q: Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died
2012 BAR) in a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died first.
Jaime’s only surviving heir is his wife, Julia, who is also
Q: Ricky donated P 1 Million to the unborn child of his Willy’s mother. Willy’s surviving heirs are his mother,
pregnant girlfriend, which she accepted. After six (6) Julia and his wife, Wilma.
months of pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized
as Angela. However, Angela died 20 hours after birth. 1. In the settlement of Jaime’s estate, can Wilma
Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million. Is Ricky successfully claim that her late husband, Willy had
entitled to recover? Explain. (2012 BAR) a hereditary share since he was much younger
than his father and, therefore, should be presumed
A: Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the P1,000,000.00. The to have survived longer?
NCC considers a fetus is considered a person for purposes 2. Suppose Jaime had a life insurance policy with his
favorable to it provided it is born later in accordance with wife, Julia, and his son, Willy, as the beneficiaries.
the provision of the NCC. While the donation is favorable Can Wilma successfully claim that one-half of the
to the fetus, the donation did not take effect because the proceeds should belong to Willy’s estate? (1998
fetus was not born in accordance with the NCC. BAR)

To be considered born, the fetus that had an intrauterine A:

life of less than seven (7) months should live for 24 hours
from its complete delivery from the mother’s womb. Since 1. No, Wilma cannot successfully claim that Willy had a
Angela had an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) hereditary share in his father’s estate. Under Art. 43,
months but did not live for 24 hours, she was not Civil Code, two persons “who are called to succeed
considered born and, therefore, did not become a person each other” are presumed to have died at the same
(Art. 41). Not being a person, she has no juridical capacity time, in the absence of proof as to which of them died
to be a donee, hence, the donation to her did not take first. This presumption of simultaneous death applies
effect. The donation not being effective, the amount in cases involving the question of succession as
donated may be recovered. To retain it will be unjust between the two who died, who in this case are
enrichment. mutual heirs, being father and son.
2. Yes, Wilma can invoke the presumption of
Q: Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were survivorship and claim that one-half of the proceeds
passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The should belong to Willy’s estate, under Sec. 3 (jj) par. 5
plane they boarded was of Philippine registry. Rule 131, Rules of Court, as the dispute does not
While en route from Manila to Greece some involve succession. Under this presumption, the
passengers hijacked the plane, held the chief pilot person between the ages of 15 and 60 years is deemed
hostage at the cockpit and ordered him to fly instead to have survived one whose age was over 60 at the
to Libya. During the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart time of their deaths. The estate of Willy endowed with
attack and was on the verge of death. Since Irma was juridical personality stands in place and stead of Willy,
already eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded as beneficiary.
to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to
solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after the Q: Elated that her sister who had been married for five
marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in years was pregnant for the first time, Alma donated
Libya Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few P100, 000.00 to the unborn child. Unfortunately, the
minutes after complete delivery. Back in the baby died one hour after delivery. May Alma recover the
Philippines, Irma Immediately filed a claim for P100, 000.00 that she had donated to said baby before it
inheritance. The parents of Isidro opposed her claim was born considering that the baby died? Stated
contending that the marriage between her and Isidro

UST BAR OPERATIONS 8

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
otherwise, is the donation valid and binding? Explain. other half will be inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna as
(1999 BAR) the reservatarios of the reserved property inherited by
A: The donation is valid and binding, being an act favorable Mrs. Luna from her child.
to the unborn child, but only if the baby had an intra uterine
life of not less than seven months and provided there was When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and the
due acceptance of the donation by the proper person unborn child. The unborn child inherited because the
representing said child. If the child had less than seven inheritance was favorable to it and it was born alive later
months of intra-uterine life, it is not deemed born since it though it lived only for five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half
died less than 24 hours following its delivery, in which case of the 10 Million estate while the unborn child inherited
the donation never became effective since the donee never the other half. When the child died, it was survived by its
became a person, birth being determinative of personality. mother, Mrs. Luna. As the only heir, Mrs. Luna inherited,
by operation of law, the estate of the child consisting of its
Q: Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, who are childless, met with a 5 Million inheritance from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs.
serious motor vehicle accident with Mr. Cruz at the Luna, what she inherited from her child was subject to
wheel and Mrs. Cruz seated beside him, resulting in reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of the child
the instant death of Mr. Cruz. Mrs. Cruz was still alive within the third degree of consanguinity and who belong
when help came but she also died on the way to the to the family of Mr. Luna, the line where the property came
hospital. The couple acquired properties worth One from.
Million (P1, 000, 000.00) Pesos during their marriage,
which are being claimed by the parents of both When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her parents as
spouses in equal shares. her only heirs. Her parents will inherit her estate
consisting of the 5 Million she inherited from Mr. Luna.
a) Is the claim of both sets of parents valid and why? The other 5 Million she inherited from her child will be
b) Suppose in the preceding question, both Mr. And delivered to the parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the
Mrs. Cruz were already dead when help came, so reserved property.
that nobody could say who died ahead of the other,
would your answer be the same to the question as In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will go to the
to who are entitled to the properties of the parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other 5 Million Pesos will
deceased couple? (1999 BAR) go to the parents of Mr. Luna as reservatarios.

A: Q: Cristy and her late husband Luis had two children,

Rose and Patrick. One summer, her mother-in-law, aged
a) No, the claim of both parents is not valid. When Mr. 70, took the two children, then aged 10 and 12, with her
Cruz died, he was succeeded by his wife and his on a boat trip to Cebu. Unfortunately, the vessel sank en
parents as his intestate heirs who will share his estate route, and the bodies of the three were never found.
equally. His estate was 0.5 Million pesos which is his None of the survivors ever saw them on the water. On
half share in the absolute community amounting to 1 the settlement of her mother-in-law's estate, Cristy files
Million Pesos. His wife, will, therefore, inherit O.25 a claim for a share of her estate on the ground that the
Million Pesos and his parents will inherit 0.25 Million same was inherited by her children from their
Pesos. grandmother in representation of their father, and she
inherited the same from them. Will her action prosper?
When Mrs. Cruz died, she was succeeded by her (2000 BAR)
parents as her intestate heirs. They will inherit all of
her estate consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the A: No, her action will not prosper. Since there was no proof
absolute community and her 0.25 Million inheritance as to who died first, all the three are deemed to have died at
from her husband, or a total of 0.750 Million Pesos. the same time and there was no transmission of rights from
one to another, applying Art. 43 of the NCC.
In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit 250, 000
Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz will inherit 750, Q: If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were to
000 Pesos. suffer an abortion following a vehicular accident
b) This being a case of succession, in the absence of proof due to the gross negligence of the bus driver, may
as to the time of death of each of the spouses, it is she and her husband claim damages from the bus
presumed they died at the same time and no company for the death of their unborn child? Explain.
transmission of rights from one to the other is deemed (2003, 2014 BAR)
to have taken place. Therefore, each of them is deemed
to have an estate valued at P500, 000, or one-half of A: No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages in the
their conjugal property of P1 million. Their respective form of indemnity for the loss of life of the unborn child.
parents will thus inherit the entire P1 million in equal This is because the unborn child is not yet considered a
shares, or P500, 000.00 per set of parents. person and the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of
person. The mother, however may recover damages for the
Q: Mr. Luna died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (P10, bodily injury she suffered from the loss of the fetus which
000, 000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth to a child is considered part of her internal organ. The parents may
four months after Mr, Luna's death, but the child died also recover damages for injuries that are inflicted
five hours after birth. Two days after the child's death, directly upon them, e.g., moral damages for mental
the widow of Mr. Luna also died because she had anguish that attended the loss of the unborn child. Since
suffered from difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr. there is gross negligence, exemplary damages can also be
Luna is now being claimed by his parents, and the recovered (Geluz v. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961).
parents of his widow. Who is entitled to Mr. Luna'a
estate and why? (1999 BAR) Q: At age 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant.
She insured her own life and named her unborn child
A: Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the parents of as her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to
Mrs. Luna as their inheritance from Mrs. Luna, while the give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father of
9
 CIVIL LAW
her unborn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Q: Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and his son
Bataan where they were vacationing. The military Roberto both died in a fire that gutted their home
gave chase and after one week, they were found in an while they were sleeping in their air-conditioned
abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were rooms. Roberto’s wife, Marilyn, and their two children
hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby were both were spared because they were in the province at the
found dead, with the baby's umbilical cord already cut. time. Dr. Lopez left an estate worth P20M and a life
Pietro survived. insurance policy in the amount of P1M with his three
children --- one of whom is Roberto --- as beneficiaries.
a) Can Marian's baby be the beneficiary of the Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her children
insurance taken on the life of the mother? (1999, her husband’s share in the estate left by Dr. Lopez, and
2012 BAR) her husband’s share in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life
b) Between Marian and the baby, who is presumed to insurance policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s
have died ahead? claims with reasons. (1999, 2009 BAR)
c) Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of the
baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds of the life A: As to the estate of Dr. Lopez:
insurance on the life of Marian? (2008 BAR)
Marilyn is not entitled to a share in the estate of Dr.
A: Lopez. For purposes of succession, Dr. Lopez and his
son Roberto are presumed to have died at the same
a) Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the life time, there being no evidence to prove otherwise, and
insurance of Marian. Art. 40 of the FC provides that there shall be no transmission of rights from one to the
"birth determines personality; but the conceived child other (Article 43). Hence, Roberto inherited nothing
shall be considered born for all purposes that are from his father that Marilyn would in turn inherit from
favorable to it, provided that it be born later with the Roberto. The children of Roberto, however, will
conditions specified in Art. 41. Article 41 states that succeed their grandfather, Dr. Lopez, in representation
"for civil purposes, the fetus shall be considered born of their father Roberto and together will receive 1/3 of
if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the estate of Dr. Lopez since their father Roberto was
the mother's womb. However, if the fetus had an intra- one of the three children of Dr. Lopez. Marilyn cannot
uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed represent her husband Roberto because the right is not
born if it dies within twenty-four (24) hours after its given by law to a surviving spouse.
complete delivery from the maternal womb. The act of
naming the unborn child as sole beneficiary in the As to the proceeds of the insurance on the life of Dr.
insurance is favorable to the conceived child and Lopez:
therefore the fetus acquires presumptive or
provisional personality. However, said presumptive Since succession is not involved as regards the
personality only becomes conclusive if the child is insurance contract, the provisions of the Rules of Court
born alive. The child need not survive for twenty-four on survivorship shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez,
(24) hours as required under Art. 41 of the Code who was 70 years old, is presumed to have died ahead
because "Marian was already due to give birth," of Roberto, who is presumably between the ages of 15
indicating that the child was more than seven months and 60. Having survived the insured, Roberto’s right as
old. a beneficiary became vested upon the death of Dr.
b) If the baby was not alive when completely delivered Lopez. When Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to
from the mother’s womb, it was not born as a person, receive the insurance proceeds became part of his
then the question of who between two persons hereditary estate, which in turn was inherited in equal
survived will not be an issue. Since the baby had an shares by his legal heirs, namely, his spouse and
intra-uterine life of more than 7 months, it would be children. Therefore, Roberto’s children and his spouse
considered born if it was alive, at the time of its are entitled to Roberto’s one-third share in the
complete delivery from the mother’s womb. We can insurance proceeds.
gather from the facts that the baby was completely
delivered. But whether or not it was alive has to be MARRIAGE
proven by evidence.
Formal and Essential Requisites of Marriage (1994,
If the baby was alive when completely delivered from 1995, 1996, 1999, 2009, 2016 BAR)
the mother’s womb, then it was born as a person and
the question of who survived as between the baby and Q: Brad and Angelina had a secret marriage before a
the mother shall be resolved by the provisions of the pastor whose office is located in Arroceros Street, City of
Rules of Court on survivorship. This is because the Manila. They paid money to the pastor who took care of
question has nothing to do with succession. Obviously, all the documentation. When Angelina wanted to go to
the resolution of the question is needed just for the the U.S., she found out that there was no marriage
implementation of an insurance contract. Under Rule license issued to them before their marriage. Since their
13, Sec. 3, (jj), (5) as between the baby who was under marriage was solemnized in 1995 after the effectivity of
15 years old and Marian who was 18 years old, Marian the Family Code, Angelina filed a petition for judicial
is presumed to have survived. declaration of nullity on the strength of a certification by
the Civil Registrar of Manila that, after a diligent and
In both cases, therefore, the baby never acquired any exhaustive search, the alleged marriage license
right under the insurance policy. The proceeds of the indicated in the marriage certificate does not appear in
insurance will then go to the estate of Marian. the records and cannot be found.

c) Since the baby did not acquire any right under the 1. Decide the case and explain.
insurance contract, there is nothing for Pietro to 2. In case the marriage was solemnized in 1980 before
inherit. the effectivity of the Family Code, is it required that

UST BAR OPERATIONS 10

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
a judicial petition be filed to declare the marriage
null and void? Explain. (2016 BAR) A:

A: 1. The marriage is valid. The irregularity in the

issuance of a valid license does not adversely affect
1. I will grant the petition for judicial declaration of nullity the validity of the marriage. The marriage license is
of Brad and Angelina’s marriage on the ground that valid because it was in fact issued by a Civil Registrar
there is a lack of marriage license. Article 3 of the Family (Arts. 3 and 4, FC).
Code provides that one of the formal requisites of 2. No, the answer would not be the same. The marriage
marriage is a valid marriage license and Article 4 of the would be void because of the absence of a formal
same Code states that absence of any of the essential or requisite. In such a case, there was actually no valid
formal requisites shall render the marriage void ab marriage license.
initio. In Abbas v. Abbas [689 SCRA 646 (2013)], the
Supreme Court declared the marriage as void ab initio Q: In December 2000, Michael and Anna, after
because there is proof of lack of record of marriage obtaining a valid marriage license, went to the Office of
license. the Mayor of Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The
The certification by the Civil Registrar of Manila that, Mayor was not there, but the Mayor’s secretary asked
after diligent and exhaustive search, the alleged Michael and Anna and their witnesses to fill up and
marriage license indicated in the marriage certificate sign the required marriage contract forms. The
does not appear in the records and cannot be found secretary then told them to wait, and went out to look
proves that the marriage of Brad and Angelina was for the Mayor who was attending a wedding in a
solemnized without the requisite marriage license and is neighboring municipality. When the secretary caught
therefore void ab initio. The absence of the marriage up with the Mayor at the wedding reception, she
license was certified to by the local civil registrar who is showed him the marriage contract forms and told him
the official custodian of these documents and who is in that the couple and their witnesses were waiting in his
the best position to certify as to the existence of these office. The Mayor forthwith signed all the copies of the
records. Also, there is a presumption of regularity in the marriage contract, gave them to the secretary who
performance of official duty. (Republic v. CA and Castro, returned to the Mayor’s office. She then gave copies of
236 SCRA 257 [1994]) the marriage contract to the parties, and told Michael
and Anna that they were already married. Thereafter,
2. No, it is not required that a judicial petition be filed to the couple lived together as husband and wife, and had
declare the marriage null and void when said marriage three sons. (2009 BAR)
was solemnized before the effectivity of the Family Code.
As stated in the cases of People v. Mendoza, 95 Phil. 845 a) Is the marriage of Michael and Anna valid,
(1954) and People v. Aragon 100 Phil. 1033 (1957), the voidable, or void? Explain your answer.
old rule is that where a marriage is illegal and void from b) What is the status of the three children of Michael
its performance, no judicial is necessary to establish its and Anna? Explain your answer.
invalidity.
A:
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Irrespective of when the marriage
took place, other than for purposes of remarriage, no judicial a) The marriage is void because of the absence of an
acion is necessary to declare a marriage absolute nullity. For essential and formal requisite, namely consent of the
other purposes, such as but not limitd to determination of parties freely given in the presence of the solemnizing
heirship, legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child, settlement of officer and a marriage ceremony (Art. 2, FC).
estate, dissolution of property regim, or a criminal case for b) The children are illegitimate, having been born outside
that matter, the court may pass upon the validity of marriage a valid marriage.
even in a suit not directly instituted to question the same so
long as it is essential to the determination of the case. This is Q: Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were
without prejudice to any issue that may arise in the case. passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The
When such need arises, a final judgmenet of declaration of plane they boarded was of Philippine registry. While en
nullity is necessary even if the purpose is other than to route from Manila to Greece some passengers hijacked
remarry. The clause on the basis of a final judgment the plane, held the chief pilot hostage at the cockpit and
declaring such previous marriage void in Article 40 of the ordered him to fly instead to Libya. During the hijacking
Family Code connotes that such final judgment need to be Isidro suffered a heart attack and was on the verge of
obtained only for purpose of remarriage. (Ablaza v. Republic, death. Since Irma was already eight months pregnant by
628 SCRA 27 [2010]) Isidro, she pleaded to the hijackers to allow the assistant
pilot to solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after
Q: On Valentine's Day 1996, Ellas and Fely, both single the marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in
and 25 years of age, went to the city hall where they Libya Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few
sought out a fixer to help them obtain a quickie minutes after complete delivery. Back in the Philippines
marriage. For a fee, the fixer produced an ante-dated Irma immediately filed a claim for inheritance. The
marriage license for them, Issued by the Civil parents of Isidro opposed her claim contending that the
Registrar of a small remote municipality. He then marriage between her and Isidro was void ab initio on
brought them to a licensed minister in a restaurant the following grounds:
behind the city hall, and the latter solemnized their
marriage right there and then. a) they had not given their consent to the marriage of
their son;
1. Is their marriage valid, void or voidable? b) there was no marriage license;
Explain. c) the solemnizing officer had no authority to perform
2. Would your answer be the same if it should turn the marriage; and,
out that the marriage license was spurious? Explain. d) the solemnizing officer did not file an affidavit of
(1996, 2008 BAR) marriage with the proper civil registrar.
11
 CIVIL LAW

Resolve each of the contentions (a to d) raised by the Q: Roderick and Faye were high school sweethearts.
parents of Isidro. Discuss fully. (1995 BAR) When Roderick was 18 and Faye, 16 years old, they
started to live together as husband and wife without
A: the benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 years
of age, her parents forcibly took her back and
a) The fact that the parents of Isidro and of Irma did not arranged for her marriage to Brad. Although Faye
give their consent to the marriage did not make the lived with Brad after the marriage, Roderick continued
marriage void ab initio. The marriage is merely voidable to regularly visit Faye while Brad was away at work.
under Art 45 of the Family Code. During their marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl,
b) Absence of marriage license did not make the marriage Laica. When Faye was 25 years old, Brad discovered
void ab initio. Since the marriage was solemnized in her continued liaison with Roderick and in one of their
articulo mortis, it was exempt from the license heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost no
requirement under Art. 31 of the Family Code. time in marrying her true love Roderick, without a
c) On the assumption that the assistant pilot was acting for marriage license, claiming that they have been
and in behalf of the airplane chief who was under continuously cohabiting for more than 5 years. Was
disability, and by reason of the extraordinary and the marriage of Roderick and Faye valid? (2008, 2002
exceptional circumstances of the case, the marriage was BAR)
solemnized by an authorized officer under Art. 7 (3) and
Art. 31 of the Family Code. A: No. The marriage of Roderick and Faye is not valid. Art.
d) Failure of the solemnizing officer to file the affidavit of 4 of the FC provide that the absence of any of the essential
marriage did not affect the validity of the marriage. It is or formal requisites renders the marriage void ab initio.
merely an irregularity which may subject the However, no license shall be necessary for the marriage of
solemnizing officer to sanctions. a man and a woman who have lived together as husband
and wife for at least 5 years and without any legal
Q: What is the status of the following marriages and impediment to marry each other. In Republic v. Dayot (G.R.
why? No. 175581, March 28, 2008), reiterating the doctrine in
Niñal v. Bayadog (G.R. No. 133778, March 14, 2000), this
a) A marriage between two 19-year olds without five-year period is characterized by exclusivity and
parental consent. continuity. In the present case, the marriage of Roderick
b) A marriage between two 21-year olds without and Faye cannot be considered as a marriage of
parental advice. exceptional character, because there were two legal
c) A marriage between two Filipino first cousins in impediments during their cohabitation: minority on the
Spain where such marriage is valid. part of Faye, during the first two years of cohabitation;
d) A marriage between two Filipinos in Hongkong and, lack of legal capacity, since Faye married Brad at the
before a notary public. age of 18. The absence of a marriage license made the
e) A marriage solemnized by a town mayor three marriage of Faye and Roderick void ab initio.
towns away from his jurisdiction. (1999 BAR)
Q:
A: 1) The complete publication of the Family Code was
made on August 4, 1987. On September 4, 1987,
a) The marriage is voidable. The consent of the parties to Junior Cruz and Gemma Reyes were married
the marriage was defective. Being below 21 years old, before a municipal mayor. Was the marriage valid?
the consent of the parties is not full without the 2) Suppose the couple got married on September 1,
consent of their parents. The consent of the parents of 1994 at the Manila Hotel before the Philippine
the parties to the marriage is indispensable for its Consul General to Hongkong, who was on vacation
validity. in Manila. The couple executed an affidavit
b) Between 21-year olds, the marriage is valid despite consenting to the celebration of the marriage at
the absence of parental advice, because such absence the Manila Hotel. Is the marriage valid? (1994
is merely an irregularity affecting a formal requisite BAR)
i.e., the marriage license and does not affect the
validity of the marriage itself. This is without prejudice A:
to the civil, criminal, or administrative liability of the
party responsible therefor. 1) Yes, the marriage is valid. The Family Code took effect
c) By reason of public policy, the marriage between on August 3, 1988. At the time of the marriage on
Filipino first cousins is void (Art. 38, par. 1, FC), and September 4, 1987, municipal mayors were
the fact that it is considered a valid marriage in a empowered to solemnize marriage under the Civil
foreign country in this case, Spain— does not validate Code of 1950.
it, being an exception to the general rule in Art. 26 of 2) a) The marriage is not valid. Consuls and vice-consuls
said Code which accords validity to all marriage are empowered to solemnize marriage between
solemnized outside the Philippine x x x and valid there Philippine citizens abroad in the consular office of the
as such. foreign country to which they were assigned and have
d) It depends. If the marriage before the notary public is no power to solemnize marriage on Philippine soil
valid under Hongkong Law, the marriage is valid in the b) A Philippine consul is authorized by law to
Philippines. Otherwise, the marriage that is invalid in solemnize marriage abroad between Filipino citizens.
Hongkong will be invalid in the Philippines. He has no authority to solemnize a marriage in the
e) VALID. It is jurisprudential that a marriage solemnized Philippines. Consequently, the marriage in question is
by a town mayor outside of his jurisdiction is a mere void, unless either or both of the contracting parties
irregularity and will not invalidate the marriage. believed in good faith that the consul general had
Hence, the marriage solemnized bby a town mayor authority to solemnize their marriage in which case
three towns away from his jurisdiction is a valid the marriage is valid.
marriage.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 12

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Marriage Solemnized/Divorce Obtained Abroad (1992, After Maris received the final judgment of divorce,
1996, 1999, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2016 she married her childhood sweetheart Pedro, also a
BAR) Filipino citizen, in a religious ceremony in Cebu
City, celebrated according to the formalities of
Q: Romeo and Juliet, both Filipinos, got married. After Philippine law. Pedro later left for the United States
a few years, Juliet got word from her mother that she and became naturalized as an American citizen.
can go to the United States for naturalization. Juliet Maris followed Pedro to the United States, and after a
promised she will be back the moment she becomes an serious quarrel, Maris filed a suit and obtained a
American. After sometime, Romeo learned from a divorce decree issued by the court in the state of
friend that Juliet already became a U.S. citizen and Maryland. Maris then returned to the Philippines and
even divorced him to marry a wealthy American in a civil ceremony celebrated in Cebu City
businessman. Romeo filed a petition before the according to the formalities of Philippine law, she
Regional Trial Court praying that an order be issued married her former classmate Vincent likewise a
authorizing him to remarry pursuant to Article 26 of Filipino citizen.
the Family Code. Decide the petition with reasons.
(2016 BAR) a) Was the marriage of Maris and Johnson valid when
celebrated? Is their marriage still validly existing
A: If the time of Juliet’s acquisition of U.S. citizenship now? Reasons.
preceded the time when she obtained the divorce decree, b) Was the marriage of Maris and Pedro valid
then the divorce decree can be given effect in the when celebrated? Is their marriage still validly
Philippines, and consequently, Romeo will be capacitated existing now? Reasons.
to remarry under Philippine law. On the other hand, if c) Was the marriage of Maris and Vincent valid when
Juliet obtained the divorce decree before she acquired U.S. celebrated? Is their marriage still validly existing
citizenship, then the foreign divorce decree cannot be now? Reasons.
recognized by Philippine courts. d) At this point in time, who is the lawful
husband of Maris? Reasons. (1992, 2005 BAR)
Art. 26, par. 2 of the Family Code provides that where a
marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is A:
validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly
obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or a) The marriage of Maris and Johnson was valid when
her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to celebrated because all marriages solmenized outside
remarry under Philippine law. In Republic v. Orbecido (472 the Philippines (Tokyo) in accordance with the laws in
SCRA 114 [2005]), the Supreme Court ruled that Art. 26, force in the country where they are solemnized
par. 2 should be interpreted to include cases involving (Japan), and valid there as such, are also valid in the
parties who, at the time of the celebration of the marriage Philippines.
were Filipino citizens, but later on, one of them becomes
naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a divorce Their marriage no longer validly subsists, because it
decree. The reckoning point is not their citizenship at the has been dissolved by the absolute divorce validly
time of celebration of marriage, but their citizenship at the obtained by Johnson which capacitated Maris to
time the divorce decree is obtained abroad by the alien remarry (Art. 26, Family Code).
spouse capacitating him/her to remarry.
b) The marriage of Maris and Pedro was valid when
Q: Cipriano and Lady Miros married each other. Lady celebrated because the divorce validly obtained by
Miros then left for the US and there, she obtained Johnson in Manila capacitated Maris to marry Pedro.
American citizenship. Cipriano later learned all about
this including the fact that Lady Miros has divorced The marriage of Maris and Pedro is still validly existing
him in America and that she had remarried there. He because the marriage has not been validly dissolved by
then filed a petition for authority to remarry, invoking the Maryland divorce.
Par. 2, Art. 26 of the Family Code. Is Cipriano
capacitated to re-marry by virtue of the divorce decree c) The marriage of Maris and Vincent is void ab initio
obtained by his Filipino spouse who was later because it is a bigamous marriage contracted by Maris
naturalized as an American citizen? Explain. (2012 during the subsistence of her marriage with Pedro
BAR) (Art. 25 and 41, FC).

A: Yes, he is capacitated to re-marry. While the second The marriage of Maris and Vincent does not validly
paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code is applicable exist because Article 26 does not apply. Pedro was
only to a Filipino who married a foreigner at the time of not a foreigner at the time of his marriage with
the marriage, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Maris and the divorce abroad (in Maryland) was
Republic v. Orbecido, GR. No. 154380, October 5, 2005, that initiated and obtained not by the alien spouse, but by
the said provision equally applies to a Filipino who the Filipino spouse. Hence, the Maryland divorce did
married another Filipino, at the time of the marriage, but not capacitate Maris to marry Vincent.
who was already a foreigner when the divorce was
obtained. d) At this point in time, Pedro is still the lawful husband
of Maris because their valid marriage has not been
Q: In 1989, Maris, a Filipino citizen, married her boss dissolved by any valid cause (Art. 26, FC).
Johnson, an American citizen, in Tokyo in a wedding
ceremony celebrated according to Japanese laws. One Q: Flor and Virgilio were married to each other in
year later, Johnson returned to his native Nevada, and Roxas City in 1980. In 1984, Flor was offered a
he validly obtained in that state an absolute divorce teaching job in Canada, which she accepted. In 1989,
from his wife Maris. she applied for and was grantd Canadian citizenship.
The following year, she sued for divorce from Virgilio
in a Canadian court. After Virgilio was served with
13
 CIVIL LAW
summons, the Canadian court tried the case and a) Is the divorce obtained by Wilma from Harry
decreed the divorce. Shortly thereafter, Flor married a recognized in the Philippines? Explain your
Canadian. Can Virgilio marry again in the Philippines? answer.
(1996 BAR) b) If Harry hires you as his lawyer, what legal
A: No, Virgilio cannot validly remarry. His case is not recourse would you advise him to take? Why?
covered by Art. 26 of the Family Code. For said Article to c) Harry tells you that he has fallen in love with
be applicable, the spouse who filed for divorce must be a another woman, Elizabeth, and wants to marry her
foreigner at the time of the marriage. Since both of them because, after all, Wilma is already married to
were Filipinos at the time of the marriage, the divorce Joseph. Can Harry legally marry Elizabeth?
obtained by Flor did not capacitate Virgilio to remarry. The Explain. (1996, 1999, 2009 BAR)
fact that Flo was already an alien at the time she obtained
the divorce does not give Virgilio the capacity to remarry A:
under Philippine Law.
a) Yes, the divorce obtained by Wilma is recognized as
Q: Ben and Eva were both Filipino citizens at the time valid in the Philippines. At the time she got the
of their marriage in 1967. When their marriage turned divorce, she was already a foreign national having
sour, Ben went to a small country in Europe, got been naturalized as a citizen of that “small country in
himself naturalized there, and then divorced Eva in Europe.” Based on precedents established by the
accordance with the law of that country. Later, he Supreme Court (Bayot v. CA, G.R. No. 155635,
returned to the Philippines with his new wife. Eva now November 7, 2008), divorce obtained by a foreigner is
wants to know what action or actions she can file recognized in the Philippines if validly obtained in
against Ben. She also wants to know if she can likewise accordance with his or her national law.
marry again. What advice can you give her? (1999 b) I will advice Harry to:
BAR) 1. Dissolve and liquidate his property relations with
Wilma; and
A: She may remarry. While a strict interpretation of Art. 26 2. If he will remarry, file a petition for the
of the FC would capacitate a Filipino spouse to remarry recognition and enforcement of the foreign
only when the other spouse was a foreigner at the time of judgment of divorce (Rule 39, Rules of Court).
the marriage, the DOJ has issued an opinion (Opinion 134 s. c) Yes, he can validly marry Elizabeth, applying the
of 1993) that the same injustice sought to be cured by doctrine laid down by the Supreme Court in Republic
Article 26 is present in the case of spouses who were both v. Orbecido (427 SCRA 114 [2005]).
Filipino at the time of the marriage but one became an
alien subsequently. Said injustice is the anomaly of Eva Under the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family
remaining married to her husband who is no longer Code, for the Filipino spouse to have capacity to
married to her. Hence, said Opinion makes Art. 26 remarry, the law expressly requires the spouse who
applicable to her case and the divorce obtained abroad by obtained the divorce to be a foreigner at the time of
her former Filipino husband would capacitate her to the marriage. Applying this requirement to the case of
remarry. To contract a subsequent marriage, all she needs Harry, it would seem that he is not given the capacity
to do is present to the civil registrar the decree of divorce to remarry. This is because Wilma was a Filipino at the
when she applies for a marriage license under Art. 13 of time of her marriage to Harry.
the FC.
In Republic v. Orbecido, however, the Supreme Court
Q: Marvin, a Filipino, and Shelley, an American, both ruled that a Filipino spouse is given the capacity to
residents of California, decided to get married in their remarry even though the spouse who obtained the
local parish. Two years after their marriage, Shelley divorce was a Filipino at the time of the marriage, if
obtained a divorce in California. While in Boracay, the latter was already a foreigner when the divorce
Marvin met Manel, a Filipina, who was vacationing was obtained abroad. According to the Court, to rule
there. Marvin fell in love with her. After a brief otherwise will violate the equal protection clause of
courtship and complying with all the requirements, the Constitution.
they got married in Hongkong to avoid publicity, it
being Marvin's second marriage. Is his marriage to Q: True or False. Under Art. 26 of the Family Code,
Manel valid? Explain. (2006 BAR) when a foreign spouse divorces his/her Filipino
spouse, the latter may re-marry by proving only that
A: Yes, the marriage of Marvin and Manel is valid. While the foreign spouse has obtained a divorce against her
Marvin was previously married to Shelley, the divorce from or him abroad. (2010 BAR)
Marvin obtained by Shelley in California capacitated Marvin
to contract the subsequent marriage to Manel under the 2 nd A: FALSE. In Garcia v. Recio, 366 SCRA 437 (2001), the SC
paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code which provides held that for a Filipino spouse to have capacity to contract
that where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a a subsequent marriage, it must also be proven that the
foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter foreign divorce obtained by the foreigner spouse gives
validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him such foreigner spouse capacity to remarry.
or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have
capacity to remarry under Philippine law. Marriages Void ab Initio (1991, 1992, 1993, 1996,
1997, 1998, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2012,
Q: Harry married Wilma, a very wealthy woman. 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 BAR)
Barely five (5) years into the marriage, Wilma fell in
love with Joseph. Thus, Wilma went to a small country Q: Leo married Lina and they begot a son. After the
in Europe, became a naturalized citizen of that bitth of their child, Lina exhibited unusual behavior
country, divorced Harry, and married Joseph. A year and started to neglect her son; she frequently went out
thereafter, Wilma and Joseph returned and with her friends and gambled in casinos. Lina later had
established permanent residence in the Philippines. extra-marital affairs with several men and eventually
abandoned Leo and their son. Leo was able to talk to

UST BAR OPERATIONS 14

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
the psychiatrist of Lina who told him that Lina suffers Ariz became envious of the success of his wife. He
from dementia praecox, a form of psychosis where the started to drink alcohol until he became a drunkard.
afflicted person is prone to commit homicidal attacks. He preferred to join his "barkadas"; became a
Leo was once stabbed by Lina but fortunately he only wifebeater; would hurt his children without any
suffered minor injuries. Will a Petition for Declaration reason; and failed to contribute to the needs of the
of Nullity of Marriage filed with the court prosper? family. Despite rehabilitation and consultation with a
Explain. (2016 BAR) psychiatrist, his ways did not change.

A: No, a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage After 19 years of marriage, Paz, a devout Catholic,
under Art. 36 of the Family Code will not prosper. Even if decided to have their marriage annulled by the church.
taken as true, the grounds alleged are not sufficitent to Through the testimony of Paz and a psychiatrist, it was
declare the marriage void under “psychological found that Ariz was a spoiled brat in his youth and was
incapacity.” In Santos v. CA (240 SCRA 20 [1995]), the sometimes involved in brawls. In his teens, he was
Supreme Court explained that psychological incapacity once referred to a psychiatrist for treatment due to his
must be characterized by (a) gravity, (b) juridical violent tendencies. In due time, the National Appellate
antecedence, and (c) incurability. The illness must be Matrimonial Tribunal (NAMT) annulled the union of
shown as downright incapacity or inability to perform Ariz and Paz due to the failure of Ariz to perform and
one’s marital obligations, not a mere refusal, neglect, fulfill his duties as a husband and as a father to their
difficulty or much less, ill will. children. The NAMT concluded that it is for the best
interest of Paz, Ariz and their children to have the
While Lina was not examined by a physician, the Supreme marriage annulled.
Court has ruled in Marcos v. Marcos (343 SCRA 755 [2000])
that actual medical examination need not be resorted to In view of the NAMT decision, Paz decided to file a
where the totatlity of evidence presented is enough to Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage of their
sustain a finidng of psychological incapacity. However, in civil wedding before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
this case, the pieces of evidence presented are not Makati City using the NAMT decision and the same
sufficient to conclude that indeed Lina is suffering from evidence adduced in the church annulment
psychological incapacity existing already before the proceedings as basis. If you are the judge, will you
marriage, incurable and serious enough to prevent her grant the petition? Explain. (2014 BAR)
from performing her essential marital obligations.
A: If I were the judge, I will not grant the petition. While
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No, a Petition for Declaration of the decision of the church tribunal annulling the marriage
Nullity of Marriage under Art. 36 of the Family Code will of the parties may be persuasive, it is not however, binding
not prosper. However, a Petition for Annulment of upon the civil courts. For psychological incapacity to be a
Marriage under Art. 45 of the Family Code may prosper, on ground for nullity, it must be shown that it was rooted in
the ground of unsound mind, assuming that Lina’s the history of the party alleged to be suffering from it, it
unsound mind existed at the time of the celebration of the must be grave and serious, and incurable such that it
marriage. renders the person incapacitated to perform the essential
marital obligations due to causes psychological in nature.
Q: The petitioner filed a petition for declaration of In the case presented, it appears that Ariz fulfilled his
nullity of marriage based allegedly on the marital obligations at the beginning and it was only after
psychological incapacity of the respondent, but the feeling envious about the success of Paz that he started
psychologist was not able to personally examine the exhibiting violent tendencies and refused to comply with
respondent and the psychological report was based marital obligations. Psychological incapacity is not mere
only on the narration of petitioner. Should the refusal but outright incapacity to perform marital
annulment be granted? Explain. (2012 BAR) obligations which does not appear to be present in the
case of Ariz (Marcos v. Marcos, G.R. No. 136490, October 19,
A: No. The annulment cannot be guaranteed solely on the 2000).
basis of the psychological report. For the report to prove
the psychological incapacity of the respondent, it is Q: Miko and Dinah started to live together as husband
required that the psychologist should personally examine and wife without the benefit of marriage in 1984. Ten
the respondent and the psychological report should be (10) years after, they separated. In 1996, they decided
based on the psychologist’s independent assessment of the to live together again, and in 1998, they got married.
facts as to whether or not the respondent is
psychologically incapacitated. On February 17, 2001, Dinah filed a complaint for
declaration of nullity of her marriage with Miko on the
Since, the psychologist did not personally examine the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of
respondent, and his report is based solely on the story of the Family Code. The court rendered the following
the petitioner who has an interest in the outcome of the decision:
petition, the marriage cannot be annulled on the ground of
respondent’s psychological incapacity if the said report is 1. “Declaring the marriage null and void;
the only evidence of respondent’s psychological incapacity. 2. Dissolving the regime of absolute community of
property; and
Q: Ariz and Paz were officemates at Perlas ng Silangan 3. Declaring that a decree of absolute nullity of
Bank (PSB). They fell in love with each other and had a marriage shall only be issued after liquidation,
civil and church wedding. Meanwhile, Paz rapidly partition and distribution of the parties’
climbed the corporate ladder of PSB and eventually properties under Article 147 of the Family Code."
became its Vice President, while Ariz remained one of
its bank supervisors, although he was short of 12 units Dinah filed a motion for partial reconsideration
to finish his Masters of Business Administration (MBA) questioning the portion of the decision on the issuance
degree. of a decree of nullity of marriage only after the

15
 CIVIL LAW
liquidation, partition and distribution of properties However, the OSG filed an appeal, arguing that sexual
under Article 147 of the Code. infidelity was only a ground for legal separation and
that the RTC failed to abide by the guidelines laid down
If you are the judge, how will you decide petitioner’s in the Molina case. How would you decide the appeal?
motion for partial reconsideration? Why? (2014 BAR) (2015 BAR)

A: I will grant partial reconsideration. If the marriage is A: I will resolve the appeal in favor of the Republic. In the
declared void under Art. 36, the provisions of the Family case of Dedel v. Dedel (G.R. No. 151867, January 29, 2004), the
Code on liquidation, partition, and distribution of the Supreme Court refused to declare the marriage of the
properties on absolute community or conjugal partnership parties void on the ground of sexual infidelity of the wife
will not apply but rather Art. 147 or 148 depending on the Sharon. In the case mentioned, the wife committed infidelity
presence or absence of a legal impediment between them. with several men up to the extent of siring two illegitimate
In Diño v. Diño (G.R. No. 178044, January 19, 2011), the SC children with a foreigner. The court, however, said that it
ruled that Art. 50 of the FC and Section 19 of the Rules on was not shown that the sexual infidelity was a product of a
Declaration of Nullity applies only to marriages which are disordered personality and that it was rooted in the history
declared void ab initio or annulled by final judgment under of the party alleged to be psychologically incapacitated. Also,
Arts. 40 and 45 of the FC. In short, Art. 50 of the FC does the finding of psychological incapacity cannot be based on
not apply to marriages which are declared void ab initio the interviews conducted by the clinical psychologist on the
under Art. 36 of the FC which should be declared void husband or his witnesses and the person alleged to be
without waiting for the liquidation of the properties of the psychologically incapacitated must be personally examined
parties. to arrive at such declaration (Marcos v. Marcos, G.R. No.
136490, October 19, 2000; Agraviador v. Agraviador, G.R. No.
Q: After undergoing sex reassignment in a foreign 170729, December 8, 2010).
country, Jose, who is now using the name of "Josie,"
married his partner Ador. Is the marriage valid? Q: You are a Family Court judge and before you is a
Petition for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage
a. Yes, the marriage is valid for as long as it is valid in (under Article 36 of the Family Code) filed by Maria
the place where it is celebrated following Article 17 against Neil. Maria claims that Neil is psychologically
of the Civil Code. incapacitated to comply with the essential obligations
b. Yes, the marriage is valid if all the essential and of marriage because Neil is a drunkard, a womanizer, a
formal elements of marriage under the Family Code gambler, and a mama's boy- traits that she never knew
are present. or saw when Neil was courting her. Although
c. No, the marriage is not valid because one essential summoned, Neil did not answer Maria's petition and
element of marriage is absent. never appeared in court.
d. No, the marriage is not valid but is voidable because
"Josie" concealed her real identity. (2014 BAR) To support her petition, Maria presented three
witnesses- herself, Dr. Elsie Chan, and Ambrosia. Dr.
A: C – not valid for lack of one essential requirement Chan testified on the psychological report on Neil that
(Silverio v. Republic, G.R. No. 174689, October 22, 2007). she prepared. Since Neil never acknowledged nor
responded to her invitation for interviews, her report
Q: Kardo met Glenda as a young lieutenant and after a is solely based on her interviews with Maria and the
whirlwind courtship, they were married. In the early spouses' minor children. Dr. Chan concluded that Neil
part of his military career, Kardo was assigned to is suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, an
different places all over the country but Glenda refused ailment that she found to be already present since
to accompany him as she preferred to live in her Neil's early adulthood and one that is grave and
hometown. They did not live together until the 12th incurable. Maria testified on the specific instances
year of their marriage when Kardo had risen up the when she found Neil drunk, with another woman, or
ranks and was given his own command. They moved to squandering the family's resources in a casino.
living quarters in Fort Gregorio. One day, while Kardo Ambrosia, the spouses' current household help,
was away on official business, one of his military aides corroborated Maria's testimony.
caught Glenda having sex with the corporal assigned as
Kardo's driver. The aide immediately reported the On the basis of the evidence presented, will you grant
matter to Kardo who rushed home to confront his wife. the petition? (1996, 2006, 2012, 2013 BAR)
Glenda readily admitted the affair and Kardo sent her
away in anger. Kardo would later come to know the true A: No. The petition should be denied.
extent of Glenda's unfaithfulness from his aides, his
household staff, and former neighbors who informed The psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the
him that Glenda has had intimate relations with various Family Code must be characterized by (a) gravity, (b)
men throughout their marriage whenever Kardo was juridical antecedence, and (c) incurability. It is not enough
away on assignment. to prove that the parties failed to meet their
responsibilities and duties as married persons; it is
Kardo filed a petition for declaration of nullity of essential that they must be shown to be incapable of doing
marriage under Article 36. Based on interviews from so, due to some psychological (not physical) illness
Kardo, his aide, and the housekeeper, a psychologist (Republic v. CA and Molina, G.R. No. 108763 February 13,
testified that Glenda's habitual infidelity was due to her 1997). In this case, the pieces of evidence presented are
affliction with Histrionic Personality Disorder, an not sufficient to conclude that indeed Niel is suffering from
illness characterized by excessive emotionalism and a psychological incapacity [Narcissistic Personality
uncontrollable attention-seeking behavior rooted in Disorder] existing already before the marriage, incurable
Glenda's abandonment as a child by her father. Kardo and serious enough to prevent Neil from performing his
himself, his aide, and his housekeeper also testified in essential marital obligations. Dr. Chan’s report contains
court. The RTC granted the petition, relying on the mere conclusions. Being a drunkard, a womanizer, a
liberality espoused by Te v. Te and Azcueta v. Republic. gambler and a mama’s boy merely shows Neil’s failure to

UST BAR OPERATIONS 16

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
perform his marital obligations. In a number of cases, the Explain the status of the marriage between Lulu and
Supreme Court did not find the existence of psychological Tirso.
incapacity in cases where the respondents showed
habitual drunkenness (Republic v. Melgar, G.R. No. 139676, A: The marriage between Lulu and Tirso is also void ab
March 31, 2006), blatant display of infidelity and initio because Lulu is still validly married to Sonny.
irresponsibility (Dedel v. CA, G.R. No. 151867, January 29,
2004), or being hooked to gambling and drugs (Republic v. Q: Gigi and Ric, Catholics, got married when they were
Tanyag-San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, February 28, 2007). 18 years old. Their marriage was solemnized on August
2, 1989 by Ric's uncle, a Baptist Minister, in Calamba,
Q: On May 1, 1978 Facundo married Petra, by whom he Laguna. He overlooked the fact that his license to
had a son Sotero. Petra died on July 1, 1996, while solemnize marriage expired the month before and that
Facundo died on January 1, 2002. Before his demise, the parties do not belong to his congregation. After 5
Facundo had married, on July 1, 2002, Quercia. Having years of married life and blessed with 2 children, the
lived together as husband and wife since July 1, 1990, spouses developed irreconcilable differences, so they
Facundo and Quercia did not secure a marriage license parted ways. While separated, Ric fell in love with Juliet,
but executed the requisite affidavit for the purpose. To a 16 year-old sophomore in a local college and a
ensure that his inheritance rights are not adversely Seventh-Day Adventist. They decided to get married
affected by his father’s second marriage, Sotero now with the consent of Juliet's parents. She presented to
brings a suit to seek a declaration of the nullity of the him a birth certificate showing she is 18 years old. Ric
marriage of Facundo and Quercia, grounded on the never doubted her age much less the authenticity of her
absence of a valid marriage license. Quercia contends birth certificate. They got married in a Catholic church
that there was no need for a marriage license in view in Manila. A year after, Juliet gave birth to twins, Aissa
for her having lived continuously with Facundo for and Aretha.
five years before their marriage and that Sotero has no
legal personality to seek a declaration of nullity of the 1) What is the status of the marriage between Gigi
marriage since Facundo is now deceased. and Ric — valid, voidable or void? Explain.
2) What is the status of the marriage between Ric
A. Is the marriage of Facundo and Quercia valid, and Juliet — valid, voidable or void?
despite the absence of a marriage license? Explain. 3) Suppose Ric himself procured the falsified birth
B. Does Sotero have the personality to seek the certificate to persuade Juliet to marry him despite
declaration of nullity of the marriage, especially her minority and assured her that everything is
now that Facundo is already deceased? Explain. in order. He did not divulge to her his prior
(2002 BAR) marriage with Gigi. What action, if any, can Juliet
take against him? Explain.
A: 4) If you were the counsel for Gigi, what action/s will
you take to enforce and protect her interests?
A. The marriage with Quercia is valid. The exemption from Explain. (2006 BAR)
the requirement of a marriage license under Article 34
of the Family Code requires that the man and woman A:
must have lived together as husband and wife for at 1) The marriage between Gigi and Ric is void because a
least five years and without any legal impediment to minister has no authority to solemnize a marriage
marry each other during those five years. Although the between contracting parties who were both not
cohabitation of Facundo and Quercia for six years from members of the minister’s religious sect. Under the
July 1, 1990 to July 1, 1996 when Petra died was one Family Code, a minister or a priest has authority to
with a legal impediment, the cohabitation thereafter solemnize a marriage but only if one or both
until the marriage on July 1, 2002 was free from any contracting parties are members of the religious sect
legal impediment since Facundo’s marriage with Petra of the pries or minister. Since neither Ric nor Gigi was
has already been extinguished due to the latter’s death. a member of the Baptist Church because both of them
The cohabitation of Facundo and Quercia from the time were Catholic, the Baptist Minister did not have
of death of Petra up to the time of their marriage on July authority to solemnize their marriage.
1, 2002 met the 5-year cohabitation requirement
therefore making their marriage despite the lack of a Ric and Gigi cannot claim that they believed in good
marriage license valid. faith and that the Baptist Minister had the authority to
B. Yes, a void marriage may be questioned by any solemnize the marriage and invoke Art. 35 (2) of the
interested party in any proceeding where the Family Code to make the marriage valid. The provision
resolution of the issue is material. Being a of the Family Code applies only to a mistake of fact,
compulsory heir, Soterro has the personality to and not to a mistake of law. Hence the fact that the
question the validity of the marriage of Facundo and Minister’s license was expired will not affect the
Quercia. Otherwise, his participation in the estate on validity of the marriage if Ric or Gigi believed in good
Facundo would be affected (Ninãl v. Bayadog, G.R. No. faith that the Minister had a valid license. That would
133778, March 14, 2000). be a mistake of fact. However, believing that the
Minister had authority to solemnize the marriage even
Q: In 1985, Sonny and Lulu, both Filipino citizens, were if none of the contracting parties was a member of the
married in the Philippines. In 1987, they separated, Minister’s religious sect is a mistake of law. This is
and Sonny went to Canada, where he obtained a because the law expressly provides that the Minister
divorce in the same year. He then married another has authority only if one or both contracting parties
Filipina, Auring, in Canada on January 1, 1988. They are members of the Minister’s religious sect. A mistake
had two sons, James and John. In 1990, after failing to of law does not excuse from non-compliance.
hear from Sonny, Lulu married Tirso, by whom she 2) The marriage between Ric and Juliet is void because
had a daughter, Verna. In 1991, Sonny visited the Juliet was below 18 years of age. Under the Family
Philippines where he succumbed to heart attack. Code, the requisite age for legal capacity to contract
marriage is 18 years old and a marriage by a party who
17
 CIVIL LAW
is below 18 years old is void under all circumstances. C. In accordance with law, if drug addiction, habitual
Hence, even though Juliet’s parents have fiven their alcoholism, lesbianism or homosexuality should occur
consent to the marriage and even though Ric believed in only during the marriage, they:
good faith that she was 18 years old, the marriage is 1) Will not constitute as grounds for declaration of
void. nullity (Art. 36, Family Code)
3) (a) Juliet may file an action to declare her marriage to 2) Will constitute as grounds for legal separation (Art.
Ric null and void on the ground that she was not of 55, Family Code)
marrying age. 3) Will not constitute as grounds to render the
(b) She may also file a criminal case against Ric for marriage voidable (Art. 45 and 46, Family Code)
bigamy because he contracted the marriage with her
without a judicial declaration of nullity of his first Q: Gemma filed a petition for the declaration of nullity
marriage to Gigi. of her marriage with Arnell on the ground of
(c) She may also file a criminal case for falsification, psychological incapacity. She alleged that after 2
perjury, or illegal marriage as the case may be. months of their marriage, Arnell showed signs of
(d) In case the facts and the evidence will warrant, she disinterest in her, neglected her and went abroad. He
may also file a criminal case for seduction. In all these returned to the Philippines after 3 years but did not
cases, Juliet may recover damages. even get in touch with her. Worse, they met several
4) As counsel for Gigi, I will file an action for declaration of times in social functions but he snubbed her. When she
nullity of Gigi’s marriage to Ric on the ground of got sick, he did not visit her even if he knew of her
absence of authority of the Baptist minister to confinement in the hospital. Meanwhile, Arnell met an
solemnize the marriage between Ric and Gigi who were accident which disabled him from reporting for work
both non-members of the Baptist Church. and earning a living to support himself. Will Gemma's
suit prosper? Explain. (2006 BAR)
Q: Under what conditions, respectively, may drug
addiction be a ground, if at all for a declaration of A: Gemma’s suit will not prosper. The acts of Arnell
nullity of marriage (1997, 2002 BAR) complained about do not by themselves constitute
psychological incapacity. It is not enough to prove the
A: Declaration of nullity of marriage: commission of those acts or the existence of his abnormal
1. The drug addiction must amount to psychological behaviour. It must be shown that those acts or that
incapacity to comply with the essential obligations of behaviour was manifestation of a serious mental disorder
marriage; and that it is the root cause why he was not able to perform
2. It must be antecedent (existing at the time of marriage), the essential duties of married life. It must also be shown
grave and incurable; that such psychological incapacity, as manifested in those
3. The case must be filed before August 1, 1998. Because if acts or that behaviour, was existing at the time of the
they got married before August 3, 1998, it must be filed celebration of the marriage. In this case, there was no
before August 1, 1998. showing that Arnell was suffering from a manifestation of
that disorder, and that such disorder prevented him from
Q: complying with his duties as a married person.

A. Give a brief definition or explanation of the term Q: Article 36 of the Family Code provides that a
“psychological incapacity” as a ground for the marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of
declaration of nullity of a marriage. the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to
B. If existing at the inception of marriage, would the comply with the essential marital obligations of
state of being of unsound mind or the concealment marriage, shall be void. Choose the spouse listed below
of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, who is psychologically incapacitated. Explain.
homosexuality or lesbianism be considered indicia
of psychological incapacity? Explain. A. Nagger
C. If drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or B. Gay or Lesbian
homosexuality should occur only during the C. Congenital sexual pervert
marriage, would these constitute grounds for a D. Gambler
declaration of nullity or for legal separation, or E. Alcoholic (2006 BAR)
would they render the marriage voidable? (2002
BAR) A: The gay or lesbian is psychologically incapacitated. Being
gay or lesbian is a mental disorder which prevents the
A: afflicted person from performing the essential duties of
married life. He or she will not be able to perform his duty of
A. PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY is a mental disorder of sexual consortium with his or her spouse due to his or her
the most serious type showing the incapability of one or sexual preference for a person of the same sex. However,
both spouses to comply the essential marital obligations the law requires that the disorder or state of being gay or
of love, respect, cohabitation, mutual help and support, lesbian incapacitating such person must be existing at the
trust and commitment. It must be characterized by time of the celebration of the marriage.
juridical antecedence, gravity and incurability and its
root causes must be clinically identified or examined Q: True or False.
(Santos v. CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995).
B. In the case of Santos v. CA (G.R. No. 112019, January 4, Amor gave birth to Thelma when she was 15 years old.
1995), the Supreme Court held that being of unsound Thereafter, Amor met David and they got married when
mind, drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or she was 20 years old. David had a son, Julian, with his
homosexuality may be an indicia of psychological ex-girlfriend Sandra. Julian and Thelma can get
incapacity, depending on the degree of severity of the married. (2007 BAR)
disorder. However, the concealment of drug addiction,
habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or homosexuality is a
ground of annulment of marriage.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 18

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
A: TRUE. Julian and Thelma can get married. Marriage
between stepbrothers and stepsisters are not among the A: Either or both of the parties cannot contract marriage in
marriages prohibited under the Family Code. the Philippines with another person without committing
Q: Despite several relationships with different women, bigamy, unless there is compliance with the requirements of
Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship Art. 52 Family Code, namely: there must be a judgment of
with Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years annulment or absolute nullity of the marriage, partition and
old. His second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and distribution of the properties of the spouses and the delivery
Ryan. His third, with Elena, bore him no children of their children’s presumptive legitimes, which shall be
although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous recorded in the appropriate Civil Registry of Property,
relationship. His last, with Fe, produced no biological otherwise the same shall not affect third persons and the
children but they informally adopted without court subsequent marriage shall be null and void. (Arts. 52 and 53,
proceedings, Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they Family Code)
consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby
and was entrusted to them by the midwife who Q: Maria and Luis, both Filipinos, were married by a
attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, including Catholic priest in Lourdes Church, Quezon City in
Amy, now live with Andrew in his house. Can Jon and 1976, Luis was drunk on the day of his wedding. In
Jane legally marry? (2008 BAR) fact, he slumped at the altar soon after the ceremony.
After marriage, Luis never had a steady job because
A: Yes. Jon and Jane can marry each other; Jon is an he was drunk most of the time. Finally, he could not
illegitimate child of Andrew while Jane is a child of Elena get employed at all because of drunkenness. Hence, it
from a previous relationship. Thus, their marriage is not one was Maria who had to earn a living to support herself
of the prohibited marriages enumerated under Art. 38 of the and her child begotten with Luis. In 1986, Maria filed a
FC. petition in the church matrimonial court in Quezon
City to annul her marriage with Luis on the ground of
Q: In June 1985, James married Mary. In September psychological incapacity to comply with his marital
1988, he also married Ophelia with whom he begot two obligation. Her petition was granted by the church
(2) children, A and B. In July 1989, Mary died. In July matrimonial court.
1990, he married Shirley and abandoned Ophelia.
During their union, James and Ophelia acquired a 1) Can Maria now get married legally to another
residential lot worth P300, 000.00. man under Philippine laws after her marriage to
Luis was annulled by the church matrimonial court?
Ophelia sues James for bigamy and prays that his Explain.
marriage with Shirley be declared null and void. James, 2) What must Maria do to enable her to get
on the other hand, claims that since his marriage to married lawfully to another man under Philippine
Ophelia was contracted during the existence of his laws? 1993 BAR)
marriage with Mary, the former is not binding upon him,
the same being void ab initio; he further claims that his A:
marriage to Shirley is valid and binding as he was
already legally capacitated at the time he married her. Is 1) No, Maria cannot validly contract a subsequent marriage
the contention of James correct? (1991 BAR) without a court declaration of nullity of the first
marriage. The law does not recognize the church
A: Yes. His marriage to Ophelia is void ab initio because of declaration of nullity of a marriage.
his subsisting prior marriage to Mary. His marriage to 2) To enable Maria to get married lawfully to another man,
Shirley, after Mary’s death, is valid and binding. she must obtain a judicial declaration of nullity of the
prior marriage under Article 36 Family Code.
Alternative Answer: No. The contention of James is not
correct. Q: In 1985, Sonny and Lulu, both Filipino citizens, were
married in the Philippines. In 1987, they separated,
Art. 40, Family Code, provides that the “absolute nullity of a and Sonny went to Canada, where he obtained a
previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of divorce in the same year. He then married another
remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring Filipina, Auring, in Canada on January 1, 1988. They
such previous marriage void.” It can be said, therefore, that had two sons, James and John. In 1990, after failing to
the marriage of James to Shirley is void since his previous hear from Sonny, Lulu married Tirso, by whom she
marriage to Ophelia, although itself void, had not yet been had a daughter, Verna. In 1991, Sonny visited the
judicially declared void. Philippines where he succumbed to heart attack.
Explain the status of the marriage between Lulu and
Q: A and B, both 18 years old, were sweethearts studying Tirso. (2005 BAR)
in Manila. On August 3, 1988, while in first year college,
they eloped. They stayed in the house of a mutual friend A: The marriage between Lulu and Tirso is void ab initio
in town X, where they were able to obtain a marriage because Lulu is still validly married to Sonny.
license. On August 30, 1988, their marriage was
solemnized by the town mayor of X in his office. Q: Ana Rivera had a husband, a Filipino citizen like her,
Thereafter, they returned to Manila and continued to who was among the passengers on board a commercial
live separately in their respective boarding houses, jet plane which crashed in the Atlantic Ocean ten (10)
concealing from their parents, who were living in the years earlier and had never been heard of ever since.
province what they had done. In 1992, after graduation Believing that her husband had died, Ana married Adolf
from college, A and B decided to break their relation and Cruz Staedtler, a divorced German national born of a
parted ways. Both went home to their respective towns German father and a Filipino mother residing in
to live and work. Can either or both of them contract Stuttgart. To avoid being reqiured to submit the
marriage with another person without committing required certificate of capacity to marry from the
bigamy? Explain your answer. German Embassy in Manila, Adolf stated in the
application for marriage license that he was a Filipino
19
 CIVIL LAW
citizen. With the marriage license stating that Adolf was ii. If the wife goes (to) abroad to work as a nurse and
a Filipino, the couple got married in a ceremony refuses to come home after the expiration of her
officiated by the Parish Priest of Calamba, Laguna in a three-year contract there.
beach in Nasugbu, Batangas, as the local parish priest iii. If the husband discovers after the marriage that
refused to solemnize marriages except in his church. Is his wife has been a prostitute before they got
the marriage valid? Explain fully. (2008 BAR) married.
iv. If the husband has a serious affair with his
A: The issue hinges on whether or not the missing husband secretary and refuses to stop notwithstanding
was dead or alive at the time of the second marriage. advice from relatives and friends.
v. If the husband beats up his wife every time he
If the missing husband was in fact dead at the time the comes home drunk. (2003 BAR)
second marriage was celebrated, the second marriage was
valid. Actual death of a spouse dissolves the marriage ipso A:
facto whether or not the surviving spouse had knowledge of
such fact. A declaration of presumptive death even if i. Since AIDS is a serious and incurable sexually-
obtained will not make the marriage voidable because transmissible disease, the wife may file an action for
presumptive death will not prevail over the fact of death. annulment of the marriage on this ground whether
such fact was concealed or not from the wife, provided
If the missing husband was in fact alive when the second that the disease was present at the time of the
marriage was celebrated, the second marriage was void ab marriage. The marriage is voidable even though the
initio because of a prior subsisting marriage. Had Ana husband was not aware that he had the disease at the
obtained a declaration of presumptive death the second time of marriage.
marriage would have been voidable. ii. If the wife refuses to come home for three (3) months
from the expiration of her contract, she is presumed to
In both cases, the fact that the German misrepresented his have abandoned the husband and he may file an
citizenship to avoid having to present his Certificate of Legal action for judicial separation of property. If the
Capacity, or the holding of ceremony outside the church or refusal continues for more than one year from the
beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the solemnizing officer, expiration of her contract, the husband may file an
are all irregularities which do not affect the validity of the action for legal separation under Article 55(10) of
marriage. the FC on the ground of abandonment of petitioner by
respondent without justifiable cause for more than
Voidable Marriages (1990, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1996, one year. The wife is deemed to have abandoned the
1997, 1999, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009 BAR) husband when she leaves the conjugal dwelling
without any intention of returning (Art. 101, FC). The
Q: One of the grounds for annulment of marriage is that intention not to return cannot be presumed during the
either party, at the time of their marriage was three-year period of her contract.
afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease, found iii. If the husband discovers after the marriage that his
to be serious and appears incurable. Two (2) years wife was a prostitute before they got married, he has
after their marriage, which took place on 10 October no remedy. No misrepresentation or deceit as to
1988, Bethel discovered that her husband James has a character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall
sexually-transmissible disease which he contracted constitute fraud as legal ground for an action for the
even prior to their marriage although James did not annulment of marriage (Art. 46, FC).
know it himself until he was examined two [2) years iv. The wife may file an action for legal separation. The
later when a child was already born to them. Bethel husband’s sexual infidelity is a ground for legal
sues James for annulment of their marriage. James separation (Art. 55, FC). She may also file an action for
opposes the annulment on the ground that he did not judicial separation of property for failure of her
even know that he had such a disease so that there husband to comply with his marital duty of fidelity
was no fraud or bad faith on his part. (Art. 135 (4), 101, FC).
Decide. (1991 BAR) v. The wife may file an action for legal separation on
the ground of repeated physical violence on her
A: The marriage can be annulled, because good faith is not a person (Art. 55 (1), FC). She may also file an action for
defense when the ground is based upon sexually- judicial separation of propertyfor failure of the
transmissible disease on the part of either party. husband to comply with his marital duty of mutual
respect [Art. 135 (4), 101, FC]. She may also file an
Q: Suppose that both parties at the time of their action for declaration of nullity of the marriage if the
marriage were similarly afflicted with sexually- husband’s behavior constitute psychological
transmissible diseases, serious and incurable, and incapacity existing at the time of the celebration of
both knew of their respective infirmities, can Bethel marriage.
or James sue for annulment of their marriage? (1991
BAR) Q: True or False.

A: Yes, the marriage can still be annulled because the fact The day after John and Marsha got married, John told
that both of them are afflicted with sexually-transmissible her that he was impotent. Marsha continued to live with
diseases does not efface or nullify the ground. John for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped from filing an
annulment case against John. (2007, 2010 BAR)
Q: Which of the following remedies, i.e., (a) declaration
of nullity of marriage, (b) annulment of marriage, (c) A: FALSE. Marsha is not estopped from filing an annulment
legal separation, and/or (d) separation of property, case against John on the ground of his impotence, because
can an aggrieved spouse avail himself/herself of: she learned of his impotence after the celebration of the
marriage and not before. Physical incapacity to consummate
i. If the wife discovers after the marriage that her is a valid ground for the annulment of marriage if such
husband has AIDS. incapacity was existing at the time of the marriage,

UST BAR OPERATIONS 20

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
continues and appears to be incurable. The marriage may be
annulled on this ground within five years from its a. for a declaration of nullity of marriage
celebration (Art. 45 [5], Family Code). b. for an annulment of the marriage contract, and
c. for legal separation between the spouses? (1997,
Q: Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and 2002 BAR)
employees of the U.S. State Department, got married in
the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for A: Declaration of nullity of marriage:
annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were
assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first year a. The drug addiction must amount to psychological
of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita incapacity to comply with the essential obligations of
filed an annulment case against Emmanuel before a marriage;
Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s b. It must be antecedent (existing at the time of marriage),
sterility at the time of the celebration of the marriage. grave and incurable:
Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are both Filipinos. c. The case must be filed before August 1, 1998. Because if
After their wedding in Kenya, they come back and take they got married before August 3, 1998, it must be filed
up residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage be before August 1, 1998.
annulled n the ground of Emmanuel’s sterility? (2009
BAR) Annulment of the Marriage Contract:

A: No, the marriage cannot be annulled under the a. The drug addiction must be concealed;
Philippine law. Sterility is not a ground for annulment of b. It must exist at the time of marriage;
marriage under Art. 45 of the FC. c. There should be no cohabitation with full knowledge of
the drug addiction;
Q: Yvette was found to be positive for HIV virus, d. The case is filed within five (5) years from discovery.
considered sexually transmissible, serious and
incurable. Her boyfriend Joseph was aware of her Legal Separation:
condition and yet married her. After two (2) years
of cohabiting with Yvette, and in his belief that she a. There should be no condonation or consent to the drug
would probably never be able to bear him a healthy addiction;
child, Joseph now wants to have his marriage with b. The action must be filed within five (5) years from the
Yvette annulled. Yvette opposes the suit contending occurrence of the cause.
that Joseph is estopped from seeking annulment of c. Drug addiction arises during the marriage and not at the
their marriage since he knew even before their time of marriage.
marriage that she was afflicted with HIV virus. Can the
action of Joseph for annulment of his marriage with Q: B and G, age 20 and 19, respectively, and both
Yvette prosper? Discuss fully. (1995 BAR) single, elped and got married to each other without
parental consent in the case of G, a teenaged student of
A: No, Joseph knew that Yvette was HIV positive at the exclusive college for girls. Three years later, her
time of the marriage. He is, therefore, not an injured party. parents wanted to seek judicial annulment on that
The FC gives the right to annul the marriage only to an ground. You were consulted and asked to prepare the
injured party [Art. 47 (5), FC]. proper complaint. What advice would you give G’s
parents? Explain your answer. (1990 BAR)
Q: Bert and Baby were married to each other on
December 23, 1988. Six months later, she discovered A: G himself should file the complaint under Art. 45 of the
that he was a drug addict. Efforts to have him Family Code, and no longer the parents, because G is
rehabilitated were unsuccessful. Can baby as for already 22 years of age.
annulment of marriage, or legal separation? Explain
(1996 BAR) Compliance Requirements in Cases of Judgments of
Annulment or of Absolute Nullity of Marriage (1990,
A: No, Baby cannot ask for annulment of her marriage or 1991, 1993, 2010 BAR)
for legal separation because both these actions had already
prescribed. Q: Is there any law which allows the delivery to
compulsory heirs of their presumptive legitimes
While concealment of dug addition existing at the time of during the lifetime of their parents? If so, in what
marriage constitutes fraud under Art. 46 of the FC which instances?
makes the marriage voidable under Art. 45 of the FC, the
action must, however, be brought within 5 years from the A: Yes, under Arts. 51 and 52 of the New Family Code, in
discovery thereof under Art. 47(3), FC. Since the drug case of legal separation, annulment of marriage,
addiction of Bert was discovered by Baby in June 1989, the declaration of nullity of marriage and the automatic
action had already prescribed in June of 1994. termination of a subsequent marriage by the reappearance
of the absent spouse, the common or community property
Although drug addiction is a ground for legal separation of the spouses shall be dissolved and liquidated..
under Art. 55(5) and Art. 57 of the FC requires that the Art. 51. In said partition, the value of the presumptive
action must be brought within 5 years from the occurrence legitimes of all common children, computed as of the date
of the cause. Since Bert had been a drug addict from the of the final judgment of the trial court, shall be delivered in
time of the celebration of the marriage, the action for legal cash, property or sound securities, unless the parties, by
separation must have been brought not later than 23 mutual agreement, judicially approved, had already
December 1993. Hence, Baby cannot, now, bring the action provided for such matters.
for legal separation.
The guardian of their children, or the trustee of their
Q: Under what conditions, respectively, may drug property, may ask for the enforcement of the judgment.
addiction be a ground, if at all:
21
 CIVIL LAW
They delivery of the presumptive legitimes herein
prescribed shall in no way prejudice the ultimate Q: The spouses Peter and Paula had three (3) children.
successional rights of the children accruing upon the death Paula later obtained a judgment of nullity of marriage.
of either or both of the parents; but the value of the Their absolute community of property having been
properties alredy received under the decree of annulment dissolved, they delivered P1 million to each of their 3
or absolute nullity shall be considered as advances on their children as their presumptive legitimes. Peter later re-
legitime. married and had two (2) children by his second wife
Marie. Peter and Marie, having successfully engaged in
Art. 52. The judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity business, acquired real properties. Peter later died
of the marriage, the partition and distribution of the intestate. Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will his
properties of the spouses, and the delivery of the estate be divided among them? (2010 BAR)
children’s presumptive legitimes shall be recorded in the
appropriate civil registry and registries of property; A: The legal heirs of Peter are his children by the first and
otherwise, the same shall not affect third persons. second marriages and his surviving second wife.

Q: The marriage of H and W was annulled by the Their shares in the estate of Peter will depend, however,
competent court. Upon finality of the judgment of on the cause of the nullity of the first marriage. If the
nullity, H began looking for his prospective second nullity of the first marriage was psychological incapacity of
mate. He fell in love with a sexy woman S who wanted one or both spouses, the three children of that void
to be married as soon as possible i.e., after a few marriage are legitimate and all of the legal heirs shall share
months of courtship. As a young lawyer you were the estate of Peter in equal shares. If the judgment of
consulted by H. nullity was for other causes, the three children are
illegitimate and the estate shall be distributed such that an
a) How soon can H be joined in lawful wedlock to his illegitimate child of the first marriage shall receive half of
girlfriend S? Under exisiting laws, are there certain the share of a legitimate child of the second marriage, and
requisites that must be complied with befre he can the second wife will inherit a share equal to that of a
remarry? What advice would you give H? legitimate child. In no case may the two legitimate children
b) Suppose that children were born from the union of of the second marriage receive a share less than one-half of
H and W, what would be the status of said the estate which is their legitime. When the estate is not
children? Explain your answer. sufficient to pay all the legitimes of the compulsory heirs,
c) If the subsequent marriage of H to S was the legitime of the spouse is preferred and the illegitimate
contracted before compliance with the statutory children suffer the reduction.
condition for its validity, what are the rights of the
children of the first marriage (i.e., of H and W) and Computation:
of the children of the subsequent marriage (of H
and S)? (1990 BAR) (A) If the ground of nullity is psychological incapacity:
3 children by first marriage 1/6 of the estate for each
A:
2 children by second marriage 1/6 of the estate for each
a) H or either spouse for that matter, can marry again Surviving second spouse 1/6 of the estate
after complying with the provisions of Art. 52 of the
Family Code, namely, there must be a partition and (B) If the ground of nullity is not psychological capacity:
distribution of the properties of the spouses, and the
delivery of the children’s presumptive legitimes, which 1⁄4 of the estate for each of
2 legitimate children
should be recorded in the appropriate civil registry second marriage
and registries of property. H should be so advised. Surviving second spouse 1⁄4 of the estate
b) The children born from the union of H and W would be 3 illegitimate children 1/12 of estate for each of first
legitimate children if conceived or born before the
marriage
decree of annulment of the marriage (under Art. 45 of
the Family Code) has become final and executory (Art.
54, Family Code). NOTE: The legitime of an illegitimate child is supposed to
c) The children of the first marriage shall be considered be 1⁄2 the legitime of a legitimate child or 1/8 of the
legitimate children if conceived or born before the estate. But the estate will not be sufficient to pay the said
judgment of annulment of the marriage of H and W has legitime of the 3 illegitimate children, because only 1⁄4 of
become final and executory. Children conceived or the estate is left after paying the legitime of the surviving
born of the subsequent marriage shall likewise be spouse which is preferred.
legitimate even if the marriage of H and S be null and
void for failure to comply with the requisites of Article Hence, the remaining 1⁄4 of the estate shall be divided
52 of the Family Code (Art. 53, Family Code) among the 3 illegitimate children.

As legitimate children, they have the following rights: LEGAL SEPARATION (1994, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003,
2006, 2007, 2012 BAR)
1) To bear the surnames of the father and the mother
in conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code Q: After they got married, Nikki discovered that
on Surnames Christian was having an affair with another woman.
2) To receive support from their parents, their But Nikki decided to give it a try and lived with him for
ascendants and in proper cases, their brothers and two (2) years. After two (2) years, Nikki filed an action
sisters, in conformity with the provisions of this for legal separation on the ground of Christian’s sexual
Code on Support; and infidelity. Will the action prosper? Explain. (2012 BAR)
3) To be entitled to the legitime and other
successional rights granted to them by the Civil A: Nikki’s action will not prosper on account at
Code (Art. 174, Family Code). condonation. Although the action for legal separation has

UST BAR OPERATIONS 22

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
not yet prescribed, the prescriptive period being five years, 3) As judge, I will deny the petition. Petition for legal
the decision of Nikki to live with Christian after separation may be filed only by the aggrieved spouse.
discovering his affair amounts to condonation of such act. Since Saul was unfaithful and was in fact caught in
However, if such affair is still continuing, Nikki's action flagrante by his wife, he is not an “aggrieved” spouse
would prosper because the action will surely be within (5) entitled to the relief. He who comes to court must
years from the commission of the latest act of sexual come with clean hands. And even assuming that the
infidelity. Every act or sexual liaison is a ground for legal attempt on his life by the wife is a ground for legal
separation. separation, he is still not entitled to the relief because
of his infidelity. The law does not allow legal
Q: Rosa and Ariel were married in the Catholic Church separation if both parties have given ground for legal
of Tarlac, Tarlac on January 5, 1988. In 1990, Ariel separation.
went to Saudi Arabia to work. There, after being
converted into Islam, Ariel married Mystica. Rosa Q: True or False
learned of the second marriage of Ariel on January 1, If a man commits several acts of sexual infidelity,
1992 when Ariel returned to the Philippines with particularly in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, the prescriptive
Mystica. Rosa filed an action for legal separation on period to file for legal separation runs from 2002. (2007
February 5, 1994. BAR)

1) Does Rosa have legal grounds to ask for legal A: FALSE. The five-year prescriptive period for filing legal
separation? separation runs from the occurrence of sexual infidelity
2) Has the action prescribed? (1994 BAR) committed in 2002 runs from 2002, for the sexual infidelity
committed in 2003, the prescriptive period runs from 2003
A: and so on. The action for legal separation for the last act of
sexual infidelity in 2005 will prescribe in 2010.
1) a) Yes, the abandonment of Rosa by Ariel for more
than one (1) year is a ground for legal separation PROPERTY RELATIONS OF THE SPOUSES (FAMILY
unless upon returning to the Philippines, Rosa agrees CODE) (1991, 1992, 1995, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2002,
to cohabit with Ariel which is allowed under the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2015, 2016
Muslim Code. In this case, there is condonation. BAR)
b) Yes. The contracting of a subsequent bigamous
marriage whether in the Philippines or abroad is a Q: Bernard and Dorothy lived together as common-law
ground for legal separation under Art. 55(7) of the spouses although they are both capacitated to marry.
Family Code. Whether the second marriage is valid or After one year of cohabitation, Dorothy went abroad to
not, Ariel having converted into Islam is immaterial. work in Dubai as a hair stylist and regularly sent
2) No. Under Art. 57 of the Family Code, the aggrieved money to Bernard. With the money, Bernard bought a
spouse must file the action within five (5) years from lot. For a good price, Bernard sold the lot. Dorothy
the occurrence of the cause. The subsequent marriage came to know about the acquisition and sale of the lot
of Ariel could not have occurred earlier than 1990, the and filed a suit to nullify the sale because she did not
time he went to Saudi Arabia. Hence, Rosa has until give her consent to the sale.
1995 to bring the action under the Family Code.
1. Will Dorothy's suit prosper? Decide with reasons.
Q: Saul, a married man, had an adulterous relation with 2. Suppose Dorothy was jobless and did not
Tessie. In one of the trysts, Saul's wife, Cecile, contribute money to the acquisition of the lot and
caught them in flagrante. Armed with a gun, Cecile her efforts consisted mainly in the care and
shot Saul in a fit of extreme jealousy, nearly killing maintenance of the family and household, is her
him. Four (4) years after the incident, Saul filed an consent to the sale a prerequisite to its validity?
action for legal separation against Cecile on the Explain. (2016 BAR)
ground that she attempted to kill him.
A:
1) If you were Saul's counsel, how will you argue his
case? 1. Yes, Dorothy’s suit will prosper, unless the buyer is a
2) If you were the lawyer of Cecile, what will be your buyer in good faith and for value. The rule of co-
defense? ownership governs the property relationship in a
3) If you were the judge, how will you decide the union without marriage between a man and a woman
case? (2006 BAR) who are capacitated to marry each other. Article 147
of the Family Code is specifically applicable. Under this
A: article, neither party can encumber or dispose by acts
inter vivos of his or her share in the property acquired
1) As the counsel of Saul, I will argue that an attempt by during cohabitation and owned in common, without
the wife against the life of the husband is one of the the consent of the other, until after the termination of
grounds enumerated by the Family Code for legal their cohabitation, thus, Bernard may not validly
separation and there is no need for criminal dispose of the lot without the consent of Dorothy as
conviction for the ground to be invoked (Art. 55, par. 9, the lot was acquired through their work during their
FC). cohabitation.
2) If I were the lawyer of Cecile, I will interpose the 2. Yes, if Dorothy was jobless and did not contribute
defense that the attempt on his life was without money to the acquisition of the lot, her consent is still
criminal intent but was impelled solely by passion and a prerequisite to the validity of the sale. Under the
obfuscation. This is the reason why under the Revised same article, a party who did not participate in the
Penal Code, even killing him when caught in the act acquisition by the other party of any property shall be
would be justified. To be a ground for legal separation, deemed to have contributed jointly in the acquisition
the attempt must be intentional and wrongful. thereof if the former’s efforts consisted in the care and
maintenance of the family and the household. In this
23
 CIVIL LAW
case, although the money used to buy the lot was If, on the other hand, Jambrich and Descallar were not
solely from Bernard, Dorothy’s care and maintenance capacitated to marry each other, Article 153 governs their
of the family and household are deemed contributions property relations. Under this regime, Jambrich and
in the acquisition of the lot. Article 147, 2 nd paragraph Descallar are owners of the properties but only if both of
is applicable, as the lot is deemed owned in common them contributed in their acquisition. If all the funds used
by the common-law spouses in equal shares as the in acquiring the properties in question came from
same was acquired during their cohabitation, without Jambrich, the entire property is his even though he is
prejudice to the rights of a buyer in good faith and for disqualified from owning it. His subsequent transfer to
value. Borromeo, however, is valid as it removed the
disqualification. In such case, all of the properties are
Q: Marco and Gina were married in 1989. Ten years owned by Borromeo. If, on the other hand, Descallar
later, or in 1999, Gina left Marco and lived with another contributed to their acquisition, the properties are co-
man, leaving their two children of school age with owned by Descallar and Borromeo in proportion to the
Marco. When Marco needed money for their children's respective contributions of Descallar and Jambrich.(Note:
education he sold a parcel of land registered in his The facts of the problem are not exactly the same as in the
name, without Gina's consent, which he purchased case of Borromeo v. Descallar, G.R. No. 159310, February 24,
before his marriage. Is the sale by Marco valid, void or 2009, hence, the difference in the resulting answer.)
voidable? Explain with legal basis. (2015 BAR)
Q: Maria, wife of Pedro, withdrew P 5 Million from
A: The sale made by Marco is considered void. The parties their conjugal funds. With this money, she constructed
were married in 1989 and no mention was made whether a building on a lot which she inherited from her father.
they executed a marriage settlement. In the absence of a Is the building conjugal or paraphernal? Reasons.
marriage settlement, the parties shall be governed by (2012 BAR)
absolute community of property whereby all the properties
owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the A: It depends. If the value of the building is more than the
marriage as well as whatever they may acquire during the value of the land, the building is conjugal and the land
marriage shall form part of the absolute community. In ACP, becomes conjugal property under Art. 120 of the FC. This
neither spouse can sell or encumber property belonging to is a case of reverse accession, where the building is
the ACP without the consent of the other. Any sale or considered as the principal and the land, the accessory. If,
encumbrance made by one spouse without the consent of on the other hand, the value of the land is more than the
the other shall be void although it is considered as a value of the building, then the ordinary rule of accession
continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse upon applies where the land is the principal and the building,
authority of the court or written consent of the other spouse the accessory. In such case, the land remains paraphernal
(Art. 96, FC). property and the building becomes paraphernal properly.
(Note: The rule on reverse accession is applicable only to the
Q: Jambrich, an Austrian, fell in-love and lived together regime of conjugal partnership of gains in both the Family
with Descallar and bought their houses and lots at Code and the New Civil Code. The foregoing answer assumes
Agro-Macro Subdivision. In the Contracts to Sell, that CPG is the regime of the property relations of the
Jambrich and Descallar were referred to as the buyers. spouses.)
When the Deed of Absolute Sale was presented for
registration before the Register of Deeds, it was Q: In 1989, Rico, then a widower forty (40) years of
refused because Jambrich was an alien and could not age, cohabited with Cora, a widow thirty (30) years of
acquire alienable lands of the public domain. After age. While living together, they acquired from their
Jambrich and Descallar separated, Jambrich combined earnings a parcel of rice land. After Rico and
purchased an engine and some accessories for his boat Cora separated, Rico lived together with Mabel, a
from Borromeo. To pay for his debt, he sold his rights maiden sixteen (16) years of age. While living
and interests in the Agro-Macro properties to together, Rico was a salaried employee and Mabel
Borromeo. Borromeo discovered that titles to the kept house for Rico and did full-time household chores
three (3) lots have been transferred in the name of for him. During their cohabitation, a parcel of
Descallar. Who is the rightful owner of the properties? coconut land was acquired by Rico from his savings.
Explain. (2012 BAR) After living together for one (1) year, Rico and Mabel
separated. Rico then met and married Letty, a single
A: It depends. On the assumption that the Family Code is woman twenty-six (26) years of age. During the
the applicable law, the ownership of the properties marriage of Rico and Letty, Letty bought a mango
depends on whether or not Jambrich and Descallar are orchard out of her own personal earnings.
capacitated to marry each other during their cohabitation,
and whether or not both have contributed funds for the a) Who would own the rice land, and what property
acquisition of the properties. relations govern the ownership? Explain.
b) Who would own the coconut land, and what
If both of them were capacitated to marry each other, Art. property Relations governs the ownership? Explain.
147 will apply to their property relations and the c) Who would own the mango orchard, and what
properties in question are owned by them in equal shares property relation governs the ownership? Explain.
even though all the funds used in acquiring the properties (1992, 1997, 2000 BAR)
came only from the salaries or wages or the income of
Jambrich from his business or profession. In such a case, A:
while Jambrich is disqualified to own any part of the
properties, his subsequent transfer of all his interest a) Rico and Cora are the co-owners of the rice land. The
therein to Borromeo, a Filipino, was valid as it removed Relations is that of co-ownership (Art. 147 par. 1, FC).
the disqualification. In such case, the properties are owned However, after Rico's marriage to Letty, the half interest
by Borromeo and Descallar in equal shares. of Rico in the riceland will then become absolute
community property of Rico and Letty.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 24

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
b) Rico is the exclusive owner of the coconut land. The on the regime of conjugal partnership of gains. The
Relations is a sole/single proprietorship (Art. 148 marriage settlement was registered in the Register of
par. 1, FC, is applicable, and not Art. 147, FC). However, Deeds of Manila, where Mila is a resident. In 1992, they
after Rico's marriage to Letty, the coconut land of Rico jointly acquired a residential house and lot, as well as a
will then become absolute community property of Rico condominium unit in Makati. In 1995, they decided to
and Letty. change their property relations to the regime of
c) Rico and Letty are the co-owners. The relation is the complete separation of property. Mila consented, as
Absolute Community of Property (Arts. 75, 90 and 9l, she was then engaged in a lucrative business. The
FC). spouses then signed a private document dissolving
their conjugal partnership and agreeing on a
Q: On 10 September 1988 Kevin, a 26-year old complete separation of property. Thereafter, Gabby
businessman, married Karla, a winsome lass of 18. acquired a mansion in Baguio City, and a 5-hectare
Without the knowledge of their parents or legal agricultural land in Oriental Mindoro, which he
guardians, Kevin and Karla entered into an antenuptial registered exclusively in his name. In the year 2000,
contract the day beore their marriage stipulating that Mila's business venture failed, and her creditors
conjugal partnership of gains shall govern their sued her for P10, 000, 000.00. After obtaining a
marriage. At the time of their marriage Kevin’s estate favorable judgment, the creditors sought to execute on
was worth 50 Million while Karla’s was valued at 2 the spouses' house and lot and condominium unit, as
Million. well as Gabby's mansion and agricultural land.

A month after their marriage Kevin died in a freak a) Discuss the status of the first and the amended
helicopter accident. He left no will, no debts, no marriage settlements.
obligations. Surviving Kevin, aside from Karla, are his b) Discuss the effects of the said settlements on the
only relatives: his brother Luis and first cousin Lilia. properties acquired by the spouses.
What property regime governed the marriage of Kevin c) What properties may be held answerable for
and Karla? Explain. (1995 BAR) Mila's obligations? Explain. (2005 BAR)
A:
A: Since the marriage settlement was entered into without
the consent and without the participation of the parents a) 1) The first marriage settlement was valid because it
(they did not sign the document), the marriage settlement is was in writing, signed by the parties and executed
invalid applying Art. 78, F.C. which provides that a minor before the celebration of the marriage
who according to law may contract marriage may also enter 2) The subsequent afreement of the parties was void as
into marriage settlements but they shall be valid only of the a modification of their marriage settlement. To be valid,
person who may give consent to the marriage are made the modification must be executed before the
parties to the agreement. (Karla was still a minor at the time celebration of the marriage. The subsequent agreement
the marriage settlement was executed in September 1988 of the parties did not effect a dissolution of their
because the law, RA 6809, reducing the age of majority to 18 conjugal partnership and a separation of their
years took effect on 18 December 1989). The marriage properties because it was not approved by the court. To
settlement being void, the property regime governing the be valid, an agreement by the parties to dissolve their
marriage is, therefore, absolute community of property, conjugal partnership and to separate their properties
under Art. 75 of the FC. during the marriage has to be approved by the court.
b) Since the marriage settlement was binding between the
Q: Tim came into possession of an old map showing parties, conjugal partnership of gains was the regime of
where a purported cache of gold bullion was hidden. their property relations. Under the rgime of conjugal
Without any authority from the government Tim partnership of gains, all properties acquired by the
conducted a relentless search and finally found the spouses during the marriage, jointly or by either one of
treasure buried in a new river bed formerly part of a them, through their work or undusty are conjugal.
parcel of land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The Therfore, the residential house and lot, and the
old river which used to cut through the land of Spouses condominium unit are conjugal having been jointly
Ursula and Urbito changed its course through natural acquired by the couple during the marriage. Inasmuch
causes. as the subsequent agreement on dissolution of the
conjugal partnership and separation of property was
Suppose Tirso and Tessie were married on 2 August invalid, conjugal partnership subsisted between the
1988 without executing any antenuptial agreement. One parties. Therefore, the mansion and the agricultural land
year after their marriage, Tirso while supervising the are also conjugal having been acquired by one of the
clearing of Tessie’s inherited land on the latter’s request, spouses during the marriage.
accidentally found the treasure not in the new river bed c) The marriage settlement cannot prejudice third parties,
but on the property of Tessie. To whom shall the such as the creditors, because it was not registered with
treasure belong? (1995 BAR) the local civil registrar where the marriage was
recorded. To bind third parties, the Family Code
A: Since Tirso and Tessie were married before the effectivity requires registration of the marriage settlement not only
of the Family Code, their property relation is governed by with the proper registers of deeds but also with the local
conjugal partnership of gains. Under Art. 54 of the Civil Code, civil registrar where the marriage was recorded. Hence,
the share of the hidden treasure which the law awards to the if the rules on conjugal partnership will prejudice the
finder or proprietor belongs to the conjugal partnership of creditors, the rles on absolute community will be
gains. The one-half share pertaining to Tessie as owner o the applied instead. However, insofar as debts contracted by
land, and the one-half share pertaining to Tirso as finder of one spouse without the consent of the other are
the treasure, belong to the conjugal partnership of gains. concerned, the rule is the same for both conjugal
partnership and absolute community. The partnership
Q: Gabby and Mila got married at Lourdes Church in or community is liable for debts contracted by one
Quezon City on July 10, 1990. Prior thereto, they spouse but only to the extent that it benefited the family.
executed a marriage settlement whereby they agreed Therefore, if the debts contracted by Mila redounded to
25
 CIVIL LAW
the benefit of the family, all the conjugal partnership 1) a) Yes. The Family Code provides that all property
properties are liable to pay them but only to the extent acquired during the marriage, whether the acquisition
the family was benefited. The separate properties of appears to have been made, contracted or registered in
Mila may be held answerable for Mila’s debts and the community property unless the contrary is proved.
obligations that did not redound to the benefit of the b) Yes. The shares are presumed to be absolute
family. community property having been acquired during the
marriage despite the fact that those shares were
Q: Bar candidates Patricio Mahigugmaon and Rowena registered only in her name. Alberto’s right to claim his
Amor decided to marry each other before the last day of share will only arise, however, at dissolution
the 1991 Bar Examinations. They agreed to execute a c) The presumption is still that the shares of stock are
Marriage Settlement. Rowena herself prepared the owned in common. Hence, they will form part of the
document in her own handwriting. They agreed on the absolute community or the conjugal partnership
following: (1) a conjugal partnership of gains; (2) each depending on what the property regime is.
donates to the other fifty (50) percent of his/her present d) Since Paulita acquired the shares of stock by onerous
property; (3) Rowena shall administer the conjugal title during the marriage, these are part of the conjugal
partnership property; and (4) neither may bring an or absolute community property as the case may be or
action for the annulment or declaration of nullity of after, the effectivity of the Family Code. Her physical
their marriage. Both signed the agreement in the separation from her husband did not dissolve the
presence of two witnesses. They did not, however, community of property. Hence, the husband has a right
acknowledge it before a notary public. to share in the shares of stock.
2) a) Under a community of property, whether absolute or
a) As to form, is the Marriage Settlement valid? May it relative, the disposition of property belonging to such
be registered in the registry of property? If not, what community is void if done by just one spouse without
steps must be taken to make it registrable? the consent of the other or authority of the proper court.
b) Are the stipulations valid? However, the land was registered in the name of Paulita
c) If the Marriage Settlement is valid as to form and the as “widow”. Hence, the buyer has the right to rely upon
above stipulations are likewise valid, does it now what appears in the record of the Register of Deeds and
follow that said Marriage Settlement is valid and should, consequently, be protected. Alberto cannot
enforceable? (1991 BAR) recover the land from Rafael but would have the right of
recourse against his wife.
A: b) The parcel of land is absolute community property
having been acquired during the marriage and through
a) Yes, it is valid as to form because it is in writing. Paulita’s industry despite the registration being only in
However, it cannot be registered in the registry of the name of Paulita. The land being community
property because it is not a public document. To make it property, its sale to Rafael without the consent of
registrable, it must be reformed and has to be notarized. Alberto is void. However, since the land is registered in
b) Stipulations 1 and 3 are valid because they are not the name of Paulita as widow, there is nothing in the title
contrary to law. Stipulation 4 is void because it is which would raise a suspicion for Rafael to make
contrary to law. Stipulation 2 is valid up to 1/5 of their inquiry. He, therefore, is an innocent purchaser for value
respective present properties by void as to the excess from whom the land may no longer be recovered.
(Art. 84, Family Code). c) The parcel of land is absolute community property
c) No, on September 15, 1991, the marriage settlement is having been acquired during the marriage and through
not yet valid and enforceable until the celebration of the Paulita’s industry despite registration only in the name
marriage, to take place before the last day of the 1991 of Paulita. The land being community property, its sale
Bar Examinations. to Rafael without the consent of Alberto is void.

Q: May succession be conferred by contracts or acts inter Q: Luis and Rizza, both 26 years of age and single, live
vivos? (1991 BAR) exclusively with each other as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage. Luis is gainfully
A: Under Art. 84 of the Family Code amending Art. 130 of the employed. Rizza is not employed, stays at home, and
Civil Code, contractual succession is no longer possible since takes charge of the household.
the law now requires that donations of future property be
governed by the provisions on the testamentary succession After living together for a little over twenty years, Luis
and formalities of wills. was able to save from his salary earnings during that
period the amout of P200, 000.00 presently deposited
Q: Paulita left the conjugal home because of the in a bank. A house and lot worth P500, 000.00 used by
excessive drinking of her husband, Alberto. Paulita, out the common-law spouses to purchase the property,
of her own endeavor, was able to buy a parcel of land P200, 000.00 had come from the sale of palay
which she was able to register under her name with the harvested from the hacienda owned by Luis and P300,
addendum “widow”. She also acquired stocks in a listed 000.00 from the rentals of a building belonging to
corporation registered in her name. Paulita sold the Rizza. In fine, the sum of P500, 000.00 had been part of
parcel of land to Rafael, who first examined the original the fruits received during the period of cohabitation
of the transfer certificate of title. from their separate property. A car worth P100,
000.00, being used by the common-law spouses, was
1) Has Alberto the right to share in the shares of stock donated just months ago to Rizza by her parents.
acquired by Paulita?
2) Can Alberto recover the land from Rafael? (1994 Luis and Rizza now decide to terminate their
BAR) cohabitation, and they ask you to give them your legal
advice on the following:
A:
a) How, under the law, should the bank deposit of
P200, 000.00, the house and lot valued at P500,

UST BAR OPERATIONS 26

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
000.00 and the car worth P100, 000.00 be allocated his wife, Issa and his mother, Sofia. Assuming that the
to them? relative values of both assets remained at the same
b) What would your answer be (to the above question) proportion:
had Luis and Rizza been living together all the time,
i.e., since twenty years ago, under a valid marriage? 1. State whether Sofia can rightfully claim that the
(1997 BAR) house and lot are not conjugal but exclusive
property of her deceased son.
A: 2. Will your answer be the same if Bob died before
August 3, 1988? (1998 BAR)
a) Art. 147 of the Family Code provides in part that when a
man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each A:
other, live exclusively with each other as husband and
wife without the benefit of marriage or under a void 1. Since Bob and Sofia got married in 1970, then the
marriage, their wages and salaries shall be owned by law that governs is the New Civil Code, in which case,
them through their work or industry shall be governed the property relations that should be applied as
by the rules of co-ownership. regards the property of the spouses is the system of
relative community or conjugal partnership of gains
In the absence of proof to the contrary, properties (Art. 119). By conjugal partnership of gains, the
acquired while they lived together shall be presumed to husband and the wife place in a common fund the fruits
have been obtained by their joint efforts, work or of their separate property and the income from their
industry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares. A work or Industry (Art. 142). In this instance, the lot
party who did not participate in the acquisition by the inherited by Bob in 1975 is his own separate
other party of any property shall be deemed to have property, he having acquired the same by lucrative
contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof if the title (Art. 148, par. 2). However, the house
former’s efforts consisted in the care and maintenance constructed from his own savings in 1981 during
of the family and of the household. the subsistence of his marriage with Issa is conjugal
property and not exclusive property in accordance
Thus: with the principle of "reverse accession" provided
for in Art. 158 of the Civil Code.
1. The wages and salaries of Luis in the amount of 2. Yes, the answer would still be the same. Since Bob and
P200, 000.00 shall be divided equally between Luis Issa contracted their marriage way back in 1970,
and Rizza. then the property relations that will govern is still
2. The house and lot valued at P500, 000.00 having the relative community or conjugal partnership of
been acquired by both of them through work or gains (Art.119). It will not matter if Bob died before or
industry shall be divided between them in after August 3, 1988 (effectivity date of the Family
proportion to their respective contribution in Code], what matters is the date when the marriage
consonance with the rules on co-ownership. Hence, was contracted. As Bob and Issa contracted their
Luis gets 2/5 while Rizza gets 3/5 of P500, 000.00. marriage way back in 1970, the property relation that
3. The car worth P100, 000.00 shall be exclusively governs them is still the conjugal partnership of gains
owned by Rizza, the same having been donated to (Art. 158).
her by her parents. Q: Adam, a building contractor, was engaged by Blas to
construct a house on a lot which he (Blas) owns. While
b) The property relations between Luis and Rizza, their digging on the lot in order to lay down the foudation of
marriage having been celebrated 20 years ago (under the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It turned out to
the Civil Code) shall be governed by the conjugal be the vault of the old Banco de las Islas Filipinas.
partnership of gains, under which the husband and wife Using a detonation device, Adam was able to open the
place in a common fund the proceeds, products, fruits vault containing old notes and coins which were in
and income from their separate properties and those circulation during the Spanish era. While the notes and
acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts coins are no longer legal tender, they were valued at
of by chance, and upon dissolution of the marriage or of P100 million because of their historical value and the
the partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained by coins silver nickel content. The following filed legal
either or both spouse shall be divided equally between claims over the notes and coins:
them (Art. 142, Civil Code).
i. Adam, as finder;
Thus: ii. Blas, as owner of the property where they were
found;
1. The salary of Luis deposited in the bank in the iii. Bank of the Philippine Islands, as successor-in-
amount of P200, 000.00 and the house and lot interest of the owner of the vault; and
valued at P500, 000.00 shall be divided equally iv. The Philippine Government because of their
between Luis and Rizza. historical value.
2. However, the car worth P100, 000.00 donated to
Rizza by her parents shall be considered to her own Assuming that either or both Adam and Blas are
paraphernal property, having been acquired by adjudged as owners, will the notes and coins be
luctrative title (par. 2, Art. 148, Civil Code). deemed part of their absolute community or conjugal
partnership of gains with their respective spouses?
Q: In 1970, Bob and Issa got married without (2008 BAR)
executing a marriage settlement. In 1975, Bob
inherited from his father a residential lot upon which, A: Yes. The hidden treasure will be part of the absolute
in 1981, he constructed a two-room bungalow with community or conjugal property of the respective
savings from his own earnings. At that time, the lot was marriages (Arts 91, 93 and 106, Family Code).
worth P800, 000.00 while the house, when finished
cost P600, 000.00. In 1989 Bob died, survived only by
27
 CIVIL LAW
Q: For five years since 1989, Tony, a bank vice-
president, and Susan, an entertainer, lived together as Q: G and B were married on July 3, 1989. On March 4,
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage 2001, the marriage, which bore no offspring, was
although they were capacitated to marry each other. declared void ab initio under Article 36 of the Family
Since Tony's salary was more than enough for their Code. At the time of the dissolution of the marriage,
needs, Susan stopped working and merely "kept house". the couple possessed the following properties:
During that period, Tony was able to buy a lot and
house in a plush subdivision. However, after five years, 1. a house and lot acquired by B on August 3, 1988,
Tony and Susan decided to separate. one third (1/3) of the purchase price
(representing downpayment) of which he paid;
a) Who will be entitled to the house and lot? one third (1/3) was paid by G on February 14,
b) Would it make any difference if Tony could not 1990 out of a cash gift given to her by her parents
marry Susan because he was previously married to on her graduation on April 6, 1989; and the
Alice from whom he is legally separated? (2000 balance was paid out of the spouses’ joint income;
BAR) and
2. an apartment unit donated to B by an uncle on
A: June 19, 1987.
a. Who owns the foregoing properties? Explain.
a) Tony and Susan are entitled to the house and lot as co- b. If G and B had married on July 3, 1987 and their
owners in equal shares. Under Article 147 of the Family marriage was dissolved in 2007, who owns the
Code, when a man and a woman who are capacitated to properties? Explain. (2010 BAR)
marry each other lived exclusively with each other as
husband and wife, the property acquired during their A:
cohabitation are presumed to have been obtained by
their joint efforts, work or industry and shall be owned a. Since the marriage was declared void ab initio in 2001,
by them in equal shares. This is true even though the no absolute community or conjugal partnership was
efforts of one of them consisted merely in his or her ever established between B and G. Their property
care and maintenance of the family and of the relation is governed by a “special co-ownership” under
household. Article 147 of the Family Code because they were
b) Yes, it would make a difference. Under Article 148 of capacitated to marry each other.
the Family Code, when the parties to the cohabitation
could not marry each other because of an impediment, Under Article 147, wages and salaries of the “former
only those properties acquired by both of them spouses” earned during their cohabitation shall be
through their actual joint contribution of money, owned by them in equal shares while properties
property, or industry shall be owned by them in acquired thru their work for industry shall be owned
common in proportion to their respective by them in proportion to their respective
contributions. The efforts of one of the parties in contributions. Care and maintenance of the family is
maintaining the family and household are not recognized as a valuable contribution. In the absence
considered adequate contribution in the acquisition of of proof as to the value of their respective
the properties. Since Susan did not contribute to the contributions, they shall share equally.
acquisition of the house and lot, she has no share
therein. If Tony cohabited with Susan after his legal If ownership of the house and lot was acquired by B on
separation from Alice, the house and lot is his August 3, 1988 at the time he bought it on installment
exclusive property. If he cohabited with Susan before before he got married, he shall remain owner of the
his legal separation from Alice, the house and lot house and lot but he must reimburse G for all the
belongs to his community or partnership with Alice. amounts she advanced to pay the purchase price and
for one-half share in the last payment from their joint
Q: In December 2000, Michael and Anna, after income. In such case, the house and lot were not
obtaining a valid marriage license, went to the Office of acquired during their cohabitation, hence, are not co-
the Mayor of Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The owned by B and G.
Mayor was not there, but the Mayor’s secretary asked
Michael and Anna and their witnesses to fill up and But if the ownership of the house and lot was acquired
sign the required marriage contract forms. The during the cohabitation, the house and lot will be
secretary then told them to wait, and went out to look owned as follows:
for the Mayor who was attending a wedding in a
neighboring municipality. When the secretary caught i. 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by B. He is an
up with the Mayor at the wedding reception, she undivided co-owner to that extent for his
showed him the marriage contract forms and told him contributions in its acquisition in the form of the
that the couple and their witnesses were waiting in his down payment he made before the celebration of
office. The Mayor forthwith signed all the copies of the the marriage. The money he used to pay the
marriage contract, gave them to the secretary who down payment was not earned during the
returned to the Mayor’s office. She then gave copies of cohabitation, hence, it is his exclusive property.
the marriage contract to the parties, and told Michael ii. 1/3 of the house and lot is owned by G. She is an
and Anna that they were already married. Thereafter, undivided co-owner to the extent for her
the couple lived together as husband and wife, and had contribution in its acquisition when she paid 1/3
three sons. What governs the properties acquired by of the purchase price using the gift from her
the couple? Explain. (2009 BAR) parents. Although the gift was acquired by G
during her cohabitation with B, it is her exclusive
A: The marriage being void, the property relationship that property. It did not consist of wage or salary or
governed their union is special co-ownership under Article fruit of her work or industry.
147 of the Family Code. This is on the assumption that there iii. 1/3 of the house is co-owned by B and G because
was no impediment for them to validly marry each other. the payment came from their co-owned funds,

UST BAR OPERATIONS 28

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
i.e., their joint income during their cohabitation Having been acquired during their cohabitation, the
which is shared by them equally in the absence of residential lot is presumed acquired through their joint
any proof to the contrary. work and industry under Art. 147, hence B and G are co-
After summing up their prospective shares, B and G owners of the said property in equal shares.
are undivided co-owners of the house and lot in equal
shares. Art. 147 also provides that when a party to the void
marriage was in bad faith, he forfeits his share in the co-
As to the apartment, it is owned exclusive by B ownership in favor of the common children or descendants.
because he acquired it before their cohabitation. Even In default of children or descendants, the forfeited share
if he acquired it during their cohabitation, it will still shall belong to the innocent party. In the foregoing problem,
be his exclusive property because it did not come from there is no showing that one party was in bad faith. Hence,
his wage or salary, or from his work or industry. It was both shall be presumed in good faith and no forfeiture shall
acquired gratuitously from his uncle. take place.

b. The answer is the same as in letter A. Since the parties Q: In June 1985, James married Mary. In September
to the marriage which was later declared void ab initio 1988, he also married Ophelia with whom he begot two
were capacitated to marry each other, the applicable (2) children, A and B. In July 1989, Mary died. In July
law under the New Civil Code was Article 144.This 1990, he married Shirley and abandoned Ophelia.
Article is substantially the same as Article 147 of the During their union, James and Ophelia acquired a
Family Code. residential lot worth P300, 000.00.

Hence, the determination of ownership will remain the Ophelia sues James for bigamy and prays that his
same as in question A. And even assuming that the two marriage with Shirley be declared null and void. James,
provisions are not the same, Article 147 of the Family on the other hand, claims that since his marriage to
Code is still the law that will govern the property Ophelia was contracted during the existence of his
relations of B and G because under Article 256, the marriage with Mary, the former is not binding upon him,
Family Code has retroactive effect insofar as it does the same being void ab initio; he further claims that his
not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights marriage to Shirley is valid and binding as he was
under the new Civil Code or other laws. Applying already legally capacitated at the time he married her.
Article 147 retroactively to the case of G and B will not What property regime governed the union of James and
impair any vested right. Until the declaration of nullity Ophelia? (1991 BAR)
of the marriage under the Family Code, B and G have
not as yet acquired any vested right over the A: The provisions of Art. 148 of the Family Code shall
properties acquired during their cohabitation. govern:

Q: In 1997, B and G started living together without the Art. 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under the
benefit of marriage. The relationship produced one preceding Article, only the properties acquired by both of
offspring, Venus. The couple acquired a residential lot the parties through their actual joint contribution of money
in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001, G having property, or industry shall be owned by them in common in
completed her 4-year college degree as a fulltime proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence
student, she and B contracted marriage without a of proof to the contrary, their contributions and
license. corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The same
rule and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of money
The marriage of B and G was, two years later, declared and evidences of credit.
null and void due to the absence of a marriage license. If
you were the judge who declared the nullity of the Q: In 1973, Mauricio, a Filipino pensioner of the U.S.
marriage, to whom would you award the lot? Explain Government, contracted a bigamous marriage with
briefly. (2010 BAR) Erlinda, despite the fact that his first wife, Carol, was
still living. In 1975, Mauricio and Erlinda jointly bought
A: Since the marriage was null and void, no Absolute a parcel of rice land, with the title being placed jointly in
Community or Conjugal Partnership was established their names. Shortly thereafter, they purchased another
between B and G. Their properties are governed by the property (a house and lot) which was placed in her
“special co-ownership” provision of Article 147 of the name alone as the buyer. In 1981, Mauricio died and
Family Code because both B and G were capacitated to Carol promptly filed an action against Erlinda to
marry each other. The said Article provides that when a recover both the Riceland and the house and lot,
man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each other, claiming them to be conjugal property of the first
live exclusively with each other as husband and wife marriage. Erlinda contends that she and the late
without the benefit of marriage, or under a void marriage: Mauricio were co-owners of the Riceland; and with
(1) their wages and salaries shall be owned by them in equal respect to the house and lot, she claims she is the
shares; and (2) property acquired by both of them through exclusive owner. Assuming she fails to prove that she
their work or industry shall be governed by the rules on co- had actually used her own money in either purchase,
ownership. In co-ownership, the parties are co-owners if how do you decide the case?
they contributed something of value in the acquisition of the
property. Their share is in proportion to their respective A: Under Art. 148 of the Family Code, which applies to
contributions. In an ordinary co-ownership the care and bigamous marriages, only the properties through their
maintenance of the family is not recognized as a valuable actual joint contribution of money, property or industry
contribution for the acquisition of a property. In the Article shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their
147 “special co-ownership”, however, care and maintenance respective contributions. Moreover, if one of the parties is
is recognized as a valuable contribution which will entitle validly married to another, his share in the co-ownership
the contributor to half of the property acquired. shall accrue to the absolute community/conjugal
partnership existing in such valid marriage.

29
 CIVIL LAW
Thus, in this case, since Erlinda failed to prove that she used a) Having been born during the marriage of Faye and
her own money to buy the Riceland and house and lot, she Brad, she is presumed to be the legitimate child of Faye
cannot claim to be the co-owner of the Riceland nor the and Brad. This presumption had become conclusive
exclusive owner of the house and lot. Such properties are because the period of time to impugn her filiation had
Mauricio’s. And since his share accrues to the conjugal already prescribed.
partnership with Carol, Carol can validly claim such b) No, she cannot impugn her own filiation. The law does
properties to the exclusion of Erlinda (Art. 144, Civil Code) not allow a child to impugn his or her own filiation. In
the problem, Laica’s legitimate filiation was accorded to
PATERNITY AND FILIATION (1990, 1995, 1999, 2003, her by operation of law which may be impugned only
2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010 BAR) by Brad, or his heirs in the cases provided by law within
the prescriptive period.
Q: Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without c) No, she cannot be legitimated by the marriage of her
children. Desirous to have a baby, they consulted Dr. biological parents. In the first place she is not, under the
Jun Canlas, a, prominent medical specialist on human law, the child of Roderick, in the second place, her
fertility. He advised Beth to undergo artificial biological parents could not have validly married each
insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm count other at the time she was conceived and born simply
was inadequate to induce pregnancy. Hence, the because Faye was still married to Roderick at that time.
couple looked for a willing donor. Andy the brother Under Article 177 of the Family Code, only children
of Ed, readily consented to donate his sperm. After a conceived or born outside of wedlock of parents who, at
series of test, Andy's sperm was medically the time of the conception of the child were not
introduced into Beth's ovary. She became pregnant disqualified by any impediment to marry each other,
and 9 months later, gave birth to a baby boy, named may be legitimated.
Alvin.
Q: Spouses B and G begot two offsprings. Albeit they
1. Who is the Father of Alvin? Explain. had serious personality differences, the spouses
2. What are the requirements, if any, in order for Ed continued to live under one roof. B begot a son by
to establish his paternity over Alvin? another woman. G also begot a daughter by another
man.
A:
A. If G gives the surname of B to her daughter by
1. Ed is the father of Alvin because Alvin was conceived another man, what can B do to protect their
and born during the marriage of his mother to Ed. legitimate children's interests? Explain.
Under the law, the child born during the marriage of the B. If B acquiesces to the use of his surname by G’s
mother to her husband is presumed to be the legitimate daughter by another man, what is/are the
child of the husband (Concepcion v. Almonte, 468 SCRA consequence/s? Explain. (2010 BAR)
438 [2005]). While it is true that there was no written
consent by the husband to the artificial insemination, A:
absence of such consent may only give the husband a
ground to impugn the legitimacy of the child but will A. B can impugn the status of G's daughter by another man
not prevent the child from acquiring the status of as his legitimate daughter on the ground that for
legitimate child of the husband at the time of its birth. biological reason he could not have been the father of
2. To establish Ed’s paternity over Alvin, only two the child, a fact that may be proven by the DNA test.
requirements must concur: (1) the fact that Ed and the Having been born during the marriage between B and
mother of Alvin are validly married, and (2) the fact that G, G's daughter by another man is presumed as the child
Alvin was conceived or born during the subsistence of of B under Article 164 of the Family Code. In the same
such marriage. action to impugn, B can pray for the correction of the
status of the said daughter in her record of birth.
Q: Roderick and Faye were high school sweethearts. B. If B acquiesces and does not file the action to impugn
When Roderick was 18 and Faye, 16 years old, they the legitimacy of the child within the prescriptive
started to live together as husband and wife without period for doing so under Article 170 of the Family
the benefit of marriage. When Faye reached 18 years Code, G's daughter by another man shall be conclusively
of age, her parents forcibly took her back and presumed as the legitimate daughter of B by G.
arranged for her marriage to Brad. Although Faye
lived with Brad after the marriage, Roderick continued Q: In 1985, Sonny and Lulu, both Filipino citizens, were
to regularly visit Faye while Brad was away at work. married in the Philippines. In 1987, they separated,
During their marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl, and Sonny went to Canada, where he obtained a
Laica. When Faye was 25 years old, Brad discovered divorce in the same year. He then married another
her continued liaison with Roderick and in one of their Filipina, Auring, in Canada on January 1, 1988. They
heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost no had two sons, James and John. In 1990, after failing to
time in marrying her true love Roderick, without a hear from Sonny, Lulu married Tirso, by whom she
marriage license, claiming that they have been had a daughter, Verna. In 1991, Sonny visited the
continuously cohabiting for more than 5 years. Philippines where he succumbed to heart attack.
Explain the respective filiation of James, John and
a) What is the filiation status of Laica? Verna. (2005 BAR)
b) Can Laica bring an action to impugn her own status
on the ground that based on DNA results, Roderick A: James and John are the illegitimate children of Sonny and
is her biological father? Auring because they were conceived and born outside a
c) Can Laica be legitimated by the marriage of her valid marriage. Verna is an illegitimate child of Lulu and
biological parents? (2008 BAR) Tirso having been conceived and born to the invalid
marriage of Lulu and Tirso. Verna cannot be presumed as
A: the legitimate child of Sonny because of the supervening
marriage that was celebrated between Lulu and Tirso even

UST BAR OPERATIONS 30

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
though such marriage is void ab initio. The case of Liyao v. Q: Nestor is the illegitimate son of Dr. Perez. When Dr.
Liyao is not applicable because in that case the wife begot a Perez died, Nestor intervened in the settlement of his
child by another man during her marriage to her estranged father's estate, claiming that he is the illegitimate son of
husband but no marriage was celebrated between the wife said deceased, but the legitimate family of Dr. Perez is
the father of the child. The child in that case was presumed denying Nestor's claim. What evidence or evidences
to be the legitimate child of the estranged husband. should Nestor present so that he may receive his rightful
share in his father's estate? (1999 BAR)
Q: In 1997, B and G started living together without the
benefit of marriage. The relationship produced one A: To be able to inherit, the illegitimate filiation of Nestor
offspring, Venus. The couple acquired a residential lot must have been admitted by his father in any of the
in Parañaque. After four (4) years or in 2001, G having following:
completed her 4-year college degree as a fulltime
student, she and B contracted marriage without a 1. the record of birth appearing in the civil register,
license. 2. a final judgment,
The marriage of B and G was, two years later, declared 3. a public document signed by the father, or
null and void due to the absence of a marriage license. 4. a private handwritten document signed by the latter
Is Venus legitimate, illegitimate, or legitimated? Explain (Art. 175 in relation to Art. 172, FC).
briefly. (2010 BAR)
Q: Two (2) months after the death of her husband who
A: Venus is illegitimate. She was conceived and born outside was shot by unknown criminal elements on his way
a valid marriage. Thus, she is considered illegitimate (Art home from office, Rose married her childhood
165, FC). While Venus was legitimated by the subsequent boyfriend, and seven (7) months after said marriage,
marriage of her parents, such legitimation was rendered she delivered a baby. In the absence of any evidence
ineffective when the said marriage was later on declared from Rose as to who is her child's father, what status
null and void due to absence of a marriage license. does the law give to said child? Explain. (1999 BAR)

Under Article 178 of the Family Code, “legitimation shall A: The child is legitimate of the second marriage under
take place by a subsequent valid marriage between parents. Article 168(2) of the Family Code which provides that a
The annulment of a voidable marriage shall not affect the "child born after one hundred eighty days following the
legitimation.” The inclusion of the underscored portion in celebration of the subsequent marriage is considered to
the Article necessarily implies that the Article's application have been conceived during such marriage, even though it
is limited to voidable marriages. It follows that when the be born within three hundred days after the termination of
subsequent marriage is null or void, the legitimation must the former marriage."
also be null and void. In the present problem, the marriage
between B and G was not voidable but void. Hence, Venus Q: Gigolo entered into an agreement with Majorette
has remained an illegitimate child. for her to carry in her womb his baby via in vitro
fertilization. Gigolo undertook to underwrite
Q: Abraham died intestate on 7 January 1994 Majorette’s pre-natal expenses as well as those
survived by his son Braulio. Abraham's older son attendant to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay
Carlos died on 14 February 1990. Danilo who claims Majorette P2 million and, in return, she would give
to be an adulterous child of Carlos intervenes in the custody of the baby to him.
proceedings for the settlement of the estate of
Abraham in representation of Carlos. Danilo was After Majorette gives birth and delivers the baby to
legally adopted on 17 March 1970 by Carlos with the Gigolo following her receipt of P2 million, she engages
consent of the "latter's wife.” your services as her lawyer to regain custody of the
baby. Is the child entitled to support and inheritance
1. Under the Family Code, how may an illegitimate from Gigolo? Explain. (2010 BAR)
filiation be proved? Explain.
2. As lawyer for Danilo, do you have to prove Danilo’s A: If Gigolo voluntarily recognized the child as his
illegitimate filiation? Explain. (1995, 1999 BAR) illegitimate child in accordance with Article 175 in relation
to Article 172 of the Family Code, the child is entitled to
A: support and inheritance from Gigolo.

1. Under Art. 172 in relation to Art. 173 and Art. 175 of Q: B and G (college students, both single and not
the FC, the filiation of illegitimate children may be disqualified to marry each other) had a romantic affair.
established in the same way and by the same G was seven months in the family way as of the
evidence as legitimate children. Art. 172 provides graduation of B. Right after graduation B went home to
that the filiation of legitimate children isestablished Cebu City. Unknown to G, B had a commitment to C (his
by any of the following: (1)the record of birth childhood sweetheart) to marry her after getting his
appearing in the civil register or a final Judgment; college degree. Two weeks after B’s marriage in Cebu
or (2) an admission of legitimate filiation in a public City, G gave birth to a son E in Metro Manila.
document or a private handwritten instrument and
signedby theparent concerned. In the absence of the After 10 years of married life in Cebu, B became a
foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be widower by the sudden death of C in a plane crash. Out
proved by: (1) the open and continuous possession of of the union of B and C, two children, X and Y, were
the status of a legitimate child; or (2) any other born. Unknown to C, while on weekend trips to Manila
means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. during the last 5 years of their marriage, B invariably
2. No. Since Danilo has already been adopted by Carlos, he visited G and lived at her residence and as a result of
ceased to be an illegitimate child. An adopted which, they renewed their relationship. A baby girl F
child acquires all the rights of a legitimate child under was born to B and G two years before the death of C.
Art, 189 of the FC. Bringing his family later to Manila, B finally married G.
Recently, G died.
31
 CIVIL LAW
prejudice Joey who has already acquired a vested right
What are the rights of B’s four children: X and Y of his thereto.
first marriage; and E and F, his children with G? Explain b) The defenses of Tintin are not tenable. The fact that
your answer. Joey’s birth certificate does not show that Steve was his
father is of no moment. The law does not require such
A: Under the facts stated, X and Y are legitimate children of mention. Besides, the New Civil Code provides that
B and G. E is the legitimate children of B and G. E is the when the father did not sign the birth certificate, his
legitimated child of B and G. F is the illegitimate child of B name should not be disclosed therein. While it is true
and C as legitimate children of B and C, X and Y have the that capacity to inherit is determined at the time of the
following rights: death of the decedent and that filiation is an element of
capacity to inherit, filiation is determined not at the
1) to bear the surnames of the father and the mother, in time of the death of the decedent but at the time of the
conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code on birth of the child who is born with a status. Such status
Surnames; may subsequently change such as in legitimation, but
2) to receive support frm their parents, their ascendants, legitimation is deemed to retroact to the time of birth.
and in proper cases, their brothers and sisters, in In the same manner, recognition when given voluntarily
conformity with the provisions of the Family Code on by the father, or decreed by the court, retroacts to the
Support; and time of the child’s birth.
3) to be entitled to the legitime and other successional c) If Joey filed the action and died when the New Civil
rights granted to them by the Civil Code. (Art. 174, Code was still in force, his action would be dismissed
Family Code). E is the legitimated child of B and G. because the action was not transmissible to the heris of
Under Art. 177 of the Family Code, only children the illegitimate child (Conde v. Abaya, 13 Phil. 249
conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents [1909]). But if the action was filed after effectivity of the
who, at the time of the conception of the former, were Family Code, and Joey died during the pendency of the
not disqualified by any impediment to marry each action for recognition, it should not be dismissed. Under
other may be legitimated. E will have the same rights the present Family Code, an action commenced by a
as X and Y. F is the illegitimate child of B and G. F has legitimate child to claim his legitimate filiation is not
the right to use the surname of G, her mother, and is extinguished by his death. The Family Code makes this
entitled to support as well as the legitime consisting of provision applicable to the action for recognition filed
½ of that of each of X, Y and E. (Art. 176, Family Code) by an illegitimate child. Joey has the right to invoke this
provision because it does not impair any vested rights.
Q: Steve was married to Linda, with whom he had a (Art. 175, Family Code)
daughter, Tintin. Steve fathered a son with Dina, his
secretary of 20 years, whom Dina named Joey, born Q: May an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her
on September 20, 1981. Joey's birth certificate did natural father, use the surname of her natural mother as
not indicate the father's name. Steve died on August the middle name? (2006 BAR)
13, 1993, while Linda died on December 3, 1993, A: Yes, an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her natural
leaving their legitimate daughter, Tintin, as sole heir. father, can use the surname of her natural mother as her
On May 16, 1994, Dina filed a case on behalf of Joey, middle name. The Court has ruled that there is no law
praying that the latter be declared an acknowledged prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by her natural
illegitimate son of Steve and that Joey be given his father to use, as middle name, her mother's surname. What is
share in Steve's estate, which is now being solely not prohibited is allowed. After all, the use of the maternal
held by Tintin. Tintin put up the defense that an name as the middle name is in accord with Filipino culture
action for recognition shall only be filed during the and customs and adoption is intended for the benefit of the
lifetime of the presumed parents and that the adopted (In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia,
exceptions under Article 285 of the Civil Code do G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005).
not apply to him since the said article has been
repealed by the Family Code. In any case, according to Q: Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an illicit affair with
Tintin, Joey's birth certificate does not show that Steve is his secretary, Nanette, a 19-year old girl, and begot a
his father. baby girl, Rona. Nanette sued Rodolfo for damages:
actual, for hospital and other medical expenses in
a) Does Joey have a cause of action against Tintin for delivering the child by caesarean section; moral,
recognition and partition? Explain. claiming that Rodolfo promised to marry her,
b) Are the defences set up by Tintin tenable? representing that he was single when, in fact, he was not;
c) Supposing that Joey died during the pendency of and exemplary, to teach a lesson to like-minded
the action, should the action be dismissed? Lotharios.
Explain. (2005 BAR)
a) Suppose Rodolfo later on acknowledges Rona and
A: gives her regular support, can he compel her to use
a) Yes, Joey have a cause of action against Tintin. While his surname? Why or why not?
the Family Code has repealed the provisions of the New b) When Rona reaches seven (7) years old, she tells
Civil Code on proof of filiation, said repeal did not Rodolfo that she prefers to live with him, because
impair vested rights. Joey was born an illegitimate child he is better off financially than Nanette. If Rodolfo
in 1981. As an illegitimate child, he had acquired, at files and action for the custody of Rona, alleging
birth, the right to prove his filiation in accordance with that he is Rona’s choice as custodial parent, will the
the provisions of the New Civil Code in force at that court grant Rodolfo’s petition? Why or why not?
time. Under the New Civil Code, an illegitimate echild
may file an action to compel his recognition even after A:
the death of the putative father when the father died
during the minority of the child. While the Family Code a) No. He has no right to compel Rona to use his surname.
has repealed this provision, it will not operate to The law does not give him the right simply because he
gave her support (RA 9255).

UST BAR OPERATIONS 32

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)

Under the Family Code, an illegitimate child was A dead child can be legitimated (2009 BAR)
required to use only the surname of the mother. Under
RA 9255 (An Act Allowing Illegitimate Children To Use A: A: TRUE. To be legitimated, the law does not require a
The Surname Of Their Father, Amending For The Purpose child to be alive at the same time of the marriage of his her
Article 176 Of Executive Order No. 209, Otherwise Known parents (Art. 177, FC). Furthermore, Art. 181 of the Family
As The "Family Code Of The Philippines"), otherwise Code which states that “The legitimation of children who
known as the Revilla law, however, the illegitimate child died before the celebration of marriage will benefit their
is given the option to use the surname of the illegitimate descendants,” does not preclude instances where such
father when the latter has recognized the former in legitimation will benefit no one but the child's ascendants,
accordance with law. Since the choice belongs to the or other relatives.
illegitimate child, Rodolfo cannotcompel Rona, if already
of age, to use the surname against her will. If Rona is still ADOPTION
a minor, to use the surname of Rodolfo will require the
consent of Rona's mother who has sole parental A. Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 (1994, 1995, 1996,
authority over her. 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009,
2010, 2012, 2014 BAR)
b) No, because Rodolfo has no parental authority over
Rona. He who has the parental authority has the right to Q: Spouses Esteban and Maria decided to raise their
custody. Under the Family Code, the mother alone has two (2) nieces, Faith and Hope, both minors, as their
parental authority over the illegitimate child. This is true own children after the parents of the minors died in a
even if the illegitimate father has recognized the child vehicular accident.
and even though he is giving support for the child. To
acquire custody over Rona, Rodolfo should first deprive Ten (10) years after, Esteban died. Maria later on
Nanette of parental authority if there is a ground under married her boss Daniel, a British national who had
the law, and in a proper court proceeding. In the same been living in the Philippines for two (2) years.
action, the court may award custody of Rona to Rodolfo
if it is for her best interest. With the permission of Daniel, Maria filed a petition
for the adoption of Faith and Hope. She did not include
Q: RN and DM, without any impediment to marry Daniel as her co-petitioner because for Maria, it was
each other, had been living together without benefit her former husband Esteban who raised the kids.
of church blessings. Their common-law union resulted
in the birth of ZMN. Two years later, they got married If you are the judge, how will you resolve the petition?
in a civil ceremony. Could ZMN be legitimated? Reason. (2014 BAR)
(2004 BAR)
A: I will dismiss the petition for adoption. The rule is that
A: ZMN was legitimated by the subsequent marriage of the husband and wife must jointly adopt and there are
RN and DM because at the time he was conceived, RN and only three recognized exceptions to joint adoption by the
DM could have validly married each other. Under the husband and wife: 1) if one spouse seeks to adopt the
Family Code children conceived and born outside of legitimate child of the other; 2) if one spouse seeks to
wedlock of parents who, at the time of the former's adopt his or her own illegitimate child; 3) if the spouses
conception, were not disqualified by any impediment to are legally separated. The case of Maria and Daniel does
marry each other are legitimated by the subsequent not appear to fall under any of the recognized exceptions,
marriage of the parents. accordingly the petition filed by the wife alone should be
dismissed.
Q: Gianna was born to Andy and Aimee, who at the
time Gianna's birth were not married to each other. Q: Honorato filed a petition to adopt his minor
While Andy was single at the time, Aimee was still in illegitimate child Stephanie, alleging that Stephanie’s
the process of securing a judicial declaration of nullity mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia; that Stephanie has
on her marriage to her ex-husband. Gianna's birth been using her mother’s middle name and surname;
certificate, which was signed by both Andy and Aimee, and that he is now a widower and qualified to be her
registered the status of Gianna as "legitimate", her adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanie’s middle
surname carrying that of Andy's and that her parents name be changed from "Astorga" to "Garcia," which is
were married to each other. her mother’s surname and that her surname "Garcia"
be changed to "Catindig," which is his surname. This
Assuming that Aimee is successful in declaring her the trial court denied. Was the trial court correct in
former marriage void, and Andy and Aimee denying Hororato’s request for Stephanie’s use of her
subsequently married each other, would Gianna be mother’s surname as her middle name? Explain.
legitimated? (2008 BAR) (1996, 2012 BAR)

A: No, Gianna will not be legitimated. While the court may A: No, the trial court was not correct. There is no law
have declared the marriage void ab initio and therefore, no prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by his natural
marriage took place in the eyes of the law, Gianna will still father to use as middle name his mother's surname. The
not be legitimated. This is because at the time she was law is silent as to what middle name an adoptee may use.
conceived and born her biological parents could not have In the case of In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga
validly married each other. For their marriage to be valid, the Garcia (G.R. No, 148311, March 31, 2005), the Supreme
court must first declare the first marriage null and void. In Court ruled that the adopted child may use the surname of
the problem, Gianna was conceived and born before the the natural mother as his middle name because there is no
court has decreed the nullity of her mother’s previous prohibition in the law against it. Moreover, it will also be
marriage. for the benefit of the adopted child who shall preserve his
lineage on his mother’s side and reinforce his right to
Q: True or False
33
 CIVIL LAW
inherit from his mother and her family. Lastly, it will make husband Tom, filed a petition in the Regional Trial
the adopted child conform with the time-honored Filipino Court of Makati, for the adoption of the minor child of
tradition of carrying the mother’s surname as the person’s her sister, a Filipina. Can the petition be granted? (2000
middle name. BAR)

Q: Spouses Primo and Monina Lim, childless, were A: It depends. If Tom and Sarah have been residing in the
entrusted with the custody of two (2) minor children, Philippines for at least 3 years prior to the effectivity of RA
the parents of whom were unknown. Eager of having 8552, the petition may be granted because the American
children of their own, the spouses made it appear that husband is not qualified to adopt.
they were the children’s parents by naming them
Michelle P. Lim and Michael Jude Lim. Subsequently, While the petition for adoption was filed in 1990, it was
Monina married Angel Olario after Primo’s death. considered refiled upon the effectivity of RA 8552, the
Domestic Adoption Act if 1998. This is the law applicable,
She decided to adopt the children by availing the the petition being still pending with the lower court.
amnesty given under R.A. 8552 to those individuals
who simulated the birth of a child. She filed separate Under the Act, Sarah and Tom must adopt jointly because
petitions for the adoption of Michelle, then 25 years they do not fall in any of the exceptions where one of the
old and Michael, 18. Both Michelle and Michael gave may adopt alone. When husband and wife must adopt
consent to the adoption. The trial court dismissed the jointly, the Supreme Court has held in a line of cases that
petition and ruled that Monina should have filed the both of them must be qualified to adopt. While Sarah, an
petition jointly with her new husband. Monina, in a alien, is qualified to adopt under Section 7(b)(1) of the Act
Motion for Reconsideration argues that mere consent for being a former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a
of her husband would suffice and that joint adoption is relative within the 4th degree of consanguinity or affinity,
not needed, for the adoptees are already emancipated. Tom an alien, is not qualified because he is neither a former
Is the trial court correct in dismissing the petitions for Filipino citizen, nor married to a Filipino. One of them not
adoption? Explain. (2012 BAR) being qualified to adopt their petition has to be denied.
However, if they have been residents of the Philippines
A: Yes, the trial court was correct. At the time the positions three years prior to the effectivity of the Act and continues
for adoptions were filed, petitioner had already remarried. to reside here until the decree of adoption is entered, they
Under the law, husband and wife shall adopt jointly, except are qualified to adopt the nephew of Sara under Section 7(b)
in cases enumerated in the law. The adoption cases of thereof, and the petition may be granted.
Michelle and James do not fall in any of the exceptions
provided in the law where a spouse is permitted to adopt Q: A German couple filed a petition for adoption of a
alone. Hence, Monina should adopt jointly with her minor Filipino child with the Regional Trial Court of
husband Angel (Adoption of Michelle P. Lim, G.R. Nos. Makati under the provisions of the Child and Youth
168992-93, May 21, 2009). Welfare Code which allowed alien to adopt. Before the
petition could be heard, the Family Code, which
Q: In 1975, Carol begot a daughter Bing, out of wedlock. repealed the Child and Youth Welfare Code, came into
When Bing was ten years old, Carol gave her consent for effect. Consequently, the Solicitor General filed a
Bing’s legal adoption by Norma and Manuel, which was motion to dismiss the petition, on the ground that the
granted by the court in 1990. In 1991, Carol learned Family Code prohibits aliens from adopting. If you were
that Norma and Manuel were engaged in a call-girl-ring the judge, how will you rule on the motion? (2001
that catered to tourists. Some of the girls lived with BAR)
Norma and Manuel. Carol got Bing back, who in the first
place wanted to return to her natural mother. A: The motion to dismiss the petition for adoption should
be denied. The law that should govern the action is the law
1) Who has a better right to the custody of Bing, Carol in force at the time of filing of the petition. At that time, it
or Norma? was the Child and Youth Welfare Code that was in effect,
2) Aside from taking physical custody of Bing, what not the Family Code. Petitioners have already acquired a
legal actions can Carol take to protect Bing? vested right on their qualification to adopt which cannot
be taken away by the Family Code (Republic v. Miller, G.R.
A: No. 125932, April 21, 1999, citing Republic v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 92326, January 24, 1992).
1) The natural mother, Carol should have the better right
in light of the principle that the child’s welfare is the Q: Lina, a former Filipina who became an American
paramount consideration in custody rights. Obviously, citizen shortly after her marriage to an American
Bing’s continued stay in her adopting parents’ house husband, would like to adopt in the Philippines, jointly
where interaction with the call girls is inevitable, would with her husband, one of her minor brothers. Assuming
be detrimental to her moral and spiritual development. that all the required consents have been obtained, could
This could be the reason for Bing’s expressed desire to the contemplated joint adoption in the Philippine
return to her natural mother. It should be noted, prosper? Explain. (2003 BAR)
however, that Bing is no longer a minor, being 19 years
of age now. It is doubtful that a court can still resolve A: Yes, Lina and her American husband can jointly adopt a
the question of custody over one who is sui juris and minor brother of Lina because she and her husband are
not otherwise incapacitated. both qualified to adopt. Lina, as a former Filipino citizen, can
2) Carol may file an action to deprive Norma of parental adopt her minor brother under Sec. 7(b)(i) of RA 8552
authority under Art. 231 of the Family Code. Or file an (Domestic Adoption Act of 1998).
action for the rescission of the adoption under Article
191 in relation to Art. 231 (2) of the Family Code. The alien husband can now adopt under Sec. 7(b) of
RA8552. The Supreme Court has held in several cases that
Q: Sometime in 1990, Sarah, born a Filipino but by then when husband and wife are required to adopt jointly, each
a naturalized American citizen, and her American one of them must be qualified to adopt in his or her own

UST BAR OPERATIONS 34

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
right (Republic v. Toledano, G.R. No. 94147, June 8, middle name. The Court has ruled that there is no law
1994).However, the American husband must comply with prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by her natural
the requirements of the law including the residency father to use, as middle name, her mother's surname. What is
requirement of three (3) years. Otherwise, the adoption will not prohibited is allowed. After all, the use of the maternal
not be allowed. name as the middle name is in accord with Filipino culture
and customs and adoption is intended for the benefit of the
Q: In 1984, Eva, a Filipina, went to work as a nurse adopted (In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia,
in the USA. There, she met and fell in love with Paul, an G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005).
American citizen, and they got married in 1985. Eva
acquired American citizenship in 1987. During their Q: For purpose of this question, assume all formalities
sojourn in the Philippines in 1990, they filed a joint and procedural requirements have been complied
petition for the adoption of Vicky, a 7-year old daughter with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior to
of Eva's sister. The government, through the Office of their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In 1971 and
the Solicitor General, opposed the petition on the 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and
ground that the petitioners, being both foreigners, are Michelle respectively. In 1973, Dessa died while giving
disqualified to adopt Vicky. birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never
married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted
a) Is the government's opposition tenable? Explain. Shelly. Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his
b) Would your answer be the same if they sought to girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died
adopt Eva's illegitimate daughter? Explain. in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who may
c) Supposing that they filed the petition to adopt inherit from Ramon and who may not? Give your
Vicky in the year 2000, will your answer be the reason briefly. (2007 BAR)
same? Explain. (2000, 2003, 2005 BAR)
A:
A: The following may inherit from Ramon:

a) Yes, the position of the government is tenable. 1. Michelle, as an adopted child of Ramon, will inherit as
Foreigners are disqualified to adopt unless they fall in a legitimate child of Ramon. As an adopted child,
any of the exceptions provided for in the law. Eva and Michelle has all the rights of a legitimate child (Sec 18,
Paul are both foreigners. Eva, Falls in one of the Domestic Adoption Law).
exceptions. She is qualified to adopt because she is a 2. Lia will inherit in representation of Anna. Although Lia
former Filipino citizen who wishes to adopt a relative is an illegitimate child, she is not barred by Articles
by consanguinity. Unfortunately, Paul is not qualified to 992, because her mother Anna is an illegitimate
adopt because he does not fall in any of the exceptions. herself. She will represent Anna as regards Anna's
Hence, they cannot adopt jointly. When husband and legitime under Art. 902 and as regards Anna's intestate
wife are adopting jointly, both of them must be qualified share under Art. 990.
to adopt in their own right Eva cannot, alone by herself,
adopt her niece because husband and wife must adopt The following may not inherit from Ramon:
jointly unless they fall in any of the exceptions provided
for in the law. They cannot adopt separately because 1. Shelly, being an adopted child, she cannot represent
they do not fall in any of the exceptions. Hence, whether Cherry. This is because adoption creates a personal
separately or jointly, Eva and Paul cannot adopt Vicky legal relation only between the adopter and the
in the Philippines (Domestic Adoption Law [RA 8552]) adopted. The law on representation requires the
b) No, my answer would be different. Eva is qualified to representative to be a legal heir of the person he is
adopt her illegitimate daughter, because she falls in one representing and also of the person from whom the
of the exceptions that allow foreigners to adopt. She is a person being represented was supposed to inherit.
former Filipino citizen adopting her relative by While Shelly is a legal heir of Cherry, Shelly is not a
consanguinity. Eva can adopt separately her illegitimate legal heir of Ramon. Adoption created a purely
child because her case is also an exception to the rule personal legal relation only between Cherry and
that husband and wife should adopt jointly. Shelly.
c) Yes, my answer will be the same. The new Law on 2. Hans and Gretel are barred from inheriting from
Domestic Adoption allows a foreigner to adopt in the Ramon under Art. 992. Being illegitimate children, they
Philippines if he has been residing in the Philippines for cannot inherit ab intestato from Ramon.
at least 3 years prior to the filing of the petition unless
the law waives that residency requirement. Paul and Q: Despite several relationships with different women,
Eva have not resided in the Philippines for the last 3 Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship
years. However, Eva will qualify for waiver because she with Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years
was a former Filipino citizen who wishes to adopt a old. His second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and
relative by consanguinity within the 4th degree. Ryan. His third, with Elena, bore him no children
Unfortunately Paul will not qualify to adopt because he although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous
does not fall in any of the instances for waiver to apply. relationship. His last, with Fe, produced no biological
They cannot adopt jointly because one of them is not children but they informally adopted without court
qualified. Neither may Eva adopt alone because she proceedings, Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they
does not fall in any of the exceptions that allow husband consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby
and wife to adopt separately. and was entrusted to them by the midwife who
attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, including
Q: May an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her Amy, now live with Andrew in his house. Is there any
natural father, use the surname of her natural mother as legal obstacle to the legal adoption of Amy by Andrew?
the middle name? (2006 BAR) To the legal adoption of Sandy by Andrew and Elena?
(2008 BAR)
A: Yes, an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her natural
father, can use the surname of her natural mother as her
35
 CIVIL LAW
A: No, there is no legal obstacle to the legal adoption of Amy signified his willingness to adopt Laurie. Can John file
by Andrew. While a person of age may not be adopted, Amy the petition for adoption? If yes, what are the
falls within two exceptions: (1) she is an illegitimate child requirements? If no, why? (2010 BAR)
and she is being adopted by her illegitimate father to
improve her status; and (2) even on the assumption that she A: No, John cannot file the petition to adopt alone.
is not an illegitimate child of Andrew, she may still be Philippine law requires husband and wife to adopt jointly
adopted, although of legal age, because she has been except on certain situations enumerated in the law. The
consistently considered and treated by the adopter as his case of John does not fall in any of the exceptions (RA
own child since minority. In fact, she has been living with 8552).
him until now.
B. Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995 (R.A. No. 8043)
There is a legal obstacle to the adoption of Sandy by Andrew (2005 BAR)
and Elena. Andrew and Elena cannot adopt jointly because
they are not married. Q: Hans Berber, a German national, and his Filipino
wife, Rhoda, are permanent residents of Canada. They
Q: Rafael, a wealthy bachelor, filed a petition for the desire so much to adopt Magno, an 8-year old
adoption of Dolly, a one-year old foundling who had a orphaned boy and a baptismal godson of Rhoda.
severe heart ailment. During the pendency of the Since the accidental death of Magno's parents in 2004,
adoption proceedings, Rafael died of natural causes. he has been staying with his aunt who, however, could
The Office of the Solicitor General files a motion to hardly afford to feed her own family. Unfortunately,
dismiss the petition on the ground that the case can no Hans and Rhoda cannot come to the Philippines to
longer proceed because of the petitioner’s death. adopt Magno although they possess all the
qualifications as adoptive parents. Is there a possibility
a) Should the case be dismissed? Explain. for them to adopt Magno? How should they go about it?
b) Will your answer be the same if it was Dolly who (2005 BAR)
died during the pendency of the adoption
proceedings? Explain. (2009 BAR) A: Under RA 8043, establishing the rules for inter-country
adoption of Filipino children, the spouses may file an
A: application to adopt a Filipino child with the Inter-country
Adoption Board (ICAB) after they have been determined
a) It depends on the stage of the proceedings when Rafael eligible and fit to adopt by the State Welfare Agency or a
died. If he died after all the requirements under the law licensed adoption agency in Canada. The Candian agency
have been complied with and the case is already will forward the required supporting documents to the ICAB
submitted for resolution, the court may grant the for matching with a Filipino child. The spouses, after filing a
petition and issue a decree of adoption despite the petition with the ICAB, shall be issued the Placement
death of the adopter (Sec. 13, RA 8552). Otherwise, the Authority and when all the travel documents of the child
death of the petitioner shall have the effect terminating who is declared legally eligible for adoption as determined
the proceedings. by the ICAB, are ready the adoptive parents or any one of
b) No, if it was Dolly who died, the case should be them shall personally fetch the child in the Philippines for
dismissed. Her death terminates the proceedings (Art. adoption in the court of the foreigner’s country.
13, RA 8552).
ISUPPORT (FAMILY CODE) (2004, 2006, 2008, 2010
Q: Spouses Rex and Lea bore two children now aged 14 BAR)
and 8. During the subsistence of their marriage, Rex
begot a child by another woman. He is now 10 years of Q: Despite several relationships with different women,
age. On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child by Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship
another woman, she filed a petition for legal separation with Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years
which was granted. Rex now wants to adopt his old. His second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and
illegitimate child. Ryan. His third, with Elena, bore him no children
although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous
A. Whose consent is needed for Rex’s adoption of his relationship. His last, with Fe, produced no biological
illegitimate child? children but they informally adopted without court
B. If there was no legal separation, can Rex still adopt proceedings, Sandy's now 13 years old, whom they
his illegitimate child? Explain. (2010 BAR) consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby
and was entrusted to them by the midwife who
A: attended to Sandy's birth. All the children, including
Amy, now live with Andrew in his house.
A. The consent of the 14-year-old legitimate child, of the
10-year-old illegitimate child and of the biological a) In his old age, can Andrew be legally entitled to
mother of the illegitimate child are needed for the claim support from Amy, Jon, Ryan, Jane, and
adoption (Sec. 7 and 9, RA 8552). The consent of Lea is Sandy assuming that all of them have the means to
no longer required because there was already a final support him?
decree of legal separation. b) Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Jane, and Sandy legally claim
B. Yes, he can still adopt his illegitimate child but with the support from each other? (2008 BAR)
consent of his spouse, of his 14-year-old legitimate
child, of the illegitimate child, and of the biological A:
mother of the illegitimate child (Sec. 7 and 9, RA 8552).
a) Andrew can claim support from them all, except from
Q: Eighteen-year old Filipina Patrice had a daughter Sandy and Jane, who is not his child, legitimate,
out of wedlock whom she named Laurie. At 26, Patrice illegitimate or adopted.
married American citizen John who brought her to live b) Amy, Jon and Ryan, can legally claim support from
with him in the United States of America. John at once each other under Art. 196 of the FC which provides

UST BAR OPERATIONS 36

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
that brothers and sisters not legitimately related, liable for the damages caused by the acts or
whether of the full or half-blood, are bound to support omissions of the unemancipated minor unless they
each other except when the need for support is due to exercised the proper diligence required under the
a cause imputable to the claimant’s fault or negligence. circumstances (Art.219, FC). In the problem, the TEACHER
Jane and Sandy, however, cannot legally claim support and the SCHOOL AUTHORITIES are liable for the
from each other and from Amy, Jon and Ryan because blindness of the victim, because the student who causes
they are not related to any of them. it was under their special parental authority and they
were negligent. They were negligent because they were
Q: Under Article 213 of the Family Code, no child chatting in the corridor during the class period when the
under 7 years of age shall be separated from the stabbing incident occurred. The incident could have been
mother unless the court finds compelling reasons to prevented had the teacher been inside the classroom at
order otherwise. that time. The guilty boy’s PARENTS are subsidiarily
liable under Article 219 of the Family Code.
1) Explain the rationale of this provision.
2) Give at least 3 examples of “compelling reasons” Q: On May 5, 1989, 16-year old Rozanno, who was
which justify the taking away from the mother’s issued a student permit, drove to school a car, a gift
custody of her child under 7 years of age. (2006 from his parents. On even date, as his class was
BAR) scheduled to go on a field trip, his teacher requested
him to accommodate in his car, as he did, four (4) of
A: his classmates because the van rented by the school
was too crowded. On the way to a museum which the
1) The rationale of the provision is that a child below 7 students were scheduled to visit, Rozanno made a
years old needs the love and care which only its mother wrong maneuver, causing a collision with a jeepney.
can give. The welfare of the child is given the highest One of his classmates died. He and the three (3) others
priority and the interest of the child prevails over were badly injured.
procedural rules.
2) The following have been considered as “compelling A. Who is liable for the death of Rozanno’s classmate
reasons” to deprive a mother of custody: and the injuries suffered by Rozanno and his 3
other classmates? Explain.
a. Neglect, B. Under the same facts, except the date of
b. Abandonment, occurrence of the incident, this time in mid-1994,
c. Unemployment, what would be your answer? Explain. (2010 BAR)
d. Immorality (Espiritu v. CA, 242 SCRA 362 [1995]),
e. Alcoholism, A:
f. Drug addiction,
g. Maltreatment, A. At the time the incident occurred in May 1989,
h. Insanity, Rozanno was still a minor. Being a minor, Art. 218,
i. Highly communicable serious disease, (FC) applies. Pursuant to Art. 218, the school, its
j. Grave physical handicap, administrators and teachers shall be liable for the acts
k. Serious and credible threat by the child to ham of minor Rozanno because of the special parental
himself if separated from his mother (Luna v. CA authority and responsibility that they exercise over
137 SCRA 7 [1985]) him. The authority applies to all authorized activities,
whether inside or outside the premises of the school,
Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between: Substitute entity or institution. The field trip on which occasion
parental authority and special parental authority. (2004 Rozanno drove the car, was an authorized activity,
BAR) and, thus, covered by the provision. Furthermore, the
parents of Rozanno are subsidiarily liable pursuant to
A: In substitute parental authority, the parents lose their Art. 219 (FC), and principally liable under Art. 221 (FC),
parental authority in favor of the substitute who acquires it if they are negligent.
to the exclusion of the parents. B. Since Rozanno was 16 years old in 1989, if the
In special parental authority, the parents or anyone incident happened sometime in the middle of 1994,
exercising parental authority does not lose parental Rozanno have been 21 years old at the time. Hence, he
authority. Those who are charged with special parental was already of legal age. The law reducing the age of
authority exercise such authority only during the time that majority to 18 years took effect in December 1989.
the child is in their custody or supervision.
Being of legal age, Arts. 218, 219, and 221(FC), are no
Substitute parental authority displaces parental authority longer applicable. In such case, only Rozanno will be
while special parental authority concurs with parental personally responsible for all the consequences of his
authority. act unless his school or his parents were themselves
also negligent and such negligence contributed to the
Q: If during class hours, while the teacher was happening of the incident. In that event, the school or
chatting with other teachers in the school corridor, a 7 his parents are not liable under Art. 218, 218 or 221
year old male pupil stabs the eye of another boy with a (FC), but will be liable under general provision on the
ball pen during a fight, causing permanent blindness Civil Code on quasi-delict.
to the victim, who could be liable for damages for
the boy’s injury: the teacher, the school authorities, Q: DON, an American businessman, secured parental
or the guilty boy’s parents? Explain. (2003 BAR) consent for the employment of five minors to play
certain roles in two movies he was producing at home in
A: The school, its administrators, and teachers have Makati. They worked at odd hours of the day and night,
special parental authority and responsibility over the but always accompanied by parents or other adults. The
minor child while under their supervision, instruction or producer paid the children talent fees at rates better
custody (Art.218, FC). They are principally and solidarily than adult wages.
37
 CIVIL LAW
the unlocked drawer inside his father's bedroom. Jake
But a social worker, DEB, reported to OSWD that these died as a result of the lone gunshot wound he sustained.
children often missed going to school. They sometimes His parents sued Julio's parents for damages arising
drank wine, aside from being exposed to drugs. In some from quasi-delict. At the time of the incident, Julio
scenes, they were filmed naked or in revealing was 18 years old living with his parents. Julio's
costumes. In his defense, DON contended all these were parents moved to dismiss the complaint against them
part of artistic freedom and cultural creativity. None of claiming that since Julio was already of majority age,
the parents complained, said DON. He also said they they were no longer liable for his acts.
signed a contract containing a waiver of their right to file
any complaint in any office or tribunal concerning the 1) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Why?
working conditions of their children acting in the 2) What is the liability of Julio's parents to Jake's
movies. parents? Explain your answer. (1993 BAR)
Is the waiver valid and binding? Why or why not?
Explain. (2004 BAR) A:

A: The waiver is not valid. Although the contracting parties 1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be granted.
may establish such stipulations, clauses, terms and Article 236 of the Family Code as amended by RA6809,
conditions as they may deem convenient, they may not do so provides in the third paragraph that "nothing in this
if such are contrary to law, morals, good customs, public Code shall be construed to derogate from the duty or
order, or public policy (Art. 1306). The parents' waiver to file responsibility of parents and guardians for children
a complaint concerning the working conditions detrimental and wards below twenty-one years of age
to the moral well-being of their children acting in the movies mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of
is in violation of the Family Code and Labor laws. Thus, the Article 2180 of the Civil Code".
waiver is invalid and not binding. 2) The liability of Julio's parents to Jake's parents arises
The Child Labor Law is a mandatory and prohibitory law and from quasi-delict and shall cover specifically the
the rights of the child cannot be waived as it is contrary to following:
law and public policy. a. P50,000.00 for the death of the son;
b. such amount as would correspond to lost
Q: Gigolo entered into an agreement with Majorette earning capacity; and
for her to carry in her womb his baby via in vitro c. moral damages.
fertilization. Gigolo undertook to underwrite
Majorette’s pre-natal expenses as well as those RETROACTIVITY OF THE FAMILY CODE (ART. 256)
attendant to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay (2000 BAR)
Majorette P2 million and, in return, she would give
custody of the baby to him. Q: On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married
to each other without a marriage settlement. In 1985,
After Majorette gives birth and delivers the baby to they acquired a parcel of land in Quezon City. On
Gigolo following her receipt of P2 million, she engages June 1, 1990, when Angelina was away in Baguio,
your services as her lawyer to regain custody of the Rene sold the said lot to Marcelo. Is the sale void or
baby. voidable? (2000)

A. What legal action can you file on behalf of A: The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family
Majorette? Explain. Code may apply retroactively but only if such application
B. Can Gigolo demand from Majorette the return of the will not impair vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got
P2 million if he returns the baby? Explain. (2010 married in 1980, the law that governed their property
BAR) relations was the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as
interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of Felipe v.
A: Aldon (G.R. No. L-60174, February 16, 1983) and
reiterated in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga (G.R No,
A. As her lawyer, I can file a petition for habeas corpus on 118784, September 2, 1999), the sale executed by the
behalf Majorette to recover custody of her child. Since husband without the consent of the wife is voidable. The
she is the mother of the child that was born out of husband has already acquired a vested right on the
wedlock, she has exclusive parental authority and voidable nature of dispositions made without the consent
custody over the child. Gigolo, therefore, has no right to of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of the Family Code which
have custody of the child and his refusal to give up makes the sale void does not apply.
custody will constitute illegal detention for which
habeas corpus is the proper remedy.
B. No, he cannot. Both he and Majorette are guilty of PART III – PROPERTY
violating the provision of the Anti-Child Abuse Law
(RA7610) on child trafficking. Being in pari delicto, the
parties shall be left where they are and Gigolo cannot CLASSIFICATION (1995, 1997, 2007 BAR)
demand the return of what he paid.
Q: Salvador, a timber concessionaire, built on his lot a
EMANCIPATION (1993 BAR) warehouse where he processes and stores his timber
for shipment. Adjoining the warehouse is a furniture
Q: Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were factory owned by NARRAMIX of which Salvador is a
sweethearts. At a party at the house of a mutual majority stockholder. NARRAMIX leased space in the
friend, Lea met Jake, also 18 years old, who showed warehouse where it placed its furniture-making
interest in her. Lea seemed to entertain Jake because machinery. (1995 BAR)
she danced with him many times. In a fit of jealousy, 1. How would you classify the furniture-making
Julio shot Jake with his father's 38 calibre revolver machinery as property under the Civil Code?
which, before going to the party he was able to get from Explain.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 38

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
2. Suppose the lease contract between Salvador and c) Are the trees, plants and flowers immovable or
NARRAMIX stipulates that at the end of the lease movable property? (2007 BAR)
the machinery shall become the property of the
lessor, will your answer be the same? Explain. A:

A: a) The platform is an immovable property under Art. 415

(9) NCC, which provides that "docks and structures
1. The furniture-making machinery is movable property which, though floating, are intended by their nature
because it was not installed by the owner of the and object to remain at a fixed place on a river, lake or
tenement. To become immovable under Art. 415 (5) of coast." Since the floating platform is a petroleum
the NCC, the machinery must be installed by the owner operation facility, it is intended to remain
of the tenement. permanently where it is situated, even if it is tethered
2. It is immovable property. When there is a provision in to a ship which is anchored to the seabed.
the lease contract making the lessor, at the end of the b) The equipment and living quarters of the crew are
lease owner of the machinery installed by the lessee, immovable property. Art. 415 (3) of the NCC classifies
the said machinery is considered to have been as an immovable "everything attached to an
installed by the lessor through the lessee who acted immovable in a fixed manner, in such a way that it
merely as his agent. Having been installed by the cannot be separated therefrom without breaking the
owner of the tenement, the machinery became material or deterioration of the object." Both the
immovable under Art. 415 of the NCC (Davao Sawmill equipment and the living quarters are permanently
v. Castillo, 61 Phil 709) attached to the platform which is also an immovable.
The equipment can also be classified as an immovable
Q: Pedro is the registered owner of a parcel of land property under Art. 415 (5) NCC because such
situated in Malolos, Bulacan. In 1973, he mortgaged equipment are "machinery, receptacles, instruments
the land to the Philippine National Bank (PNB) to or implements intended by the owner of the tenement
secure a loan of P100, 000.00. For Pedro’s failure to for an industry or works which may be carried on in a
pay the loan, the PNB foreclosed on the mortgage in building or on a piece of land and which tend directly
1980, and the land was sold at public auction to PNB to meet the needs of the industry or works." It is
for being the highest bidder. PNB secured the title logically assumed that the petroleum industry may be
thereto in 1987. carried on in a building or on a piece of land and the
platform is analogous to a building.
In the meanwhile, Pedro, who was still in possession of c) The trees, plants and flowers planted in the garden
the land, constructed a warehouse on the property. In area of the platform are immovable property under
1988, the PNB sold the land to Pablo. The Deed of Sale Art. 415 (2) NCC which classifies as an immovable
was amended in 1989 to include the warehouse. property "trees, plants and growing fruits, while they
are attached to the land or form an integral part of an
Pedro, claiming ownership of the warehouse, files a immovable, the petroleum operation facility.
complaint to annul the amended Deed of Sale before
the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, where he OWNERSHIP (1995, 1997, 2000, 2008, 2010, 2013,
resides, against both the PNB and Pablo. The PNB filed 2016 BAR)
a motion to dismiss the complaint for improper venue
contending that the warehouse is real property under Q: Joven and Juliana are the owners of a 30-hectare
Art. 415(1) of the Civil Code and therefore the action plantation in Cotabato, covered by a title. One day, a
should have instead been filed in Malolos, Bulacan. group of armed men forcibly entered their house and,
Pedro claims otherwise. The question arose as to at gun point, forced them to sign a Deed of Absolute
whether the warehouse should be considered as real Sale in favor of Romeo. Romeo got the title from them
or personal property. and they were ejected from the house and threatened
not to come back or else they will be killed. The
If consulted, what would your legal advice be? (1997 spouses went to Manila and resided there for more
BAR) than 35 years. They never went back to Cotabato for
fear of their lives. Word came to them that peace and
A: The warehouse which is a construction adhered to the order have been restored in their former place of
soil is an immovable by nature under Art. 415(1), and the residence and they decided to reclaim their land for
proper venue of any case to recover ownership of th same the benefit of their grandchildren. Joven and Juliana
which is what the purpose of the complaint to annul the filed a suit for reconveyance of their property. This
amended Deed of Sale amounts to, should be the place was opposed by the grandson of Romeo to whom the
where the property is located, or the RTC of Bulacan. title was eventually transferred, on the ground of
Q: Manila Petroleum Co. owned and operated a laches and prescription. Decide the case and rule on
petroleum operation facility off the coast of Manila. the defenses of laches and prescription. Explain your
The facility was located on a floating platform made of answer. (2016 BAR)
wood and metal, upon which was permanently
attached the heavy equipment for the petroleum A: The right of the registered owners, Joven and Juliana, to
operations and living quarters of the crew. The file suit to recover their property, is not barred by
floating platform likewise contained a garden area, prescription. Under Section 47 of P.D. No. 1529, no title to
where trees, plants and flowers were planted. The registered land in derogation of the title of the registered
platform was tethered to a ship, the MV 101, which owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse
was anchored to the seabed. possession.

a) Is the platform movable or immovable property? Proof of possession by the owner in an action for
b) Are the equipment and living quarters movable or recoveyance is immaterial and inconsequential. The right
immovable property? to recover possession is equally imprescriptible since
possession is a mere consequence of ownership. (Republic
39
 CIVIL LAW
v. Mendoza, 627 SCRA 443 [2010]). The right of Joven and Ursula and Urbito changed its course through natural
Juliana to recover is not barred by laches, either. Laches causes. To whom shall the treasure belong? Explain
deals with unreasonable delay in filing the action. The (1995 BAR)
owner’s delay, if any, cannot be construed as deliberate
and intentional. They were simply coerced out of Cotabato A: The treasure was found in a property of public
and threatened with death if they returned, and, thus, dominion, the new river bed. Since Tim did not have
could not have filed them. authority from the government and, therefore, was a
trespasser, he is not entitled to the one-half share allotted
Q: Anselmo is the registered owner of a land and a to a finder of hidden treasure. All of it will go to the State.
house that his friend Boboy occupied for a nominal In addition, under Art. 438 of the NCC in order that the
rental and on the condition that Boboy would vacate finder be entitled to the 1/2 share, the treasure must be
the property on demand. With Anselmo's knowledge, found by chance, that is by sheer luck. In this case, since
Boboy introduced renovations consisting of an Tim found the treasure not by chance but because he
additional bedroom, a covered veranda, and a relentlessly searched for it, he is not entitled to any share
concrete block fence, at his own expense. in the hidden treasure.
Subsequently, Anselmo needed the property as his
residence and thus asked Boboy to vacate and turn it Q: Marcelino, a treasure hunter as just a hobby, has
over to him. Boboy, despite an extension, failed to found a map which appears to indicate the location of
vacate the property, forcing Anselmo to send him a hidden treasure. He has an idea of the land where
written demand to vacate. In his own written reply, the treasure might possibly be found. Upon inquiry,
Boboy signified that he was ready to leave but Marcelino learns that the owner of the land, Leopoldo,
Anselmo must first reimburse him the value of the is a permanent resident of Canada. Nobody, however,
improvements he introduced on the property as he is a could give him Leopoldo's exact address. Ultimately,
builder in good faith. Anselmo refused, insisting that anyway, he enters the land and conducts a search. He
Boboy cannot ask for reimbursement as he is a mere succeeds. Leopoldo learning of Marcelino's "find",
lessee. Boboy responded by removing the seeks to recover the treasure from Marcelino but the
improvements and leaving the building in its original latter is not willing to part with it. Failing to reach an
state. agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino for the recovery
of the property. Marcelino contests the action. How
1. Resolve Boboy's claim that as a builder in good would you decide the case? (1997 BAR)
faith, he should be reimbursed the value of the
improvements he introduced. A: I would decide in favor of Marcelino since he is
2. Can Boboy be held liable for damages for removing considered a finder by chance of the hidden treasure,
the improvements over Anselmo's objection? hence, he is entitled to one-half (1/2) of the hidden
(1990, 2013 BAR) treasure. While Marcelino may have had the intention to
look for the hidden treasure, still he is a finder by chance
A: since it is enough that he tried to look for it. By chance in
the law does not mean sheer luck such that the finder
1. Boboy’s claim that he is a builder in good faith has no should have no intention at all to look for the treasure. By
legal basis. A builder in good faith is someone who chance means good luch, umplying that one who
occupies the property in the concept of an owner. The intentionally looks for the treasure is embraced in the
provisions on builder-planter-sower under the Civil provision. The reason is that it is extremely difficult to find
Code cover cases in which the builder, planter and hidden treasure without looking for it deliberately.
sower believe themselves to be owners of the land, or
at least, to have a claim of title thereto. As Boboy is a Marcelino is not a trespasser since there is no prohibition
lessee of the property, even if he was paying nominal for him to enter the premises, hence, he is entitled to half
rental, Article 1678 Civil Code, is applicable. Under this of the treasure.
provision, if the lessee makes, in good faith, useful
improvements which are suitable to the use for which Q: Adam, a building contractor, was engaged by Blas to
the lease is intended without altering the form or construct a house on a lot which he (Blas) owns. While
substance of the property leased, the lessor upon the digging on the lot in order to lay down the foundation
termination of the lease shall pay the lessee one-half of of the house, Adam hit a very hard object. It turned out
the value of the improvements at that time. Should the to be the vault of the old Banco de las Islas Filipinas.
lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may Using a detonation device, Adam was able to open the
remove the improvements even though the principal vault containing old notes and coins which were in
thing may suffer damage thereby. circulation during the Spanish era. While the notes and
2. No. Boboy cannot be held liable for damages. The coins are no longer legal tender, they were valued at
lessor, Anselmo, refused to reimburse one-half of the P100 million because of their historical value and the
value of the improvements, so the lessee, Boboy, may coins silver nickel content. The following filed legal
remove the same, even though the principal thing may claims over the notes and coins:
suffer damage thereby. If in removing the useful
improvements Boboy caused more impairment on the i. Adam, as finder;
property leased than what is necessary, he will be ii. Blas, as owner of the property where they were
liable for damages (Art. 1678). found;
iii. Bank of the Philippine Islands, as successor-in-
Q: Tim came into possession of an old map showing interest of the owner of the vault; and
where a purported cache of gold bullion was hidden. iv. The Philippine Government because of their
Without any authority from the government Tim historical value.
conducted a relentless search and finally found the
treasure buried in a new river bed formerly part of a Who owns the notes and coins? (2008 BAR)
parcel of land owned by spouses Tirso and Tessie. The
old river which used to cut through the land of Spouses

UST BAR OPERATIONS 40

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
A: Hidden treasure is a money jewelry or other precious
objects the ownership of which does not appear (Art. 439, 1. If Pedro is a builder in good faith and Juan is an owner
CC). The vault of the Banco de las Islas Filipinas has been in good faith, Juan has the right to appropriate as his
buried for about a century and the Bank of the Philippine own the house after payment of indemnity provided
Islands cannot succeed by inheritance to the property of for in Articles 546 and 548 of the Civil Code, which are
Banco de las Islas Filipinas. The ownership of the vault, the necessary and useful expenses. As to useful
together with the notes and coins can now legally be expenses, Juan has the option to either refund the
considered as hidden treasure because its ownership is no amount of the expenses, or pay the increase in value
longer apparent. The contractor, Adam, is not a trespasser which the land may have acquired by reason thereof.
and therefore entitled to one-half of the hidden treasure Alternatively, under Article 448 of the Civil Code, Juan
and Blas as owner of the property, is entitled to the other has the right to oblige Pedro to pay the price of the
half (Art. 438, CC). Since the notes and coins have historical land. However, Pedro cannot be obliged to buy the
value, the government may acquire them at their just price land if its value is considerably more than that of the
which in turn will be divided equally between Adam and house. In such case, he shall pay reasonable rend, if
Blas (Art. 438, par. 3, CC). Juan does not choose to appropriate the house after
proper indemnity. It is the owner of the land who is
Q: O, owner of Lot A, learning that Japanese soldiers authorized to exercise the options under Article 448
may have buried gold and other treasures at the because his right is older and by principle of accession,
adjoining vacant Lot B belonging to spouses X & Y, he is entitled to the ownership of the accessory thing.
excavated in Lot B where she succeeded in unearthing
gold and precious stones. How will the treasures found If Pedro is a builder in good faith and Juan is an owner
by O be divided? in bad faith because Juan knew that Pedro was
building on his lot and did not oppose it (Art. 453 par.
1. 100% to O as finder 2), and Art. 454 in relation to Art. 447 of the Civil Code
2. 50% to O and 50% to the spouses X and Y applies. Juan shall pay the value of the house and is
3. 50% to O and 50% to the state also liable for reparation of damage; however, Pedro
4. None of the above (2010 BAR) also has the right to remove or demolish the house and
ask for damages.
A: None of the above. The general rule us that the
treasure shall belong to the spouses X and Y, the owners of 2. If Pedro is a builder in bad faith and Juan is an owner
Lot B. Under Article 438 (NCC), the exception is that when in good faith, Juan has three options. He may
the discovery of a hidden treasure is made on the property appropriate the improvements without indemnity
of another and by chance, one-half thereof shall belong to under Art. 449 of the Civil Code, or demand the
the owner of the land and the other one-half is allowed to demolition of the house in order to replace things to
the finer. In the problem, the finding of the treasure was their former condition at Pedro’s expense under Art.
not by chance because O knew that the treasure was in Lot 450 or compel Pedro to pay the price of the land. In
B. While a trespasser is also not entitled to any share, and addition to these options, Juan is also entitled to
there is no indication in the problem whether or not O was damages from Pedro.
a trespasser, O is not entitled to a share because the
finding was not “by chance”. If Pedro is a builder in bad faith and Juan is an owner
in bad faith, it shall be as if both of them were in good
ACCESSION (1992, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2003, faith. (Art. 453, New Civil Code)
2008, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 BAR)
Q: Benjamin is the owner of a titled lot which is
Q: Pedro bought a parcel of land described as bounded on the north by the Maragondon River. An
Cadastral Lot No. 123 and the title was issued to his alluvial deposit of two (2) hectares was added to the
name. Juan also bought a lot in the same place, which registered area. Daniel took possession of the portion
is described as Cadastral Lot No. 124. Pedro hired a formed by accretion and claims that he has been in
geodetic engineer to determine the actual location of open, continuous and undisturbed possession of said
Lot No. 123 but for some reason, the engineer pointed portion since 1923 as shown by a tax declaration. In
to Lot No. 124 by mistake. Pedro hired a contractor to 1958, Benjamin filed a Complaint for Quieting of Title
construct his house and the latter put up a sign stating and contends that the alluvium belongs to him as the
the name of the owner of the project and the riparian owner and that since the alluvium is, by law,
construction permit number. It took more than a year part and parcel of the registered property, the same
before the house was constructed. When Pedro was may be considered as registered property. Decide the
already residing in his house, Juan told him to remove case and explain. (2016 BAR)
his house because it was built on his (Juan's) lot.
A: I will decide in favor of Daniel and dismiss the action to
Juan filed a Complaint for Recovery of Possession and quite title filed by Benjamin. Under Art. 457 of the Civil
prayed that the house be removed because Pedro is a Code, the owner of lands adjoining the banks of rivers
builder in bad faith. Pedro filed his Answer with belong the accretion which they gradually receive from the
Counterclaim that he is entitled to the payment of the effects of the current of the waters. The accretion,
value of the house plus damages because he is a however, does not automatically become registered land.
builder in good faith and that Juan is guilty of estoppel It must be brought under the Torrens system of
and laches. registration by Benjamin, the riparian owner. Since he did
1. If Pedro is a builder in good faith, what are the not, then the increment, not being registered land, was
rights given to Juan under the law? Explain. open to acquisition through prescription by third persons,
2. If Pedro is a builder in bad faith, what are the like Daniel. (Grande v. Court of Appeals, 5 SCRA 524 [1962];
rights given to Juan under the law? Explain. (2016 Cureg v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 177 SCRA 313
BAR) [1989])

A:
41
 CIVIL LAW
Q: Ciriaco Realty Corporation (CRC) sold to the spouses needed to obtain a loan from a bank first, and since the
Del a Cruz a 500-square meter land (Lot A) in sellers were in a hurry to migrate, the latter told the
Paranaque. The land now has a fair market value of P1, buyers that they could already occupy the house,
200, 000. CRC likewise sold to the spouses Rodriguez, a renovate it as it was already in a state of disrepair, and
700-square meter land (Lot B) which is adjacent to Lot pay only when their loan is approved and released.
A. Lot B has a present fair market value of P1, 500, 000. While waiting for the loan approval, the buyers spent
The spouses Dela Cruz constructed a house on Lot B, P1 Million in repairing the house. A month later, a
relying on there presentation of the CRC sales agent person carrying an authenticated special power of
that it is the property they purchased. Only upon the attorney from the sellers demanded that the buyers
completion of their house did the spouses Dela Cruz either immediately pay for the property in full now or
discover that they had built on Lot B owned by the vacate it and pay damages for having made
spouses Rodriguez, not on Lot A that they purchased. improvements on the property without a sale having
They spent P , 000,000 for the house. As their lawyer, been perfected. What are the buyers' options or legal
advise the spouses Dela Cruz on their rights and rights with respect to the expenses they incurred in
obligations under the given circumstances, and the improving the property under circumstances? (2015
recourses and options open to them to protect their BAR)
interests. (1992, 2001, 2013 BAR)
A: The buyers here may be deemed possessors or builders
A: Based on the facts as stated, the spouses Dela Cruz as in good faith because they were made to believe that they
builders and the spouses Rodriguez as landowners, are were allowed to make repairs or renovation by the sellers
both in good faith. The spouses Dela Cruz are builders in themselves. As builders in good faith, they have the right to
good faith because before constructing the house they seek reimbursement for the value of the improvements in
exercised due diligence by asking the agent of CRC the case the owner decides to appropriate them. They cannot
location of Lot A. and they relied on the information given be asked to remove the improvements because that is not
by the agent who is presumed to know the identity of the one of the options given by law to the landowner in case
lot purchased by the Dela Cruz spouses (Pleasantville v. CA, the builder is in good faith.
G.R. No. 79688, February 1, 1996). On the other hand, there
is no showing that the landowners, spouses Rodriguez, Q: A owns a parcel of residential land worth P500,
acted in bad faith. The facts do not show that the building 000.00. Unknown to A, a residential house costing
was done with their knowledge and without opposition on P100, 000.00 is built on the entire parcel by B who
their part (Art. 453). Good faith is always presumed (Art. claims ownership of the land. Answer all the following
527). The owner of the land on which anything has been questions based on the premise that B is a builder in
built, sown or planted in good faith shall have the right: good faith and A is a landowner in good faith.

1. to appropriate as his own the works after payment of a) May A acquire the house built by B? If so, how?
the indemnity provided for in Articles 546 and 548, or b) If the land increased in value to P500, 000.00 by
2. to oblige the one who built to pay the price of the land. reason of the building of the house thereon, what
amount should be paid by A in order to acquire the
However, the builder cannot be obliged to buy the land if house from B?
its value is considerably more than that of the building. In c) Assuming that the cost of the house was P900,
such case, he shall pay reasonable rent if the owner of the 000.00 and not P100, 000.00, may A require B to
land does not choose to appropriate the building or trees buy the land?
after proper indemnity. (Art. 448). d) If B voluntarily buys the land as desired by A,
The house constructed by the spouses Dela Cruz is under what circumstances may A nevertheless be
considered as a useful expense, since it increased the value entitled to have the house removed?
of the lot. As such, should the spouses Rodriguez decide to e) In what situation may a “forced lease” arise
appropriate the house, the spouses Dela Cruz are entitled between A and B, and what terms and conditions
to the right of retention pending reimbursement of the would govern the lease?
expenses they incurred or the increase in value which the
thing may have acquired by reason of the improvement Give reasons for your answers. (1992 BAR)
(Art. 546). Thus, the spouses Dela Cruz may demand P1,
000, 000 as payment of the expenses in building the house A:
or increase in value of the land because of the house as a
useful improvement, as may be determined by the court a) Yes, A may acquire the house built by B by paying
front the evidence presented during the trial (Depra indemnity to B. Article 448 of the Civil Code provides
Dumlao, G.R. No. L 57348, May 16, 1985; Technogas Phils. v. that the owner of the land on which anyting has been
CA, G.R. No. 108894, February 10, 1997). built, sown or planted in good faith, shall have the
right to appropriate as his own works, sowing or
Q: A delayed accession is: (2014 BAR) planting, after payment of the indemnity provided for
in Article 546 of the Civil Code.
A. formation of an island b) A should pay B the sum of P50, 000.00. Article 548 of
B. avulsion the Civil Code provides that useful expenses shall be
C. alluvium refunded to the possessor in good faith with the right
D. change in the course of the riverbed of retention, the person who has defeated him in the
possession having the option of refunding the amount
A: B (Art. 459) of the expenses or of paying the increase in value
which the thing may have acquired by reason thereof.
Q: Mr. and Mrs. X migrated to the US with all their The increase in value amounts to P50, 000.00.
children. As they had no intention of coming back, they c) Yes, A may require B to buy the land. Article 448 of the
offered their house and lot for sale to their neighbors, Civil Code provides that the owner of the land on
Mr. and Mrs. A (the buyers) who agreed to buy the which anything has been built in good faith shall have
property for 128 Million. Because Mr. and Mrs. A the right to oblige the one who built to pay the price of

UST BAR OPERATIONS 42

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
the land if its value is not considerably more than that construction, he opted to appropriate the building by
of the building. paying Pedro the cost thereof. However, Pedro insists
d) If B agrees to buy land but fails to pay, A can have the that he should be paid the current market value of the
house removed (Depra v. Dumlao, 136 SCRA 475). building, which was much higher because of inflation.
e) Art. 448 of the Civil Code provides that the builder (2000 BAR)
cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is 1) Who is correct Pedro or Pablo?
considerably more than that of the building. In such 2) In the meantime that Pedro is not yet paid, who is
case, he shall pay reasonable rent, if the owner of the entitled to the rentals of the building, Pedro or
land does not choose to appropriate the building after Pablo?
proper indemnity. The parties shall agree upon the
terms of the lease and in case of disagreement, the A:
court fix the terms thereof.
1) Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New Civil
Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric. Code in relation to Article 546, the builder in good faith
What are Batolome’s rights of he were: is entitled to a refund of the necessary and useful
expenses incurred by him, or the increase in value
1) A possessor of the land in good faith? which the land may have acquired by reason of the
2) A possessor of the land in bad faith? (1996 BAR) improvement, at the option of the landowner. The
builder is entitled to a refund of the expenses he
A: incurred, and not to the market value of the
improvement. The case of Pecson v. CA (G.R. No.
1) A chapel is a useful improvement. Bartolome may 115814, 26 May 1995), is not applicable to the problem.
remove the chapel if it can be removed without In the Pecson case, the builder was the owner of the
damage to the land, unless Eric chooses to acquire the land who later lost the property at a public sale due to
chapel. In the latter case, Bartolome has the right to non-payment of taxes. The Court ruled that Article
the reimbursement of the value of the chapel with 448 does not apply to the case where the owner of
right of retention until he is reimbursed. (Art. 448 in the land is the builder but who later lost the land; not
relation to Art. 546 and 547, NCC) being applicable, the indemnity that should be paid to
2) Bartolome, under Art. 449 of the NCC, loses whatever the buyer must be the fair market value of the
he built, without any right to indemnity. building and not just the cost of construction thereof.
The Court opined in that case that to do otherwise
Q: would unjustly enrich the new owner of the land.
2) Pablo is entitled to the rentals of the building. As
a) Because of confusion as to the boundaries of the the owner of the land, Pablo is also the owner of the
adjoining lots that they bought from the same building being an accession thereto. However, Pedro
subdivision company, X constructed a house on the who is entitled to retain the building is also entitled
adjoining lot of Y in the honest belief that it is the to retain the rentals. He, however, shall apply the
land that he bought from the subdivision company. rentals to the indemnity payable to him after deducting
What are the respective rights of X and Y with reasonable cost of repair and maintenance.
respect to X's house?
b) Suppose X was in good faith but Y knew that X was Q: Mike built a house on his lot in Pasay City. Two
constructing on his (Y's) land but simply kept years later, a survey disclosed that a portion of the
quiet about it, thinking perhaps that he could get building actually stood on the neighboring land of Jose,
X's house later. What are the respective rights of to the extent of 40 square meters. Jose claims that
the parties over X's house in this case? (1999 BAR) Mike is a builder in bad faith because he should know
the boundaries of his lot, and demands that the
A: portion of the house which encroached on his land
should be destroyed or removed. Mike replies that he
a) The rights of Y, as owner of the lot, and of X, as builder is a builder in good faith and offers to buy the land
of a house thereon, are governed by Art. 448 of the occupied by the building instead.
Civil Code which grants to Y the right to choose
between two remedies: (a) appropriate the house by 1) Is Mike a builder in good faith or bad faith? Why?
indemnifying X for its value plus whatever necessary 2) Whose preference should be followed? Why?
expenses the latter may have incurred for the (2001 BAR)
preservation of the land, or (b) compel X to buy the
land if the price of the land is not considerably more A:
than the value of the house. If it is, then X cannot be
obliged to buy the land but he shall pay reasonable 1) Yes, Mike is a builder in good faith. There is no
rent, and in case of disagreement, the court shall fix showing that when he built his house, he knew that a
the terms of the lease. portion thereof encroached on Jose's lot. Unless one is
b) Since the lot owner Y is deemed to be in bad faith (Art. versed in the science of surveying, he cannot
453), X as the party in good faith may (a) remove the determine the precise boundaries or location of his
house and demand indemnification for damages property by merely examining his title. In the absence
suffered by him, or (b) demand payment of the value of contrary proof, the law presumes that the
of the house plus reparation for damages (Art. 447, in encroachment was done in good faith [Technogas
relation to Art 454). Y continues as owner of the lot Phils, v. CA, G.R. No. 108894, February 10, 1997).
and becomes, under the second option, owner of the 2) None of the preferences shall be followed. The
house as well, after he pays the sums demanded. preference of Mike cannot prevail because under
Article 448 of the Civil Code, it is the owner of the land
Q: In good faith, Pedro constructed a five-door who has the option or choice, not the builder. On the
commercial building on the land of Pablo who was other hand, even though the option belongs to Jose, he
also in good faith. When Pablo discovered the cannot demand that the portion of the house
43
 CIVIL LAW
encroaching on his land be destroyed or removed Q: The properties of Jessica and Jenny, who are
because this is not one of the options given by law to neighbors, lie along the banks of the Marikina River. At
the owner of the land. The owner may choose between certain times of the year, the river would swell and as
the appropriation of what was built after payment of the water recedes, soil, rocks and other materials are
indemnity, or to compel the builder to pay for the land deposited on Jessica's and Jenny's properties. This
if the value of the land is not considerably more than pattern of the river swelling, receding and depositing
that of the building. Otherwise, the builder shall pay soil and other materials being deposited on the
rent for the portion of the land encroached. neighbors’ properties have gone on for many years.
Knowing this pattern, Jessica constructed a concrete
Q: For many years, the Rio Grande river deposited soil barrier about 2 meters from her property line and
along its bank, beside the titled land of Jose. In time, extending towards the river, so that when the water
such deposit reached an area of one thousand square recedes, soil and other materials are trapped within
meters. With the permission of Jose, Vicente this barrier. After several years, the area between
cultivated the said area. Ten years later, a big flood Jessica's property line to the concrete barrier was
occurred in the river and transferred 1000 square completely filled with soil, effectively increasing
meters to the opposite bank, beside the land of Jessica's property by 2 meters. Jenny's property,
Agustin. The land transferred is now contested by where no barrier was constructed, also increased by
Jose and Agustin as riparian owners and by Vicente one meter along the side of the river.
who claims ownership by prescription. Who should
prevail? Why? (2001 BAR) a) Can Jessica and Jenny legally claim ownership over
the additional 2 meters and one meter,
A: Jose should prevail. The disputed area, which is an respectively, of land deposited along their
alluvion, belongs by right of accretion to Jose, the properties?
riparian owner (Art. 457). When, as given in the b) If Jessica's and Jenny's properties are registered,
problem, the very same area was "transferred" by flood will the benefit of such registration extend to the
waters to the opposite bank, it became an avulsion and increased area of their properties?
ownership thereof is retained by Jose who has two years to c) Assume the two properties are on a cliff adjoining
remove it (Art. 459). Vicente's claim based on prescription the shore of Laguna Lake. Jessica and Jenny had a
is baseless since his possession was by mere tolerance of hotel built on the properties. They had the earth
Jose and, therefore, did not adversely affect Jose's and rocks excavated from the properties dumped
possession and ownership (Art. 537). Inasmuch as his on the adjoining shore, giving rise to a new patch
possession is merely that of a holder, he cannot acquire of dry land. Can they validly lay claim to the patch
the disputed area by prescription. of land? (2008 BAR)

Q: Andres is a riparian owner of a parcel of registered A:

land. His land, however, has gradually diminished in
area due to the current of the river, while the a) Jenny can legally claim ownership of the lands by right
registered land of Mario on the opposite bank has of accession (accretion) under Art. 457 of the Civil
gradually increased in area by 200-square meters. Code. The lands came into being over the years
through the gradual deposition of soil and silt by the
a) Who has the better right over the 200-square natural action of the waters of the river.
meter area that has been added to Mario’s
registered land, Mario or Andres? Jessica cannot claim the two meter-wide strip of land
b) May a third person acquire said 200-square meter added to her land. Jessica constructed the cement
land by prescription? (2003 BAR) barrier two meters in front of her property towards
the river not to protect her land from the destructive
A: Mario has a better right over the 200 square meters forces of the water but to trap the alluvium. In order
increase in area by reason of accretion, applying Article 457 that the riparian owner may be entitled to the
of the New Civil Code, which provides that “to the owners alluvium the deposition must occur naturally without
of lands adjoining the banks of rivers belong the accretion the intervention of the riparian owner (Republic v. CA
which they gradually received from the effects of the 132 SCRA 514 [1984])
current of the waters”.
a) Andres cannot claim that the increase in Mario’s land b) No, the registration of Jessica’s and Jenny’s adjoining
is his own, because such is an accretion and not a property does not automatically extend to the
result of the sudden detachment of a known portion accretions. They have to bring their lands under the
of his land and its attachment to Mario’s land, a operation of the Torrens system of land registration
process called “avulsion”. He can no longer claim following the procedure prescribed in P.D. No. 1529.
ownership of the portion of his registered land which c) Jessica and Jenny cannot validly lay claim to the price
was gradually and naturally eroded due to the current of dry land that resulted from the dumping of rocks
of the river, because he had lost it by operation of law. and carth materials excavated from their properties
That portion of the land has become part of the public because it is a reclamation without authority. The land
domain. is part of the lakeshore, if not the lakebed, which is
b) Yes, a third party may acquire by prescription the inalienable land of the public domain.
200 square meters, increase in area, because it is not
included in the Torrens Title of the riparian owner. Q: Marciano is the owner of a parcel of land through
Hence, this does not involve the imprescriptibility which a river runs out into the sea. The land had been
conferred by Section 47, P.D. No. 1529. The fact that brought under the Torrens System, and is cultivated
the riparian land is registered does not automatically by Ulpiano and his family as farmworkers therein.
make the accretion thereto a registered land(Grande Over the years, the river has brought silt and sediment
v. CA, G.R. No. L-17652, June 30, 1962; Jagualing v. CA, from its sources up in the mountains and forests so
G.R. No. 94283, March 4, 1991). that gradually the land owned by Marciano increased
in area by three hectares. Ulpiano built three huts on

UST BAR OPERATIONS 44

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
this additional area, where he and his two married proceeding in accordance with law. The ejectment
children live. On this same area, Ulpiano and his family proceeding does not provide the proper forum for the
planted peanuts, monggo beans and vegetables. cancellation of Don’s title. While Cesar’s counterclaim for
Ulpiano also regularly paid taxes on the land, as shown cancellation of Don’s title may be considered a direct
by tax declarations, for over thirty years. When attack, the same should nevertheless be denied on
Marciano learned of the increase in the size of the procedural grounds because a Municipal or Metropolitan
land, he ordered Ulpiano to demolish the huts, and Trial Court is without jurisdiction to cancel a Torrens title.
demanded that he be paid his share in the proceeds of
the harvest. Marciano claims that under the Civil Code, CO-OWNERSHIP (1993, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2006, 2008,
the alluvium belongs to him as a registered riparian 2009, 2015 BAR)
owner to whose land the accretion attaches, and that
his right is enforceable against the whole world. Q: A, B and C are the co-owners in equal shares of a
residential house and lot. During their co-ownership,
a) Is Marciano correct? Explain. the following acts were respectively done by the co-
b) What rights, if any, does Ulpiano have against owners:
Marciano? Explain. (2009 BAR)
1. A undertook the repair of the foundation of the
A: house, then tilting to one side, to prevent the
house from collapsing.
a) Marciano’s contention is correct. Since that accretion 2. B and C mortgaged the house and lot to secure a
was deposited on his land by the action of the waters loan.
of the river and he did not construct any structure to 3. B engaged a contractor to build a concrete fence
increase the deposition of soil and silt, Marciano all around the lot.
automatically owns the accretion. His real right of 4. C built a beautiful grotto in the garden.
ownership is enforceable against the whole world 5. A and C sold the land to X for a very good price.
including Ulpiano and his two married children.
Although Marciano’s land is registered, the three (3) a) Is A’s sole decision to repair the foundation of
hectares land deposited through accretion was not the house binding on B and C? May A require B
automatically registered. As an unregistered land, it is and C to contribute their 2/3 share of the
subject to acquisitive prescription by third persons. expense? Reasons.
b) What is the legal effect f the mortgage contract
Although Ulpiano and his children live in the three (3) executed by B and C? Reasons.
hectare unregistered land owned by Marciano, they c) Is B’s sole decision to build the fence binding
are farm workers; therefore, they are possessors not upon A and C? May B require A and C to
in the concept of owners but in the concept of mere contribute their 2/3 share of the expense?
holders. Even if they possess the land for more than 30 Reasos.
years, they cannot become the owners thereof through d) Is C’s sole decision to build the grotto binding
extraordinary acquisitive prescription, because the upon A and B? May C require A and B to
law requires possession in the concept of the owner. contribute their 2/3 share of the expense?
Payment of taxes and tax declaration are not enough Reasons.
to make their possession one in the concept of owner. e) What are the legal effects of the contract of
They must repudiate the possession in the concept of sale executed by A, C and X? Reasons.
holder by executing unequivocal acts of repudiation
amounting to ouster of Marciano, known to Marciano A:
and must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.
Only then would his possession become adverse. a) Yes. A’s sole decision to repair the foundation is
binding upon B and C. B and C must contribute
b) Although Ulpiano is a possessor in bad faith, because 2/3 of the expense. Each co-owner has the right
he knew he does not own the land, he will lose the to compel the other co-owners to contribute to
three huts he built in bad faith and make an the expense of preservation of the thing (the
accounting of the fruits he has gathered, he has the house) owned in common in proportion to their
right to deduct from the value of the fruits the respective interests (Arts. 485 and 488, Civil
expenses for production, gathering and preservation Code).
of the fruits (Art. 443). b) The mortgage shall not bind the 1/3 right and
interest of A and shall be deemed to cover only
He may also ask for reimbursement of the taxes he has the rights and interests of B and C in the house
paid, as these are charges on the land owned by and lot. The mortgage shall be limited to the
Marciano. This obligation is based on a quasi-contract portion (2/3) which may be allotted to B and C in
(Art. 2175). the partiion (Art. 493, Civil Code).
c) B’s sole decision to build the concrete fence is not
QUIETING OF TITLE (2005 BAR) binding upon A and C. Expenses to improve the
thing owned in common must be decided upon by
Q: In an ejectment case filed by Don against Cesar, a majority of the co-owners who represent the
can the latter ask for the cancellation of Don's title contolling interest (Arts. 489 and 492, Civil Code).
considering that he (Cesar) is the rightful owner of the d) C’s sole decision to build the grotto is not binding
lot? Explain. (2005 BAR) upon A and B who cannot be required to
contribute to the expenses for the embellishment
A: Cesar cannot ask for the cancellation of Don's title in of the thing owned in common if not decided
the ejectment case filed by Don against him. Under Section upon by the majority of the co-owners who
48 of PD 1529, the Property Registration Decree, a represent the controlling interest (Arts. 489 and
Torrents title shall not be subject to callateral attack. It 492, Civil Code).
cannot be altered, modified or cancelled except in a direct
45
 CIVIL LAW
e) The sale to X shall not bidn the 1/3 share of B and he had left, Senen seeks a partition of the farm to get his
shall be deemed to cover only the 2/3 share of A share as the only co-heir of Peter. Peter interposes his
and C in the land (Art. 493, Civil Code). B shall opposition, contending that acquisitive prescription
have the right to redeem the 2/3 share sold to X has already set in and that estoppel lies to bar the
by A and C since X is a third person (Art. 1620, action for partition, citing his continuous possession of
Civil Code). the property for at least 10 years, for almost 30 years
in fact. It is undisputed that Peter has never openly
Q: Juan and his sister Juana inherited from their claimed sole ownership of the property. If he ever had
mother two parcels of farmland with exactly the same the intention to do so, Senen was completely ignorant
areas. For convenience, the Torrens certificates of of it. Will Senen’s action prosper? Explain. (2000, 2002
title covering both lots were placed in Juan’s name BAR)
alone. In 1996, Juan sold to an innocent purchaser one
parcel in its entirety without the knowledge and A: Senen’s action will prosper. Article 494 of the New
consent of Juana, and wrongfully kept for himself the Civil Code provides that “no prescription shall run in favor
entire price paid. Since the two lots have the same of a co-owner or co-heir against his co-owners or co-
area, suppose Juana files a complaint to have herself heirs so long as he expressly or impliedly recognizes the
declared sole owner of the entire remaining second co-ownership nor notified Senen of his having repudiated
lot, contending that her brother had forfeited his the same.”
share thereof by wrongfully disposing of her
undivided share in the first lot, will the suit prosper? Q: Anthony bought a piece of untitled agricultural
(1998 BAR) land from Bert. Bert, in turn, acquired the property by
forging Carlo's signature in a deed of sale over the
A: Juana’s suit to have herself declared as sole owner of property. Carlo had been in possession of the
the entire remaining area will not prosper because while property for 8 years, declared it for tax purposes, and
Juan’s act in selling the other lot was wrongful, it did not religiously paid all taxes due on the property. Anthony
have the legal effect of forfeiting his share in the is not aware of the defect in Bert's title, but has been
remaining lot. However, Juana can file an action against in actual physical possession of the property from the
Juan for partition or termination of the co-ownership with time he bought it from Bert, who had never been in
a prayer that the lot sold be adjudicated to Juan, and the possession of the property for one year.
remaining lot be adjudicated and reconveyed to her.
a. Can Anthony acquire ownership of the property
Q: In 1955, Ramon and his sister Rosario inherited a by acquisitive prescription? How many more
parcel of land in Albay from their parents. Since years does he have possess it to acquire
Rosario was gainfully employed in Manila, she left ownership?
Ramon alone to prossess and cultivare the land. b. If Carlo is able to legally recover his property, can
However, Ramon never shared the harvest with he require Anthony to account for all the fruits he
Rosario and was even able to sell one-half of the land has harvested from the property while in
in 1985 by claiming to be the sole heir of his parents. possession?
Having reached retirement age in 1990, Rosario c. If there are standing crops on the property when
returned to the province and upon learning what had Carlo recovers possession, can Carlo appropriate
transpired, demanded that the remaining half of the them? (2008 BAR)
land be giver to her as her share. Ramon opposed,
asserting that he has already acquired ownership of A:
the land by prescription, and that Rosario is barred by
laches from demanding partition and reconveyance. a. Yes, Anthony can acquire ownership of the property
Decide the conflicting claims. (2000 BAR) by ordinary prescription which requires just title and
good faith (Art. 1117). There was just title because a
A: Ramon is wrong on both counts: prescription and deed of sale was issued in his favor even though it was
laches. His possession as co-owner did not give rise to forged, which in fact he was not aware of. He needs to
acquisitive prescription. Possession by a co-owner is possess the land in good faith and in the concept of an
deemed not adverse to the other co-owners but is, on the owner for a total of ten years in order to acquire
contrary, deemed beneficial to them (Pangan v. CA 166 ownership. Since Anthony possessed the land for only
SCRA 375). Ramon’s possession will become adverse only one year, he has not completed the ten-year period.
when he has repudiated the co-ownership and such Even if Anthony tacks the 8-year period of possession
repudiation was made known to Rosario. Assuming that by Carlo who in the deed of sale is supposed to be his
the sale in 1985 where Ramon claimed he was the sole grantor or predecessor in interest (Art. 1138 (1)), the
heir of his parents amounted to repudiation of the co- period is still short of ten years.
ownership, the prescriptive period began to run only from b. Anthony is a possessor in good faith, Anthony cannot
that time. Not more than 30 years having lapsed since be made to account for the fruits he gathered before
then, the claim of Rosario has not yet prescribed. The he was served with summons. A possessor in good
claim of laches is not also meritorious. Until the faith is entitled to the fruits received before the
repudiation of the co-ownership was made known to the possession was legally interrupted by the service of
other co-owners, no right has been violated for the said summons (Art. 554). After Anthony was served with
co-owners, no right has been violated for the said co- summons, he became a possessor in bad faith and a
owners to vindicate. Mere delay in vindicating the right, builder, planter, sower in bad faith. He can also be
standing alone, does not constitute laches. made to account for the fruits but he may deduct
expenses or production gathering and preservation of
Q: Senen and Peter are brothers. Senen migrated to the fruits (Art. 443).
Canada early while still a teenager. Peter stayed in c. The value of the standing crops must be prorated
Bulacan to take care of their widowed mother and depending upon the period of possession and the
continued to work on the Family farm even after her period of growing and producing the fruits. Anthony is
death. Returning to the country some thirty years after entitled to a part of the net harvest and a part of

UST BAR OPERATIONS 46

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
expenses of cultivation in proportion to his period of his behalf and in behalf of his buyer, contend that
possession. Carlo may appropriate the respective they are no longer co-owners, although the title
parts subject to prorating the respective periods of covering the property has remained in their names
possession. However, Carlos may allow Anthony to assuch.Mary Bart and Carlos still redeem the lot
gather these growing fruits as an indemnity for the sold by Antonio? Explain. (2002 BAR)
expenses of cultivation. If Anthony refuses to accept
the concession, he shall lose the right to indemnity A: No, they may not redeem because there was no co-
under Art. 443 (Art. 545 par. 3). ownership among Antonio, Bart, and Carlos to start with.
Their parents already partitioned the land in selling
Q: The renunciation by a co-owner of his undivided separate portions to them (Si v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
share in the co-owned property in lieu of the 122047, October 12, 2000).
performance of his obligation to contribute to taxes
and expenses for the preservation of the property Q: X, Y, Z are siblings who inherited a 10-storey
constitutes dacion en pago. (2009 BAR) building from their parents. They agreed in writing to
maintain it as a co-owned property for leasing out
A: TRUE. Under the Civil Code, a co-owner may renounce and to divide the net profits among themselves
his share in the co-owned property in lieu of paying for equally for a period of 20 years. On the 8th year, X
his share in the taxes and expenses for the preservation wanted to get out of the co-ownership so he could get
of the co-owned property. In effect, there is dacion en his 1/3 share in the property. Y and Z refused, saying
pago because the co-owner is discharging his monetary X is bound by their agreement to keep the co-
obligation by paying it with his non-monetary interest in ownership for 20 years. Are Y and Z correct? Explain.
the co-owned property. The fact that he is giving up his (2015 BAR)
entire interest simply means that he is accepting the
value of his interest as equivalent to his share in the taxes A: Y and Z are partly correct. The law provides that none
and expenses of preservation. of the co-owners shall be obliged to remain in the co-
ownership and it is the right of a co-owner to ask for
Q: Ambrosio died, leaving his three daughters, Belen, partition of the co-ownership anytime. One exception to
Rosario and Sylvia a hacienda which was mortgaged the rule is if the co-owners agree to keep the thing
to the Philippine National Bank due to the failure of the undivided which period shall not exceed ten years. In this
daughters to pay the bank, the latter foreclosed the case, the agreement to keep the thing undivided shall be
mortgage and the hacienda was sold to it as the valid at the most for ten years (Art. 494).
highest bidder. Six months later, Sylvia won the
grand prize at the lotto and used part of it to redeem POSSESSION (1990, 1991, 1997, 2000, 2006, 2007
the hacienda from the bank. Thereafter, she took BAR)
possession of the hacienda and refused to share its
fruits with her sisters, contending that it was owned Q: Distinguish between possession and occupation as
exclusively by her, having bought it from the bank with these terms are commonly used in Book II and Book
her own money. Is she correct or not? (1993, 2000 BAR) III of the Civil Code. (1997, 2007 BAR)
A: Sylvia is not correct. The 3 daughters are the co-owners
of the hacienda being the only heirs of Ambrosio. When A: Possession is a real right, while occupation is one of
the property was foreclosed, the right of redemption the original modes of acquiring ownership and other real
belongs also to the 3 daughters. When Sylvia redeemed rights. Possession, the holding of a thing or the exercise of
the entire property before the lapse of the redemption a right, does not in itself constitute ownership. There can
period, she also exercised the right of redemption of her co- be possession without ownership.
owners on their behalf. As such, she is holding the shares
of her two sisters in the property and all the fruits Q: Alberto and Janine migrated to the United States
corresponding thereto, in trust for them. Redemption by of America, leaving behind their 4 children, one of
one co-owner inures to the benefit of all (Adille v. CA, G.R. whom is Manny. They own a duplex apartment and
No. L-44546, January 29, 1988). Sylvia, however, is entitled allowed Manny to live in one of the units. While in
to be reimbursed the shares of her two sisters in the the United States, Alberto died. His widow and all
redemption price. his children executed an Extrajudicial Settlement of
Alberto's estate wherein the 2-door apartment was
Q: Antonio, Bart, and Carlos are brothers. They assigned by all the children to their mother, Janine.
purchased from their parents specific portions of a Subsequently, she sold the property to George. The
parcel of land as evidenced by three separate deeds latter required Manny to sign a prepared Lease
of sale, each deed referring to a particular lot in Contract so that he and his family could continue
metes and bounds. When the deeds were presented occupying the unit. Manny refused to sign the contract
for registration, the Register of Deeds could not alleging that his parents allowed him and his family to
issue separate certificates of title due to the continue occupying the premises. If you were George's
absence of a subdivision plan. The new title had to counsel, what legal steps will you take? Explain. (2006
be issued, therefore, in the names of the brothers as BAR)
co-owners of the entire property. The situation has
not change up to now, but each of the brothers has A: As George’s counsel, I will give Manny a written demand
been receiving rentals exclusively from the lot to vacate within a definite period, say 15 days. After the lapse
actually purchased by him. Antonio sells his lot to a of 15-day period, I will file an action for unlawful detainer to
third person, with notice to his brothers. To enable recover the possession of the apartment from Manny.
the buyer to secure a new title in his name, the Manny’s occupation of the premises was by mere tolerance
deed of sale was made to refer to an undivided of his parents. When all the co-heirs/co-owners assigned the
interest in the property of the seller (Antonio), with 2-door apartment to Janine in the extrajudicial partition,
the metes and bound for the lot sold being stated. Janine became the sole owner of the same. He continued to
Bart and Carlos reacted by signifying their exercise occupy it under the same familial arrangement. Upon the
of their right redemption as co-owners. Antonio, in sale of the property to George, Manny’s lawful occupation of
47
 CIVIL LAW
the property was terminated and Manny’s refusal to sign the (Pablo) had been unlawfully deprived of it by
lease contract and to vacate the premises after the period to reason of Alfonso's deception. Will the suit prosper?
vacate lapsed made his occupation unlawful, hence, entitling (1990, 1991 BAR)
George to the remedy of unlawful detainer. A: No. The suit will not prosper because Pablo was not
unlawfully deprived of the car although he was
Q: Felix cultivated a parcel of land and planted it with unlawfully deprived of the price. The perfection of the sale
sugar cane, believing it to be his own. When the crop and the delivery of the car was enough to allow Alfonso to
was eight months old and harvestable after two more have a right of ownership over the car, which can be
months, a resurvey of the land showed that it really lawfully transferred to Gregorio. Art. 559 applies only to
belonged to Fred. What are the options available to a person who is in possession in good faith of the property,
Fred? (2000 BAR) and not to the owner thereof. Alfonso, in the problem,
was the owner, and, hence, Gabriel acquired the title to the
A: As to the pending crops planted by Felix in good faith, car. Non-payment of the price in a contract of sale does
Fred has the option of allowing Felix to continue the not render ineffective the obligation to deliver. The
cultivation and to harvest the crops, or to continue the obligation to deliver a thing is different from the
cultivation and harvest the crops himself. In the latter obligation to pay its price. (EDCA Publishing Co. v. Spouses
option, however, Felix shall have the right to a part of Santos G.R. No. 80298, April 26, 1990)
the expenses of cultivation and to a part of the net
harvest, both in proportion to the time of possession (Art. USUFRUCT (1995, 1996, 1997 BAR)
545 NCC).
Q: What is easement? Distinguish easement from
Q: In good faith, Pedro constructed a five-door usufruct. (1995 BAR)
commercial building on the land of Pablo who was
also in good faith. When Pablo discovered the A: An easement or servitude is an encumbrance imposed
construction, he opted to appropriate the building by upon an immovable for the benefit of another immovable
paying Pedro the cost thereof. However, Pedro insists belonging to a different owner. (Art. 613, NCC)
that he should be paid the current market value of the
building, which was much higher because of inflation. Usufruct gives a right to enjoy the property of another with
the obligation of preserving its form and substance, unless
1) Who is correct Pedro or Pablo? the title constituting it or the law otherwise provides. (Art.
2) In the meantime that Pedro is not yet paid, who 562 NCC). An easement or servitude is an encumbrance
is entitled to the rentals of the building, Pedro or imposed upon an immovable for the benefit of another
Pablo? (2000 BAR) immovable belonging to a different owner (Art. 613, NCC).

A: Q: Can there be:

1) Pablo is correct. Under Article 448 of the New Civil a) An easement over a usufruct?
Code in relation to Article 546, the builder in good faith b) A usufruct over an easement?
is entitled to a refund of the necessary and useful c) An easement over another easement?
expenses incurred by him, or the increase in value
which the land may have acquired by reason of the Explain. (1995 BAR)
improvement, at the option of the landowner. The
builder is entitled to a refund of the expenses he A:
incurred, and not to the market value of the
improvement. The case of Pecson v. CA (G.R. No. a) There can be no easement over a usufruct. Since an
115814, 26 May 1995), is not applicable to the problem. easement may be constituted only on a corporeal
In the Pecson case, the builder was the owner of the immovable property, no easement may be constituted
land who later lost the property at a public sale due to on a usufruct which is not a corporeal right.
non-payment of taxes. The Court ruled that Article b) There can be no usufruct over an easement. While a
448 does not apply to the case where the owner of usufruct may be created over a right, sich right must
the land is the builder but who later lost the land; not have an existence of its own independent of the
being applicable, the indemnity that should be paid to property. A servitude cannot be the object of a usufruct
the buyer must be the fair market value of the because it has no existence independent of the property
building and not just the cost of construction thereof. to which it attaches.
The Court opined in that case that to do otherwise c) There can be no easement over another easement for
would unjustly enrich the new owner of the land. the same reason as in (a). An easement, although it is a
2) Pablo is entitled to the rentals of the building. As real right over an immovable, is not a corporeal right.
the owner of the land, Pablo is also the owner of the There is a Roman maxim which says that: There can be
building being an accession thereto. However, Pedro no servitude over another servitude.
who is entitled to retain the building is also entitled
to retain the rentals. He, however, shall apply the Q: Distinguish usufruct from commodatum and state
rentals to the indemnity payable to him after deducting whether these may be constituted over consumable
reasonable cost of repair and maintenance. goods.

Q: Pablo sold his car to Alfonso who issued a postdated A: Usufruct is a right given to a person (usufructuary) to
check in full payment therefor. Before the maturity of enjoy the property of another with the obligation of
the check, Alfonso sold the car to Gregorio who later preserving its form and substance (Art. 562, Civil Code)
sold it to Gabriel. When presented for payment, the
check issued by Alfonso was dishonored by the drawee On the other hand, commodatum is a contract by which one
bank for the reason that he, Alfonso, had already closed of the parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) something
his account even before he issued his check. Pablo sued not consumable so that the latter may use it for a certain
to recover the car from Gabriel alleging that he time and return it.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 48

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
inconvenient to use. To settle their dispute, Andres
In usufruct, the usufructuary gets the right to the use and to and Brando hired Damian, a geodetic and civil
the fruits of the same, while in commodatum, the bailee only engineer, to survey and examine the two pathways and
acquires the use of the thing loaned but not its fruits. the surrounding areas, and to determine the shortest
and the least prejudicial way through the servient
Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a part of the estates. After the survey, the engineer concluded that
fruits of the thing. (Art. 564, Civil Code). It may even be pathway B is the longer route and will need
constituted over consumables like money (Alunan v. Veloso, improvements and repairs, but will not significantly
52 Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum, affect the use of Brando's property. On the other hand,
consumable goods may be subject thereof only when the pathway A that had long been in place, is the shorter
purpose of the contract is not the consumption of the object, route but would significantly affect the use of Brando's
as when it is merely for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil Code) property. In light of the engineer's findings and the
circumstances of the case, resolve the parties' right of
Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric. way dispute. (1996, 2013 BAR)
What are Batolome’s rights of he were a usufructuary
of the land? (1996 BAR) A: Andres is not entitled to the easement of right of way
for Pathway A. Pathway B must be used.
A: Bartlome has the right to remove the improvement if it is
possible to do so without causing damage to the property
The owner of a dominant estate may validly obtain a
(Art. 579, NCC). He may also set off the improvement against
compulsory right of way only after he has established the
any damages which the property held in usufruct suffered
existence of four requisites, to wit:
because of his act or the acts of his assignee. (Art. 580, NCC).
1. the (dominant) estate is surrounded by other
Q: On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the owner of a building,
immovables and is without adequate outlet to a public
granted Petronila a usufruct over the property until 01
highway;
June 1998 when Manuel, a son of Petronila, would have
2. after payment of the proper indemnity;
reached his 30th birthday. Manuel, however, died on
3. the isolation was not due to the proprietor's own acts;
1 June 1990 when he was only 26 years old. Minerva
and
notified Petronila that the usufruct had been
4. the right of way claimed is at a point least prejudicial
extinguished by the death of Manuel and demanded
to the servient estate, and insofar as consistent with
that the latter vacate the premises and deliver the
this rule, where the distance from the dominant estate
same to the former. Petronila refused to vacate the
to the public highway may be the shortest (Art. 650).
place on the ground that the usufruct in her favor
would expire only on 1 June 1998 when Manuel
However, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that in
would have reached his 30th birthday and that the
case both criteria cannot be complied with, the right of
death of Manuel before his 30th birthday did not
way shall be established at the point least prejudicial to the
extinguish the usufruct. Whose contention should be
servient estate.
accepted? (1997 BAR)
The first and fourth requisites are not complied with. First,
A: Petronila's contention is correct. Under Article 606 of
there is another available outlet to the national highway
the Civil Code, a usufruct granted for the time that may
(Pathway B). Second, the right of way obtained (Pathway
elapse before a third person reaches a certain age shall
A) is not the least prejudicial to Brando's property as
subsist for the number of years specified even if the third
evidenced by the reports of the geodetic and civil engineer.
person should die unless there is an express stipulation in
the contract that states otherwise. In the case at bar, there
When there is already an existing adequate outlet from the
is no express stipulation that the consideration for the
dominant estate to a public highway, even if the said
usufruct is the existence of Petronila's son. Thus, the
outlet, for one reason or another, be inconvenient, the
general rule and not the exception should apply in this case.
need to open up another servitude is entirely unjustified
EASEMENTS (1996, 1998, 2001, 2005, 2013, 2014)
(Costabella Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 80511, January 25, 1991).
The rule that the easement of right of way shall be
Q: An easement that can be acquired by prescription:
established at the point least prejudicial to the servient
estate is controlling (Quimen v. CA, G.R. No. 112331, May 29,
A. Right of way
1996).
B. Watering of an animal
C. Lateral and subjacent support
Q: Distinguish between:
D. Light and view (2014 BAR)
1. Continuous and discontinuous easements;
2. Apparent and non-apparent easements; and
A: D – only continuous and apparent easements maybe
3. Positive and negative easements (1998 BAR)
acquired by prescription.
A:
Q: In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot
whose only access to the national highway was a
1. Continuous easements are those the use of which is or
pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and
may be incessant, without the intervention of any act of
others have been using this pathway (pathway A) since
man, while discontinuous easements are those which
1980. In 2006, Brando fenced off his property, thereby
are used at intervals and depend upon the acts of man.
blocking Andres' access to the national highway.
(Art. 615, Civil Code)
Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to
2. Apparent easements are those which are made known
maintain his old access route to the highway (pathway
and are continually kept in view by external signs that
A), but Brando refused, claiming that there was
reveal the use and enjoyment of the same, while non-
another available pathway (pathway B) for ingress
apparent easements are those which show no external
and egress to the highway. Andres countered that
indication of their existence. (Art. 615, Civil Code)
pathway B has defects, is circuitous, and is extremely
49
 CIVIL LAW
3. Positive easements are those which impose upon the B. Yes. Ava has the option to demand a right of way on
owner of the servient estate the obligation of allowing any of the remaining lots of Franz more so after Franz
something to be done or of doing it himself, while sold lot C to Julia. The essential elements of a legal
negative easements are those which prohibit the owner right of way under Art. 649 and 650 of the NCC are
of the servient estate from doing something which he complied with.
could lawfully do if the easement did not exist. (Art. 615,
Civil Code) Q: David is the owner of the subdivision in Sta. Rosa,
Laguna, without an access to the highway. When he
Q: Emma bought a parcel of land from Equitable-PCI applied for a license to establish the subdivision,
Bank, which acquired the same from Felisa, the David represented that he will purchase a rice field
original owner. Thereafter, Emma discovered that located between his land and the highway, and develop
Felisa had granted a right of way over the land in it into an access road. But when the license was
favor of the land of Georgina, which had no outlet to already granted, he did not bother to buy the rice
a public highway, but the easement was not annotated field, which remains unutilized until the present.
when the servient estate was registered under the Instead, he chose to connect his subdivision with the
Torrens system. Emma then filed a complaint for neighboring subdivision of Nestor, which has an
cancellation of the right of way, on the ground that it access to the highway. Nestor allowed him to do this,
had been extinguished by such failure to annotate. pending negotiations on the compensation to be
How would you decide the controversy? (2001 BAR) paid. When they failed to arrive at an agreement,
Nestor built a wall across the road connecting with
A: The complaint for cancellation of easement of right of David's subdivision. David filed a complaint in court,
way must fail. The failure to annotate the easement upon for the establishment of an easement of right of way
the title of the servient estate is not among the grounds through the subdivision of Nestor which he claims to
for extinguishing an easement under Article 631 of the NCC. be the most adequate and practical outlet to the
Under Article 617, easements are inseparable from the highway.
estate to which they actively or passively belong. Once it
attaches, it can only be extinguished under Article 631, 1) What are the requisites for the establishment of a
and they exist even if they are not stated or annotated compulsory easement of a right of way?
as an encumbrance on the Torrens title of the servient 2) Is David entitled to a right of way in this case? Why
estate. (II Tolentino 326, 1987 ed.) or why not? (1996 BAR)

Q: Franz was the owner of Lot E which was surrounded A:

by four (4) lots one of which – Lot C – he also owned.
He promised Ava that if she bought Lot E, he would 1) Art. 649, NCC. The owner, or any person who by virtue
give her a right of way in Lot C. Convinced, Ava bought of a real right may cultivate or use any immovable
Lot E and, as promised, Franz gave her a right of way in which is surrounded by other immovables pertaining
Lot C. Ava cultivated Lot E and used the right of way to other persons and without adequate outlet to a
granted by Franz. Ava later found gainful employment public highway, is entitled to demand a right of way
abroad. On her return after more than 10 years, the through the neighboring estates, after payment of the
right of way was no longer available to her because property indeminity.
Franz had in the meantime sold Lot C to Julia who had
it fenced. Should this easement be established in such a manner
that its use may be continuous for all the needs of the
A. Does Ava have a right to demand from Julia the dominant estate, establishing a permanent passage the
activation of her right of way? Explain. indemnity shall consist of the value of the land
B. Assuming Ava opts to demand a right of way from occupied and the amount of the damage caused to the
any of the owners of Lots A, B, and D, can she do servient estate.
that? Explain. (2010 BAR)
In case the right of way is limited to the necessary
A: passage for the cultivation of the estate surrounded by
others and for the gathering of its crops through the
A. Yes. Ava has the right to demand from Julia the servient estate without a permanent way, the
activation of the right of way, for the following indemnity shall consist in the payment of the damage
reasons: caused by such encumbrance.
1. The easement of the right of way is a real right
which attaches to, and is inseperable from, the This easement is not compulsory if the isolation of the
estate to which it belongs. immovable is due to the proprietor’s own acts.
2. The sale of the property includes the easement or
servitude, even if the deed of sale is silent on the The easement of right of way shall be established at
matter. the point least prejudicial to the servient estate, and
3. The vendee of the property in which a servitude insofar as consistent with this rule, where the
or easement exists cannot close or put distance from the dominant estate to a public
obstructions thereon to prevent the dominant highway may be the shortest (Art. 650, NCC; Vda. de
estate from using it. Baltazar v. CA, 245 SCRA 333)
4. Ava’s working abroad for more than ten (10)
years should not be construed as non-user, 2) No, David is not entitled to the right of way being
because it cannot be implied from the fact that she claimed. The isolation of his subdivision was due to
or those she left behind to cultivate the lot no his own act or omission because he did not develop
longer use the right of way. into an access road the rice field which he was
5. Renunciation or waiver of an easement must be supposed to purchase according to his own
specific, clear, express and made in a public representation when he applied for a license to
instrument in accordance of Art. 1358 of the NCC.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 50

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
establish the subdivision. (Floro v. Llenado, 244 SCRA a. A squatter’s hut being an illegal construction, constitutes
713). a public nuisance per se, if it poses problems of health
and sanitation. (City of Manila v. Garcia, 19 SCRA 41,
Q: Don was the owner of an agricultural land with no [1967]). If the squatter’s hut is built on a private land
access to a public road. He had been passing through and hinders or impairs the owner’s use of his or her own
the land of Ernie with the latter's acquiescence for property, then it would constitute a private nuisance.
over 20 years. Subsequently, Don subdivided his b. A swimming pool is not a nuisance and is an exception to
property into 20 residential lots and sold them to the attractive nuisance doctrine (Hidalgo v. Guillermo, 91
different persons. Ernie blocked the pathway and Phil. 488 [1952]). It generally does not cause an injury,
refused to let the buyers pass through his land. harm or prejudice to an individual or the public (Art.
694, par. 1).
a) Did Don acquire an easement of right of way? c. A house of prostitution is a public nuisance because it
Explain. shocks or disregards the decency or morality of the
b) What are the rights of the lot buyers, if any? community. (Art. 694 par. 3, Civil Code)
Explain. (2005 BAR) d. A noisy or dangerous factory even if built in a private
land may be considered a nuisance if it offends the sense
A: of the owners of the adjacent property or poses a danger
to their safety (Art. 694, par. 1, Civil Code). This kind of
a) Don did not acquire an easement of right of way. His nuisance may be classified as a public nuisance if it
passage through Ernie’s land was by mere acquiescence affects and annoys those who come within its sphere.
or tolerance. He cannot claim to have acquired the e. Uncollected garbage can be injurious to heath and even
easement of right of way by prescription, because this the environment. It is thus, considered a public nuisance.
easement is discontinuous although apparent. Only
continuous and apparent easements can be acquired by Q: A drug lord and his family reside in a small bungalow
prescription of 10 years of uninterrupted use and where they sell shabu and other prohibited drugs.
enjoyment. When the police found the illegal trade, they
b) Prior to the grant of an easement, the buyers of the immediately demolished the house because
dominant estate have no other right than to compel according to them, it was a nuisance per se that
grant of easement of right of way. Since the properties should be abated. Can this demolition be sustained?
of the buyers are surrounded by other immovable and Explain. (2006 BAR)
has no adequate outlet to a public highway and the
isolation is not due to their acts, buyers may demand A: No, the demolition cannot be sustained. The house is not
an easement of a right of way provided proper a nuisance per se or at law as it is not an act, occupation,
indemnity is paid and the right of way demanded is or structure which is a nuisance at all times and under
the shortest and least prejudicial to Ernie. any circumstances, regardless of location or
surroundings. A nuisance per se is a nuisance in and of
NUISANCE (2005, 2006 BAR) itself, without regard to circumstances.

Q: State with reason whether each of the following is a DONATIONS (1990, 1991, 1993, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006,
nuisance, and if so, give its classification, whether public 2007, 2009 BAR)
or private:
Q: Josefa executed a deed of donation covering a one-
a) A squatter’s hut hectare rice land in favor of her daughter, Jennifer.
b) A swimming pool The deed specifically provides that:
c) A house of prostitution
d) A noisy or dangerous factory in a private land "For and in consideration of the love and
e) Uncollected garbage (2005 BAR) service Jennifer has shown and given to me, I
hereby freely, voluntarily and irrevocably
A: donate to her my one-hectare rice land
covered by TCT No. 11550, located in San
1. According to Art. 694 of the Civil Code, a nuisance is any Fernando, Pampanga. This donation shall
act, omission, establishment, business condition of take effect upon my death."
property, or anything else which: The deed also contained Jennifer's signed acceptance,
i. Injures or endangers the health or safety of others; and an attached notarized declaration by Josefa and
or Jennifer that the land will remain in Josefa's
ii. Annoys or offends the sense; or possession and cannot be alienated, encumbered, sold
iii. Shocks, defies, or disregards decency or morality; or disposed of while Josefa is still alive. Advise Jennifer
or on whether the deed is a donation inter vivos or
iv. Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any mortis causa and explain the reasons supporting your
public highway or street, or any body of water; or advice. (2013 BAR)
v. Hinders or impairs the use of property.
A: The donation is a donation inter vivos.
A nuisance may be whether public or private. Under Art.
685, a public nuisance affects a community or When the donor intends that the donation shall take effect
neighbourhood or any considerable number of persons, during the lifetime of the donor, though the property shall
although the extent of the annoyance, danger of damage not be delivered till after the donor’s death, this shall be a
upon individuals may be unequal. A private nuisance, on donation inter vivos (Art. 729). The Civil Code prefers inter
the other hand, is one that violates only private rights vivos transmissions. Moreover, mortis causa donations
and produces damage to but one or a few persons. should follow the formalities of a will (Art. 728). Here there
is no showing that such formalities were followed. Thus, it
is favorable to Jennifer that the deed is a donation inter
vivos.
51
 CIVIL LAW
Q: B donated to M a parcel of land in 1980. B made the
Furthermore, what is most significant in determining the deed of donation, entitled “Donation Inter Vivos”, in a
type of donation is the absence of stipulation that the public instrument and M accepted the donation in the
donor could revoke the donation; on the contrary, the land same document. It was provided in the deed that
deeds expressly declare them to be “irrevocable,” a quality the land donated shall be immediately delivered to M
absolutely incompatible with the idea of conveyances and that M shall have the right to enjoy the fruits fully.
mortis causa where revocability is the essence of the act, to The deed also provided that B was reserving the right to
the extent that a testator cannot lawfully waive or restrict dispose of the land during his (B’s) lifetime, and that M
his right of revocation. The provisions of the deed of shall not register the deed of donation until after B’s
donation which state that the same will only take effect death. Upon B’s death, W, B’s widow, and sole heir, filed
upon the death of the donor and that there is a prohibition an action for the recovery of the donated land,
to alienate, encumber, dispose, or sell the same should be contending that the donation made by B is a donation
harmonized with its express irrevocability (Austria-Magat mortis causa and not a donation inter vivos. Will said
v. CA, G.R. No. 106755, February 1, 2002). action prosper? Explain your answer. (1990 BAR)

Q: The Roman Catholic Church accepted a donation of A: Yes the action will prosper. The donation is a donation
a real property located in Lipa City. A deed of donation mortis causa because the reservation is to dispose of all the
was executed, signed by the donor, Don Mariano, and property donated and, therefore, the donation is revocable at
the donee, the Church, as represented by Fr. Damian. will. Accordingly, the donation requires the execution of a
Before the deed could be notarized, Don Mariano died. valid will, whether notarial or holographic. (Arts. 755, 728,
Is the donation valid? (2014 BAR) Civil Code)

A: The donation is void. The donation of an immovable Q: Ernesto donated in a public instrument a parcel of
property must be in a public instrument in order for it to land to Demetrio, who accepted it in the same
be valid. In this case, the donor died even before the document. It is there declared that the donation shall
notarization of the deed of donation. Hence, it does not take effect immediately, with the donee having the
satisfy the requirement of being in a public instrument for right to take possession of the land and receive its
the donation to be valid. fruits but not to dispose of the land while Ernesto is
alive as well as for ten years following his death.
Q: Jose, single, donated a house and lot to his only Moreover, Ernesto also reserved in the same deed his
niece, Maria, who was of legal age and who accepted right to sell the property should he decide to dispose of
the donation. The donation and Maria's acceptance it at any time - a right which he did not exercise at all.
thereof were evidenced by a Deed of Donation. Maria After his death, Ernesto's heirs seasonably brought an
then lived in the house and lot donated to her, action to recover the property, alleging that the
religiously paying real estate taxes thereon. Twelve donation was void as it did not comply with the
years later, when Jose had already passed away, a formalities of a will. Will the suit prosper? (1990, 1998
woman claiming to be an illegitimate daughter of Jose BAR)
filed a complaint against Maria. Claiming rights as an
heir, the woman prayed that Maria be ordered to A: Yes, the suit will prosper as the donation did not
reconvey the house and lot to Jose's estate. In her comply with the formalities of a will. In this instance, the
complaint she alleged that the notary public who fact that the donor did not intend to transfer ownership
notarized the Deed of Donation had an expired or possession of the donated property to the donee until
notarial commission when the Deed of Donation was the donor's death, would result in a donation mortis causa
executed by Jose. Can Maria be made to reconvey the and in this kind of disposition, the formalities of a will
property? What can she put up as a defense? (2015 should be complied with, otherwise, the donation is void. In
BAR) this Instance, donation mortis causa embodied only in a
public instrument without the formalities of a will could
A: No. Maria cannot be compelled to reconvey the not have transferred ownership of disputed property to
property. The Deed of Donation was void because it was another.
not considered a public document. However, a void
donation can trigger acquisitive prescription (Solis v. CA, Q: On January 21, 1986, A executed a deed of
G.R. No. L-46753-54, August 25, 1989; Doliendo v. Biarnesa, donation inter vivos of a parcel of land to Dr. B who
G.R. No. L-2765, December 27, 1906). The void donation has had earlier constructed thereon a building in which
a quality of titulo colorado enough for acquisitive researches on the dreaded disease AIDS were being
prescription especially since 12 years had lapsed from the conducted. The deed, acknowledged before a notary
deed of donation. public, was handed over by A to Dr. B who received it. A
few days after, A flew to Davao City. Unfortunately, the
Q: Illegal and impossible conditions in a simple donation airplane he was riding crashed on landing killing him.
v. Illegal and impossible conditions in an onerous Two days after the unfortunate accident. Dr. B, upon
donation (2007 BAR) advice of a lawyer, executed a deed acknowledged
before a notary public accepting the donation. Is the
A: Illegal and impossible conditions in a simple donation are donation effective? Explain your answer. (1993, 1998
considered as not written. Such conditions shall, therefore, BAR)
be disregarded but the donation remains valid (Article 727,
NCC). A: No, the donation is not effective. The law requires that
the separate acceptance of the donee of an immovable must
On the other hand, illegal and impossible conditions imposed be done in a public document during the lifetime of the
in an onerous donation shall annul the donation (Art. 1183, donor (Art. 746 & 749, Civil Code) In this case, B
NCC). This is so because onerous donations are governed by executed the deed of acceptance before a notary public
the law on contracts (Art. 733, NCC). after the donor had already died.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 52

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Q: On July 27, 1997, Pedro mailed in Manila a letter to Q: In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In
his brother Jose, a resident of Iloilo City, offering to 1989, because a certain Picasso painting reminded Brad
donate a vintage sports car which the latter had long of her, Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his bedroom.
been wanting to buy from the former. On August 5, In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While Brad was
1997, Jose called Pedro by cellular phone to thank him mending his broken heart, he met Angie and fell in love.
for his generosity and to inform him that he was Because the Picasso painting reminded Angie of him,
sending by mail for his letter of acceptance. Pedro never Brad in his will bequeathed the painting to Angie. Brad
received that letter because it was never mailed. On died in 1995. Saddened by Brad's death, Jennifer asked
August 14, 1997, Pedro received a telegram from Iloilo for the Picasso painting as a remembrance of him. Angie
informing him that Jose had been killed in a road refused and claimed that Brad, in his will, bequeathed
accident the day before (August 13, 1997) the painting to her. Is Angie correct? Why or why not?
(2007 BAR)
1. Is there a perfected donation?
2. Will your anser be the same if Jose did mail his A: No, Angie is not correct. The Picasso painting is not given
acceptance letter but it was received by Pedro in or donated by Jennifer to Brad. She merely “placed it in his
Manila days after Jose’s death? (1998 BAR) bedroom.” Hence, she is still the owner of the painting. Not
being the owner of the Picasso painting, Brad cannot validly
A: bequeath the same to Angie (Art. 930). Even assuming that
the painting was impliedly given or donated by Jennifer to
1. None. There is no perfected donation. Under Art. 748 of Brad, the donation is nevertheless void for not being in
the Civil Code, the donation of a movable may be made writing. The Picasso painting must be worth more that 5,000
orally or in writing. If the value of the personal property pesos. Under Art. 748, the donation and acceptance of a
donated exceeds five thousand pesos, teh donation and movable worth more than 5,000 pesos must be in writing,
the acceptance shall be made in writing. Assuming that otherwise the donation is void, Jennifer remained the owner
the value of the thing donated, a vintage sports car, of the Picasso painting and Brad could not have validly
exceeds P5, 000.00, then the donation and the disposed of said painting in favor of Angie in his will.
acceptance must be in writing. In this instance, the
acceptance of Jose was not in writing, therefore, the Q: Anastacia purchased a house and lot on
donation is void. Upon the other hand, assuming that the installments at a housing project in Quezon City.
sports car costs less than P5, 000.00, the donation may Subsequently, she was employed in California and a
be oral, but still, the simultaneous delivery of the car is year later, she executed a deed of donation, duly
needed and there being none, the donation was never authenticated by the Philippine Consulate in Los
perfected. Angeles, California, donating the house and lot to her
2. Yes, the answer is the same. If Jose’s mail containing his friend Amanda. The latter brought the deed of donation
acceptance of the donation was received by Pedro after to the owner of the project and discovered that
the former’s death, then the donation is still void Anastacia left unpaid installments and real estate
because under Art. 734 of the Civil Code, the donation is taxes. Amanda paid these so that the donation in her
perfected the moment the donor knows of the favor can be registered in the project owner's office.
acceptance by the done. The death of Jose before Pedro Two months later, Anastacia died, leaving her
could receive the acceptance indicates that the donation mother Rosa as her sole heir. Rosa filed an action to
was never perfected. Under Art. 746, acceptance must annul the donation on the ground that Amanda did
be made during the lifetime of both the donor and the not give her consent in the deed of donation or in a
done. separate public instrument. Amanda replied that
the donation was an onerous one because she had to
Q: Arturo borrowed P500, 000.00 from his father. After pay unpaid installments and taxes; hence her
he had paid P300, 000.00, his father died. When the acceptance may be implied. Who is correct? (2000 BAR)
administrator of his father's estate requested
payment of the balance of P200, 000.00. Arturo A: Rosa is correct because the donation is void. The
replied that the same had been condoned by his property donated was an immovable. For such donation to
father as evidenced by a notation at the back of his be valid, Article 749 of the New Civil Code requires both
check payment for the P300, 000.00 reading: "In full the donation and the acceptance to be in a public
payment of the loan". Will this be a valid defense in an instrument. There being no showing that Amanda's
action for collection? (2000 BAR) acceptance was made in a public instrument, the
donation is void. The contention, that the donation is
A: It depends. If the notation "in full payment of the loan" onerous and therefore, need not comply with Article 749
was written by Arturo's father, there was an implied for validity is without merit. The donation is not onerous
condonation of the balance that discharges the obligation. because it did not impose on Amanda the obligation to pay
In such case, the notation is an act of the father from which the balance on the purchase price or the arrears in real
condonation may be inferred. The condonation being estate taxes. Amanda took it upon herself to pay those
implied, it need not comply with the formalities of a amounts voluntarily. For a donation to be onerous, the
donation to be effective. The defense of full payment will, burden must be imposed by the donor on the donee. In the
therefore, be valid. problem, there is no such burden imposed by the donor
onthedonee.The donation not being onerous, it must
When, however, the notation was written by Arturo himself. comply with the formalities of Article 749.
It merely proves his intention in making that payment but in
no way does it bind his father (Yam v. CA, G.R No. 104726, Q: May a person donate something that does not
February 11, 1999). In such case, the notation was not the belong to him? Explain. (2003 BAR)
act of his father from which condonation may be
inferred. There being no condonation at all, the defense of A: As a general rule, a person cannot donate something
full payment will not be valid. which he cannot dispose of at the time of the donation (Art.
751).
Q: True or False:
53
 CIVIL LAW
shall construct thereon a place of worship within 1 year
A person can dispose of his corpse through an act from the acceptance of the donation. In an affidavit he
intervivos. (2009 BAR) executed on behalf of the congregation, the Minister
accepted the donation. The Deed of Donation was not
A: A person cannot dispose of his corpse through an act inter registered with the Registry of Deeds.
vivos, i.e., an act to take effect during his lifetime. Before his
death there is no corpse to dispose. But he is allowed to do so However, instead of constructing a place of worship, the
through an act mortis causa, i.e., an act to take effect upon his Minister constructed a bungalow on the property he
death. used as his residence. Disappointed with the Minister,
the spouses revoked the donation and demanded that
Q: Spouses Michael and Linda donated a 3-hectare he vacate the premises immediately. But the Minister
residential land to the City of Baguio on the refused to leave, claiming that aside from using the
condition that the city government would build bungalow as his residence, he is also using it as a place
thereon a public park with a boxing arena, the for worship on special occasions.
construction of which shall commence within six (6)
months from the date the parties ratify the donation. Under the circumstances, can Alfredo and Racquel evict
The donee accepted the donation and the title to the the Minister and recover possession of the property? If
property was transferred in its name. Five years you were the couple's counsel, what action you take to
elapsed but the public park with the boxing arena was protect the interest of your clients? (2006 BAR)
never started. Considering the failure of the donee to
comply with the condition of the donation, the donor- A: As counsel for the couple, I may file an action for
spouses sold the property to Ferdinand who then sued reconveyance of the property on the ground that the
to recover the land from the government. Will the suit donation was not perfected. It was not perfected because
prosper? (1991 BAR) although it was made in a public document, the donee failed
to notify the donor of such acceptance in an authentic form
A: Ferdinand has no right to recover the land. It is true that before the donation was revoked under Art. 749 of the Civil
the donation was revocable because of breach of the Code. Such notification was necessary for the donation to
conditions. But until and unless the donation was revoked, become valid and binding.
it remained valid. Hence, Spouses Michael and Linda had no
right to sell the land to Ferdinand. One cannot give what he
does not have. What the donors should have done first was PART IV – OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS
to have the donation annulled or revoked. And after that
was done, they could validly have disposed of the land in
favor of Ferdinand. SOURCES OF OBLIGATION (1991, 1997, 2002, 2008 BAR)

Q: In 1950, Dr. Alba donated a parcel of land to Q: In two separate documents signed by him, Juan
Central University on condition that the latter must Valentino "obligated" himself each to Maria and to
establish a medical college on the land to be named Perla, thus -'To Maria, my true love, I obligate myself
after him. In the year 2000, the heirs of Dr. Alba filed to give you my one and only horse when I feel like It."
an action to annul the donation and for the - and -
reconveyance of the property donated to them for the 'To Perla, my true sweetheart, I obligate myself to pay
failure, after 50 years, of the University to establish you the P500.00 I owe you when I feel like it."
on the property a medical school named after their
father. The University opposed the action on the Months passed but Juan never bothered to make good
ground of prescription and also because it had not used his promises. Maria and Perla came to consult you on
the property for some purpose other than that whether or not they could recover on the basis of
stated in the donation. Should the opposition of the the foregoing settings. What would your legal advice
University to the action of Dr. Alba’s heirs be be? (1997 BAR)
sustained? Explain. (2003, 2006 BAR)
A: I would advise Maria not to bother running after Juan
A: The donation may be revoked. The non-establishment for the latter to make good his promise. This is because
of the medical college on the donated property was a a promise is not an actionable wrong that allows a party
resolutory condition imposed on the donation by the donor. to recover especially when she has not suffered damages
Although the Deed of Donation did not fix the time for resulting from such promise. A promise does not create an
the established of the medical college, the failure of the obligation on the part of Juan because it is not something
donee to establish the medical college after fifty (50) which arises from a contract, law, quasi-contracts or quasi-
years from the making of the donation should be delicts (Art, 1157). Under Art. 1182, Juan's promise to
considered as occurrence of the resolutory condition, Maria is void because a conditional obligation depends upon
and the donation may now be revoked. While the general the sole will of the obligor. As regards Perla, the
rule is that in case the period is not fixed in the agreement document is an express acknowledgment of a debt, and
of the parties, the period must be fixed first by the court the promise to pay what he owes her when he feels like it
before the obligation may be demanded, the period of fifty is equivalent to a promise to pay when his means permits
(50) years was more than enough time for the done to him to do so, and is deemed to be one with an indefinite
comply with the condition. Hence, in this case, there is no period under Art. 1180. Hence the amount is recoverable
more need for the court to fix the period because such after Perla asks the court to set the period as provided by
procedure with the condition (Central Philippine Art. 1197, par. 2.
University v. CA,G.R. No. 112127, July 17, 1995).
Q: Roland, a basketball star, was under contract for one
Q: Spouses Alfredo and Racquel were active members of year to play-for-play exclusively for Lady Love, Inc.
a religious congregation. They donated a parcel of land However, even before the basketball season could
in favour of that congregation in a duly notarized Deed open, he was offered a more attractive pay plus
of Donation, subject to the condition that the Minister fringes benefits by Sweet Taste, Inc. Roland

UST BAR OPERATIONS 54

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
accepted the offer and transferred to Sweet Taste. knowledge thereof. (Integrated Packaging Corporation v.
Lady Love sues Roland and Sweet Taste for breach of CA, G.R. No. 115117, June 8, 2000)
contract. Defendants claim that the restriction to play
for Lady Love alone is void, hence, unenforceable, as Q: A van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while
it constitutes an undue interference with the right of negotiating a downhill slope of a city road, suddenly
Roland to enter into contracts and the impairment of gained speed, obviously beyond the authorized limit
his freedom to play and enjoy basketball. Can Roland in the area, and bumped a car in front of it, causing
be bound by the contract he entered into with Lady severe damage to the care and serious injuries to its
Love or can he disregard the same? Is he liable at all? passengers. Orlando was not in the car at the time of
How about Sweet Taste? Is it liable to Lady Love? (1991 the incident. The car owner and the injured passengers
BAR) sued Orlando and Diego for damages caused by Diego’s
negligence. In their defense, Diego claims that the
A: Yes, Roland is liable under the contract as far as Lady downhill slope caused the van to gain speed and
Love is concerned. He is liable for damages under Article that, as he stepped on the brakes to check the
1170 of the Civil Code since he contravened the tenor of acceleration, the brakes locked, causing the van to
his obligation. Not being a contracting party, Sweet Taste is go even faster and eventually to hit the car in front of
not bound by the contract but it can be held liable under it. Orlando and Diego contend that the sudden
Art. 1314. The basis of its liability is not prescribed by malfunction of the van’s brake system is a
contract but is founded on quasi-delict, assuming that fortuitous even and that, therefore, they are exempt
Sweet Taste knew of the contract. Article 1314 of the Civil from any liability. Is this contention tenable? Explain.
Code provides that any third person who induces (2002 BAR)
another to violate his contract shall be liable for damages
to the other contracting party. A: No. Mechanical defects of a motor vehicle do not
constitute fortuitous event, since the presence of such
Q: Printado is engaged in the printing business. defects would have been readily detected by diligent
Suplico supplies printing paper to Printado maintenance check. The failure to maintain the vehicle in
pursuant to an order agreement under which Suplico safe running condition constitutes negligence.
binds himself to deliver the same volume of paper
every month for a period of 18 months, with Q: AB Corp. entered into a contract with XY Corp.
Printado in turn agreeing to pay within 60 days after whereby the former agreed to construct the research
each delivery. Suplico has been faithfully delivering and laboratory facilities of the latter. Under the terms
under the order agreement for 10 months but of the contract, AB Corp. agreed to complete the facility
thereafter stopped doing so, because Printado has not in 18 months, at the total contract price of P10 million.
made any payment at all. Printado has also a XY Corp. paid 50% of the total contract price, the
standing contractwith publisher Publico for the balance to be paid upon completion of the work. The
printing of 10, 000 volumes of school textbooks. work stated immediately, but AB Corp. later
Suplico was aware of said printing contract. After experienced work slippage because of labor unrest in
printing 1, 000 volumes, Printado also fails to perform his company. AB Corp.'s employees claimed that they
under its printing contract with Publico. Suplico sues are not being paid on time; hence, the work slowdown.
Printado for the value of the unpaid deliveries under As of the 17th month, work was only 45% completed.
their order agreement. At the same time Publico sues AB Corp. asked for extension of time, claiming that its
Printado for damages for breach of contract with labor problems is a case of fortuitous event, but this
respect to their own printing agreement. In the suit was denied by XY Corp. When it became certain that
filed by Suplico, Printado counters that: (a) Suplico the construction could not be finished on time, XY
cannot demand payment for deliveries made under Corp. sent written notice cancelling the contract, and
their order agreement until Suplico has completed requiring AB Corp. to immediately vacate the
performance under said contract; (b) Suplico should premises.
pay damages for breach of contract; and (c) with Can the labor unrest be considered a fortuitous event?
Publico should be liable for Printado’s breach of his (2008 BAR)
contract with Publico because the order agreement
between Suplico and Printado was for the benefit of A: Labor unrest is not a fortuitous event that will excuse
Publico. Are the contentions of Printado tenable? AB Corporation from complying with its obligation of
Explain your answers as to each contention. (2002 BAR) constructing the research and laboratory facilities of XY
Corporation. The labor unrest, which may even be
A: No, the contentions of Printado are untenable. attributed in large part to AB Corporation itself, is not the
Printado having failed to pay for the printing paper direct cause of non-compliance by AB Corporation. It is
covered by the delivery invoices on time, Suplico has independent of its obligation. It is similar to the failure of a
the right to cease making further delivery. And the latter DBP borrower to pay her loan just because her plantation
did not violate the order agreement (Integrated Packaging suffered losses due to the cadang-cadang disease. It does
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115117, June 8, not excuse compliance with the obligation (DBP v. Vda. de
2000). Suplico cannot be held liable for damages, for Moll, G.R. No. L-25802, January 31, 1972).
breach of contract, as it was not he who violated the order
agreement, but Printado. Suplico cannot be held liable for KINDS OF OBLIGATIONS (1991, 1992, 1998, 1999,
Printado’s breach of contract with Publico. He is not a 2000, 2001, 2003 BAR)
party to the agreement entered into by and between
Printado and Publico. Theirs is not a stipulation pour atrui. Q: Are the following obligations valid, why, and if they
[Aforesaid] Such contracts do could not affect third are valid, when is the obligation demandable in each
persons like Suplico because of the basic civil law case?
principle of relativity of contracts which provides that
contracts can only bind the parties who entered into it, a. If the debtor promises to pay as soon as he has the
and it cannot favor or prejudice a third person, even if means to pay;
he is aware of such contract and has acted with b. If the debtor promises to pay when he likes;
55
 CIVIL LAW
c. If the debtor promises to pay when he becomes a considered a sale and therewas delivery or tradition of
lawyer; the thing sold.
d. If the debtor promises to pay if his son, who is sick
with cancer, does not die within one year. (2003 b) No, she is not entitled to the rentals collected by Manuel
BAR) because at the time they accrued and were collected,
Eva was not yet the owner of the property.
A:
Q: In a deed of sale of realty, it was stipulated that the
a. The obligation is valid. It is an obligation subject to an buyer would construct a commercial building on the lot
indefinite period because the debtor binds himself to while the seller would construct a private passageway
pay when his means permit him to do so (Art. 1180). bordering the lot. The building was eventually finished
When the creditor knows that the debtor already has but the seller failed to complete the passageway as
the means to pay, he must file an action in court to fix some of the squatters, who were already known to be
the period, and when the definite period as set by the there at the time they entered into the contract, refused
court arrives, the obligation to pay becomes to vacate the premises. In fact, prior to its execution, the
demandable (Art. 1197). seller filed ejectment cases against the squatters.
b. The obligation to pay when he likes is a suspensive
condition the fulfillment of which is subject to the sole The buyer now sues the seller for specific performance
will of the debtor and therefore the conditional with damages. The defense is that the obligation to
obligation is void (Art. 1182). construct the passageway should be with a period
c. The obligation is valid. It is subject to a suspensive which, incidentally, had not been fixed by them, hence,
condition, i.e. the future and uncertain event of his the need for fixing a judicial period.
becoming a lawyer. The performance of this obligation
does not depend solely on the will of the debtor but Will the action for specific performance of the buyer
also on other factors outside the debtor’s control. against the seller prosper? (1991 BAR)
d. The obligation is valid. The death of the son of cancer
within one year is made a negative suspensive A: No, the action for specific performance filed by the buyer
condition to his making the payment. The obligation is is premature under Art. 1197 of the Civil Code. If a period
demandable if the son does not die within one year has not been fixed although contemplated by the parties, the
(Art. 1185). parties themselves should fix that period, failing in which,
the Court maybe asked to fix it taking into consideration the
Q: Pedro promised to give his grandson a car if the probable contemplation of the parties. Before teh period is
latter will pass the bar examinations. When his fixed, an action for specific performance is premature.
grandson passed the said examinations, Pedro
refused to give the car on the ground that the Q: In June 1988, X obtained a loan from A and executed
condition was a purely potestative one. Is he correct with Y as solidary co-maker a promissory note in favor
or not? (2000 BAR) of A for the sum of P200, 000.00. The loan was payable
at P20, 000.00 with interest monthly within the first
A: No, he is not correct. First of all, the condition is not week of each month beginning July 1988 until maturity
purely potestative, because it does not depend on the sole in April 1989. To secure the payment of the loan, X put
will of one of the parties. Secondly, even if it were, it up as security a chattel mortgage on his car, a Toyota
would be valid because it depends on the sole will of the Corolla sedan. Because of failure of X and Y to pay the
creditor (the donee) and not of the debtor (the donor). principal amount of the loan, the car was extrajudicially
foreclosed. A acquired the car at A’s highest bid of P120,
Q: In 1997, Manuel bound himself to sell Eva a house 000.00 during the auction sale.
and lot which is being rented by another person, if Eva
passes the 1998 bar examinations. Luckily for Eva, After several fruitless letters of demand against X and Y,
she passed said examinations. A sued Y for the discovery of P80, 000.00 constituting
the deficiency.
a. Suppose Manuel had sold the same house and lot
to another before Eva passed the 1998 bar Y resisted the suit raising the following defenses:
examinations, is such sale valid? Why?
b. Assuming that it is Eva who is entitled to buy said a) That Y should not be liable at all because X was not
house and lot, is she entitled to the rentals sued together with Y.
collected by Manuel before she passed the 1998 b) That the obligation has been paid completely by A’s
bar examinations? Why? (1999 BAR) acquisition of teh car through “dacion en pago” or
payment by cession.
A: c) That Y should not be held liable for the deficiency of
P80, 000.00 because he was not a co-mortgagor in
a) Yes, the sale to the other person is valid. However, teh chattel mortgage of the car, which contract was
the buyer acquired the property subject to a executed by X alone as owner and mortgagor.
resolutory condition of Eva passing the 1998 Bar d) That assuming he is liable, he should only pay the
Examinations. Hence, upon Eva's passing the Bar, the proportionate sum of P40, 000.00.
rights of the other buyer terminated and Eva acquired
ownership of the property. Decide the defense with reasons. (1992 BAR)

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: Yes, the sale to the other A:

person is valid, as the contract between Manuel and
Eva is a mere promise to sell and Eva has not acquired a) The first defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable as
a real right over the land assuming that there is a price solidary debtor. The creditor may proceed against any
stipulated in the contract for the contract to be one of the solidary debtors. The demand against one

UST BAR OPERATIONS 56

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
does not preclude further demand against the others so utility vehicles (SUVs) to the company for it to sell and
long as the debt is not fully paid. the proceeds to be credited to the loan as payment.
b) The second defense of Y is untenable. Y is still liable. Was the obligation of Butch extinguished by reason of
The chattel mortgage is only given as security and not dacion en pago upon the surrender of the SUVs? Decide
as payment for the debt in case of failure to pay. Y as a and explain. (2016 BAR)
solidary co-maker is not relieved of further liability on
the promissory note as a result of the foreclosure of teh A: No, the obligation of Butch to Hagibis was not
chattel mortgage. extinguished by the mere surrender of the SUV’s to the
c) The third defense of Y is untenable. Y is a surety of X latter. Dation in payment, whereby property is alienated to
and the extrajudicial demand against the principal the creditor in satisfaction of a debt in money, shall be
debtor is not inconsistent with a judicial demand governed by the law on sales (Art. 1245). In dacion en pago,
against the surety. A suretyship may co-exist with a as a special mode of payment, the debtor offers another
mortgage. thing to the credtor who accepts it as equivalent of
d) The fourth defense is untenable. Y is liable for the entire payment of an outstanding debt. The undertaking really
prestation since Y incurred a solidary obligation with X. partakes in one sense of the nature of sale, that is, the
creditor is really buying the thing or property of the debtor,
Q: Four foreign medical students rented the apartment payment for which is to be charged against the debtor’s
of Thelma for a period of one year. After one semester, debt. As such, the essential elements of a contract of sale,
three of them returned to their home country and namely, consent, object certain, and cause or consideration
the fourth transferred to a boarding house. Thelma must be present. In dacion en pago, there is in reality an
discovered that they left unpaid telephone bills in the objective novation of the obligation where the thing offered
total amount of P80, 000.00. The lease contract as an accepted equivalent of the performance of an
provided that the lessees shall pay for the telephone obligation is considered as the object of the contract of sale,
services in the leased premises. Thelma demanded while the debt is considered as the purchase price. In any
that the fourth student pay the entire amount of the case, common consent is an essential pre-requisite, be it
unpaid telephone bills, but the latter is willing to pay sale or innovation to have the effect of totally extinguishing
only one fourth of it. Who is correct? Why? (2001 BAR) the debt or obligation. (Filinvest Credit Corporation v.
Philippine Acetylene Company, G.R. No. L-50449, January 30,
A: The fourth student is correct. His liability is only 1982) There being no mention in the facts that Hagibis has
joint, hence, pro rata. There is solidary liability only given its consent to accept the SUCs as equivalent payment,
when the obligation expressly so states or when the law the obligation of Butch is not thereby extinguished be mere
or nature of the obligation requires solidarity (Art. 1207). delivery of the SUVs.
The contract of lease in the problem does not, in any
way, stipulate solidarity. Q: Jerico, the project owner, entered into a
Construction Contract with Ivan for the latter to
Q: Joey, Jovy and Jojo are solidary debtors under a construct his house. Jojo executed a Surety undertaking
loan obligation of P300, 000.00 which has fallen due. to guarantee the performance of the work by Ivan.
The creditor has, however, condoned Jojo's entire Jerico and Ivan later entered into a Memorandum of
share in the debt. Since Jovy has become insolvent, Agreement (MOA) revising the work schedule of Ivan
the creditor makes a demand on Joey to pay the debt. and the subcontractors. The MOA stated that all the
stipulations of the original contract not in conflict with
1. How much, if any, may Joey be compelled to said agreement shall remain valid and legally effective.
pay? Jojo filed a suit to declare him relieved of his
2. To what extent, if at all, can Jojo be compelled by undertaking as a result of the MOA because of the
Joey to contribute to such payment? (1998 BAR) change in the work schedule. Jerico claims there is no
novation of the Construction Contract. Decide the case
A: and explain. (2016 BAR)
1. Joey can be compelled to pay only the remaining balance
of P200.000, in view of the remission of Jojo's share by A: I will decide in favor of Jerico as there is no novation of
the creditor (Art. 1219). the Construction Contract. Novation is never presumed,
2. Jojo can be compelled by Joey to contribute P50.000 Art. and may only take place when the following are present:
1217. par. 3, Civil Code provides. "When one of the (1) a previous valid obligation; (2) the agreement of all the
solidary debtors cannot, because of his insolvency, parties to the new contract; (3) the extinguishment of the
reimburse his share to the debtor paying the old contract; (4) validity of the new one. There must be
obligation, such share shall be borne by all his co- consent of all the parties to the substitution, resulting in the
debtors, in proportion to the debt of each." extinction of the old obligation and the creation of a new
valid one. In this case, the revision of the work schedule of
Since the insolvent debtor's share which Joey paid was Ivan and the subcontractors is not shown to be so
P100,000, and there are only two remaining debtors - substantial as to extinguish the old contract, and there was
namely Joey and Jojo - these two shall share equally also no irreconcilable incompatibility between the old and
the burden of reimbursement. Jojo may thus be new obligations. It has also been held in jurisprudence that
compelled by Joey to contribute P50.000.00. a surety may only be relieved of his undertaking if there is a
material change in the principal contract and such would
EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS (1996, 1998, make the obligation of the surety onerous. The principal
2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2009, 2016 BAR) contract subject of the surety agreement still exists, and
Jojo is still bound as a surety.
Q: Butch got a loan from Hagibis Corporation (Hagibis)
but he defaulted in the payment. A case for collection of ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: I will decide against Jerico. The
a sum of money was filed against him. As a defense, provisions of the Civil Code on Guarantee, other than the
Butch claims that there was already an arrangement benefit of excusion (Art. 2059, CC), are applicable and
with Hagibis on the payment of the loan. To implement available to the surety because a surety is a guarantor who
the same, Butch already surrendered five (5) service binds himself solidarily. [Art. 2047(2), CC] The Supreme
57
 CIVIL LAW
Court has held that there is no reason why the provisions of value of his interest as equivalent to his share in the taxes
Art. 2079 would not apply to a surety. (Autocorp Group v. and expenses of preservation.
Intra Strata Assurance Corporation, 556 SCRA 250 [2008])
Article 2079 of the Civil Code provides that an extension Q: Define compensation as a mode of extinguishing an
granted to the debtor by the creditor without the consent of obligation, and distinguish it from payment. (1998
the guarantor extinguishes the guaranty. The changes in BAR)
the work schedule amount to an extension granted the
debtor without the consent of the surety. Hence, Jojo’s A: Compensation is a mode of extinguishing to the
obligation as a surety is extinguished. If the change of work concurrent amount, the obligations of those persons who
schedule, on the other hand, shortens the time of in their own right are reciprocally debtors and creditors
completion of the project, it will amount to a novation. The of each other (Tolentino, 1991 ed., p. 365, citing 2 Castan
old obligation, where Jojo was obligated as a surety is 560 and Francia v. IAC, 162 SCRA 753). It involves the
extinguished relatively as to him, leaving Ivan still bound. simultaneous balancing of two obligations in order to
extinguish them to the extent in which the amount of one
Q: A, B, C, D and E made themselves solidarity indebted is covered by that of the other. (De Leon, 1992, ed., p. 221,
to X for the amount of P50, 000.00. When X demanded citing 8 Manresa 401).
payment from A, the latter refused to pay on the
following grounds: Payment means not only delivery of money but also
performance of an obligation (Article 1232, Civil Code). In
a) B is only 16 years old. payment, capacity to dispose of the thing paid and
b) C has already been condoned by X. capacity to receive payment are required for debtor and
c) D is insolvent. creditor, respectively: in compensation, such capacity is
d) E was given by X an extension of 6 months not necessary, because the compensation operates by law
without the consent of the other four co-debtors. and not by the act of the parties. In payment, the
performance must be complete; while in compensation
State the effect of each of the above defenses put up by there may be partial extinguishment of an obligation
A on his obligation to pay X, if such defenses are found (Tolentino, supra).
to be true. (2003 BAR)
Q: Felipe borrowed $100 from Gustavo in 1998, when
A: the Phil P - US$ exchange rate was P56 - US$1. On
March 1, 2008, Felipe tendered to Gustavo a cashier's
a) A may avail the minority of B as a defense, but only check in the amount of P4,135 in payment of his US$
for B’s share of P 10, 000.00. A solidary debtor may 100 debt, based on the Phil P - US$ exchange rate at
avail himself of any defense which personally belongs that time. Gustavo accepted the check, but forgot to
to a solidary co-debtor, but only as to the share of deposit it until Sept. 12, 2008. His bank refused to
that co-debtor. accept the check because it had become stale. Gustavo
b) A may avail of the condonation by X of C’s share of P now wants Felipe to pay him in cash in the amount of
10, 000.00. A solidary debtor may, in actions filed by P5, 600. Claiming that the previous payment was not in
the creditor, avail himself of all defenses which are legal tender, and that there has been extraordinary
derived from the nature of the obligation and of deflation since 1998, and therefore, Felipe should pay
those which are personal to him or pertain to his own him the value of the debt at the time it was incurred.
share. With respect to those which personally belong Felipe refused to pay him again, claiming that Gustavo
to others, he may avail himself thereof only as is estopped from raising the issue of legal tender,
regards that part of the debt for which the latter are having accepted the check in March, and that it was
responsible (Art. 1222). Gustavo's negligence in not depositing the check
c) A may not interpose the defense of insolvency of D as immediately that caused the check to become stale.
a defense. Applying the principle of mutual guaranty
among solidary debtors, A guaranteed the payment of a) Can Gustavo now raised the issue that the cashier's
D’s share and of all the other co-debtors. Hence, A check is not legal tender?
cannot avail of the defense of D’s insolvency. b) Can Felipe validly refuse to pay Gustavo again?
d) The extension of six (6) months given by X to E may c) Can Felipe compel Gustavo to receive US$100
be availed of by A as a partial defense but only for the instead? (2008 BAR)
share of E, there is no novation of the obligation but
only an act of liberality granted to E alone. A:

Q: True or False a) No, because Gustavo is guilty of estoppels by laches.

He led Felipe to believe he could pay by cashier’s
The renunciation by a co-owner of his undivided check, and Felipe relied that such cahier’s check
share in the co-owned property in lieu of the would be encashed thus extinguishing his obligation.
performance of his obligation to contribute to taxes Because of Gustavo’s inaction of more than six
and expenses for the preservation of the property months the check became stale and Felipe will
constitutes dacion en pago. (2009 BAR) prejudiced if he will be required to pay $100 at the
exchange rate of P56 to $1.00. The exchange should
A: TRUE. Under the Civil Code, a co-owner may renounce be the rate at the time of payment.
his share in the co-owned property in lieu of paying for b) Yes, if the payment is valid. Since the bank
his share in the taxes and expenses for the preservation considered the cashier’s check as being stale for not
of the co-owned property. In effect, there is dacion en having been encashed on time, then the cahsier’s
pago because the co-owner is discharging his monetary check may be issued again. At any rate, non-payment
obligation by paying it with his non-monetary interest in of teh amount to Gustavo would constitute unjust
the co-owned property. The fact that he is giving up his enrichment.
entire interest simply means that he is accepting the c) Yes, Felipe can compel Gustavo to pay US$100
instead. Under the prior law, RA 529, as amended by

UST BAR OPERATIONS 58

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
R.A.4100, payment can only be in Philippine currency payable in twelve monthly installments. Sarah issued in
as it would be against publich policy, null and void favor of the bank post-dated checks, each in the amount
and of no effect. However, under RA8183, payment of P100, 000.00, to cover the twelve monthly
may be made in the currency agreed upon by the installment payments. On the third, fourth and fifth
parties, and the rate of exchange to be followed is at months, the corresponding checks bounced.
the time of payment. (C.F. Sharp & Co. Inc. vs.
Northwest Airlines, Inc., 381 SCRA 314 [2002]). The bank then declared the whole obligation due, and
proceeded to deduct the amount of one million pesos
Q: X, who has a savings deposit with Y Bank in the (P1, 000, 000.00) from Sarah’s deposit after notice to
sum of P1, 000, 000.00, incurs a loan obligation with her that this is a form of compensation allowed by law.
the said Bank in teh sum of P800, 000.00 which has Is the bank correct? Explain. (2009 BAR)
become due. When X tries to withdraw his deposit, Y
Bank allows only P200, 000.00 to be withdrawn, less A: No, the bank is not correct. While the Bank is correct
service charges, claiming that compensation has about the applicability of compensation, it was not correct
extinguished its obligation under the savings account as to the amount compensated. A bank deposit is a contract
to the concurrent amount of X’s debt. X contends that of loan, where the depositor is the creditor and the bank the
compensation is improper when one of the debts, as debtor. Since Sarah is also the debtor of the bank with
here, arises from a contract of deposit. Assuming that respect to the loan, both are mutually principal debtors and
the promissory note signed by X to evidence the loan creditors of each other. Both obligation are due, demandable
does not provide for compensation between said loan and liquidated but only up to the extent of P300, 000.00
and his savings deposit, who is correct? (1998 BAR) (covering the unpaid third, fourth and fifth monthly
installments). The entire one million was not yet due
A: Y bank is correct. Art. 1287, Civil Code, does not apply. because the loan has no acceleration clause in case of
All the requisites of Art. 1279, Civil Code are present. IN default. And since there is no retention or controversy
the case of Gullas vs. PNB (62 Phil. 519), the Supreme commenced by third person and communicated in due time
Court held: “The Civil Code contains provisions regarding to the debtor, then all the requisites of legal compensation
compensation (set off) and deposit. These portions of are present but only up to the amount of P300, 000.00. The
Philippine law provide that compensation shall take place bank, therefore, may deduct P300, 000.00 from Sarah’s bank
when two persons are reciprocally creditor and debtor of deposit by way of compensation.
each other. In this connection, it has been held that the
relation existing between a depositor and a bank is that of Q: In 1978, Bobby borrowed P1 ,000, 000.00 form
creditor and debtor. xxx As a general rule, a bank has a Chito payable in two years. The loan, which was
right of set off of the deposits in its hands for the payment evidenced by a promissory note, was secured by a
of any indebtedness to it on the part of a depositor.” mortgage on real property. No action was filed by
Hence, compensation took place between the mutual Chito to collect the loan or to foreclose the mortgage.
obligations of X and Y bank. But in 1991, Bobby, without receiving any amount
from Chito, executed another promissory note, except
Q: Stockton is a stockholder of Core Corp. He desires for the date thereof, which was the date of its
to sell his shares in Core Corp. In view of a court suit execution.
that Core Corp. has filed against him for damages in the
amount of P10 million, plus attorney’s fees of P1 1) Can Chito demand payment on the 1991
million, as a result of statements published by promissory note in 1994?
Stockton which are allegedly defamatory because it 2) Can Chito foreclose the real estate mortgage if
was calculated to injure and damage the corporation’s Bobby fails to make good his obligation under the
reputation and goodwill. The articles of incorporation 1991 promissory note?
of Core Corp. provide for a right of first refusal in
favor of the corporation. Accordingly, Stockton A:
gave written notice to the corporation of his offer to
sell his shares of P10 million. The response of Core 1) Yes, Chito can demand payment on the 1991
corp. was an acceptance of the offer in the exercise of promissory note in 1994. Although the 1978
its rights of first refusal, offering for the purpose promissory note for P1 million payable two years
payment in form of compensation or set-off against later or in 1980 became a natural obligation after the
the amount of damages it is claiming against him, lapse of ten (10) years, such natural obligation can be
exclusive of the claim for attorney’s fees. Stockton a valid consideration of a novated promissory note
rejected the offer of the corporation, arguing that dated in 1991 and payable two years later, or in
compensation between the value of the shares and the 1993.
amount of damages demanded by the corporation
cannot legally take effect. Is Stockton correct? Give All the elements of an implied real novation are
reason for your answer. (1998, 2002 BAR) present:
a) An old valid obligation;
A: Stockton is correct. There is no right of compensation b) A new valid obligation;
between his price of P10 million and Core Corp.’s c) Capacity of the parties;
unliquidated claim for damages. In order that compensation d) Animus novandi or intention to novate; and
may be proper, the two debts must be liquidated and e) The old and the new obligation should be
demandable. The case for the P10 million damages being incompatible with each other on all material
still pending in court, the corporation has as yet no claim points (Article 1292). The two promissory notes
which is due and demandable against Stockton. cannot stand together, hence, the period of
prescription of ten (10) years has not yet lapsed.
Q: Sarah had a deposit in a savings account with Filipino
Universal Bank in the amount of five million pesos (P5, 2) No. The mortgage being an accessory contract
000, 000.00). To buy a new car, she obtained a loan prescribed with the loan. The novation of the loan,
from the same bank in the amount of P1, 200, 000.00, however, did not expressly include the mortgage,
59
 CIVIL LAW
hence, the mortgage is extinguished under Article could be with their friends, they were told that the
1296 of the NCC. The contract has been extinguished business class was already fully booked, and that they
by the novation or extinction of the principal were given priority in upgrading because they are
obligation insofar as third parties are concerned. elite members/holders of Gold Mabalos Class cards.
Since they were embarrassed at the discussions with
Q: Baldomero leased his house with a telephone to the flight attendants, they were forced to take the
Jose. The lease contract provided that Jose shall pay flight at the first class section apart from their friends
for all electricity, water and telephone services in the who were in the business class. Upon their return to
leased premises during the period of the lease. Six Manila, they demanded a written apology from Pinoy
months later, Jose surreptitiously vacated the Airlines. When it went unheeded, the couple sued
premises. He left behind unpaid telephone bills for Pinoy Airlines for breach of contract claiming
overseas telephone calls amounting to over P20, moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's
000.00. Baldomero refused to pay the said bills ont he fees. Will the action prosper? Give reasons. (2004, 2005
ground that Jose had already substituted him as the BAR)
customer of the telephone company. The latter
maintained that Baldomero remained as his A: Yes, Pinoy Airlines breached its contract of carriage by
customer as far as their service contract was upgrading the seat accommodation of the Almedas without
concerned, notwithstanding the lease contract their consent. The object of their contract was the
between Baldomero and Jose. Who is correct, transportation of the Almedas from Manila to Hongkong and
Baldomero or the telephone company? Explain. (1996 back to Manila, with seats in the business class section of the
BAR) aircraft. They should have been consulted first whether they
wanted to avail themselves of the privilege and would
A: The telephone company is correct because as far as it consent to a change of seat accommodation. I should not
is concerned, teh only person it contracte with was have been imposed on them over their vehement objection.
Baldomero. The telephone company has no contract with By insisting on the upgrade, Pinoy Airlines breached its
Jose. Baldomero cannot substitute Jose in his stead contract of carriage with the Almedas.
without the consent of the telephone company (ART.
1293, NCC). Baldomero is, therefore, liable under the However, the upgrading or the breach of contract was not
contract. attended by fraud or bad faith. They were not induced to
agree to the upgrading through insidious words or deceitful
Q: The sugar cane planters of Batangas entered into machination or through wilful concealment of material facts.
a long-term milling contract with the Central Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or
Azucarera de Don Pedro Inc. Ten years later, the negligence; it imports a dishonest purpose or some moral
Central assigned its rights to the said milling contract obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong, breach of a known
to a Taiwanese group which would take over the duty through some motive or interest or ill will that partakes
operations of the sugar mill. The planters filed an of the nature of fraud.
action to annul the said assignment on the ground
that the Taiwanese group was not registered with the Neither is Pinoy Airlines in bad faith since Section 3 of the
Board of Investments. Will the action prosper or not? Economic Regulation No. 7 of teh Civil Aeronautics Board
Explain briefly. (2001 BAR) provides that an overbooking that does not exceed ten
percent is not considered deliberate and therefore does not
A: The action will prosper not on the ground invoked but amount to bad faith.
on the ground that the farmers have not given their consent
to the assignment. The milling contract imposes reciprocal As a result, the Almedas are not entitled to recover moral
obligations on the parties. The sugar central has the damages. Moral damages predicated upon a breach of
obligation to mill the sugar cane of the farmers while the contract of carriage may only be recoverable in instances
latter have the obligation to deliver their sugar cane to where the carrier is guilty of fraud or bad faith or when the
the sugar central. As to the obligation to mill the sugar cane, mishap resulted in the death of a passenger. Where in
the sugar central is a debtor of the farmers. In breaching the contract of carriage the airline is not shown to
assigning its rights under the contract, the sugar central have acted fraudulently or in bad faith, liability for damages
will also transfer to the Taiwanese its obligation to mill the is limited to the natural and probable consequence of the
sugar cane of the farmers. This will amount to a novation breach of the obligation which the parties had foreseen or
of the contract by substituting the debtor with a third could have reasonably foreseen. In such a case the liability
party. Under Article 1293 of the Civil Code, such does not include moral and exemplary damages.
substitution cannot take effect without the consent of the
creditor. The formers, who are creditors as far as the It is a requisite in the grant of exemplary damages that the
obligation to mill their sugar cane is concerned, may annul act of the offender be accompanied by bad faith or done in
such assignment for not having given their consent thereto. wanton, fraudulent or malevolent manner. Such requisite is
absent in this case. Moreover, to be entitled thereto the
CONTRACTS claimant must first establish his right to moral, temperate, or
compensatory damages. Since the Almedas are not entitled
Essential Requisites (2004, 2005 BAR) to any of these damages, the award for exemplary damages
has no legal basis. And where the awards for moral and
Q: Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of the exemplary damages are eliminated, so must the award for
country and are frequent travellers abroad. In 1996, attorney’s fees.
they booked round-trip business class tickets for the
Manila-Hong Kong-Manila route of the Pinoy Airlines, The most that can be awarded for the breach of contract is
where they are holders of Gold Mabalos Class Frequent an award for nominal damages. Pinoy Airlines may be said to
Flier cards. On their return flight, Pinoy Airlines have disturbed the spouses’ wish to be with their
upgraded their tickets to first class without their companions at teh Business Class on their flight to Manila.
consent and, in spite of their protestations to be (Cathay Pacific v. Spouses Vasquez, 399 SCRA 207 [2003]).
allowed to remain in the business class so that they

UST BAR OPERATIONS 60

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Q: Marvin offered to construct the house of Carlos for Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between inexistent
a very reasonable price of P900, 000.00, giving the and annullable contracts. (2004 BAR)
latter 10 days within which to accept or reject the
offer. On the fifth day, before Carlos could make up his A: Inexistent contracts are considered as not having been
mind, Marvin withdrew his offer. entered into and, therefore, void ab initio. They do not
create any obligation and cannot be ratified or validated,
a) What is the effect of the withdrawal of Marvin's as there is no agreement to ratify or validate. In the other
offer? hand, annullable or voidable contracts are valid until
b) Will your answer be the same if Carlos paid invalidated by the court but may be ratified.
Marvin P10, 000.00 as consideration for that
option? Explain. In inexistent contracts, one or more requisites of a valid
c) Supposing that Carlos accepted the offer before contract are absent. In annullable contracts, all the
Marvin could communicate his withdrawal elements of a contract are present except that the consent
thereof? Discuss the legal consequences. (2005 of one of the contracting parties was vitiated or one of
BAR) them has no capacity to give consent.

A: Q: X was the owner of a 10, 000 square meter

property. X married Y and out of their union, A, B and
a) The withdrawal of Marvin’s offer is valid because C were born. After the death of Y, X married Z and
there was no consideration paid for the option. An they begot as children, D, E and F. After the death of X,
option is a separate contract from the contract which the children of the first and second marriages
is the subject of the offer, and if not supported by any executed an extrajudicial partition of the aforestated
consideration, the option contract is not deemed property on May 1, 1970. D, E and F were given a one
perfected. Thus, Marvin may withdraw the offer at thousand square meter portion of the property. They
any time before acceptance of the offer. were minors at the time of the execution of the
b) If Carlos paid P10, 000.00 as consideration for that document. D was 17 years old, E was 14 and F was 12;
option, Marvin cannot withdraw the offer prior to and they were made to believe by A, B and C that
expiration of the option period. The option is a unless they sign the document they will not get any
separate contract and if founded on consideration is a share. Z was not present then. In January 1974, D E
perfected option contract and must be respected by and F filed an action in court to nullify the suit
Marvin. alleging they discovered the fraud only in 1973.
c) If Carlos has already accepted the offer and such
acceptance has been communicated to Marvin before a) Can the minority of D, E and F be a basis to nullify
Marvin communicates the withdrawal, the acceptance the partition? Explain your answer
creates a perfected construction contract, even if no b) How about fraud? Explain your answer. (1990
consideration was as yet paid for the option. If Marvin BAR)
does not perform his obligations under the perfected
contract of construction, he shall be liable for all A:
consequences arising from the breach thereof based
on any of the available remedies which may be a) Yes, minority can be a basis to nullify the partition
instituted by Carlos, such as specific performance, or because D, E and F were not properly represented by
rescission with damages in both cases. their parents or guardians at the time they contracted
the extrajudicial partition. (Articles 1327, 1391, Civil
Rescissible Contracts (1998 BAR) Code)
b) In the case of fraud, when through insidious words or
Q: In a 20-year lease contract over a building, the machinations of one of the other is induced to enter
lessee is expressly granted a right of first refusal into the contract without which he would not have
should the lessor decide to sell both the land and agreed to, the action still prosper because under Art.
building. However, the lessor sold the property to a 1391 of the Civil Code, in case of fraud, the action for
third person who knew about the lease and in fact annulment may be brought within four years from
agreed to respect it. Consequently, the lessee brings teh discovery of the fraud.
an action against both the lessor-seller and the buyer
(a) to rescind the sale and (b) to compel specific Q: Sometime in 1955, Tomas donated a parcel of land
performance of his right of first refusal in the sense to his stepdaughter Irene, subject to the condition
that the lessor should be ordered to execute a deed of that she may not sell, transfer or cede the same for
absolute sale in favor of the lessee at the same price. twenty years. Shortly thereafter, he died. In 1965,
The defentdants contend that the plaintiff can neither because she needed money for medical expenses,
seek rescission of teh sale nor compel specific Nene sold the land to Conrado. The following year,
performance of a “mere” right of first refusal. Decide Irene died, leaving as her sole heir a son by the name
the case. (1998 BAR) of Armando. When Armando learned that the land
which he expected to inherit had been sold by Irene
A: The action filed by the lessee, for both rescission of the to Conrado, he filed an action against the latter for
offending sale and specific performance of the right of annulment of the sale, on the ground that it violated
first refusal which was violated, should prosper. The the restriction imposed by Tomas. Conrado filed a
ruling in Equatorial Realty Development, Inc. v. Mayfair motion to dismiss, on the ground that Armando did
Theater, Inc, (264 SCRA 482), a case with similar facts, not have the legal capacity to sue. If you were the
sustains both rights of action because the buyer in the judge, how will you rule on this motion to dismiss?
subsequent sale knew the existence of right of first Explain. (1996 BAR)
refusal, hence in bad faith.
A: As judge, I will grant the motion to dismiss. Armando
Voidable Contracts (1990, 1996, 2004 BAR) has no personality to bring the action for annulment of
the sale to conrado. Only an aggrieved party to the
61
 CIVIL LAW
contract may bring the action for annulment thereof (Art. land from the tax sales. Section 44 of P.D. No. 1529
1397, NCC). While Armando is heir and successor-in- provides that every registered owner receiving a
interest of his mother (Art. 1311, NCC), he (standing in Certificate of Title shall hold the same free from all
place of his mother) has no personality to annul the encumbrances, subject to certain exemptions.
contract. Both are not aggrieved parties on account of b) Juan may recover because he was not a party to the
their own violation of the condition of, or restriction on, violation of the law.
their ownership imposed by the donation. Only the donor c) No, the sale did not divest Maria of her title precisely
or his heirs would have the personality to bring an action because the sale is void. It is as good as if no sale ever
to revoke a donation for violation of a condition thereof took place.
or a restriction thereon. (Garrido v. CA, 236 SCRA 450).
Consequently, while the donor or his heirs were not In tax sales, teh owner is divested of his land initially
parties to the sale, they have the right to annul the upon award and issuance of a Certificate of Sale, and
contract of sale because their rights are prejudiced by one finally after the lapse of the 1 year period from date
of the contracting parties thereof (DBP v. CA, 96 SCRA of registration, to redeem, upon execution by the
342; Teves v. PHHC, 23 SCRA 1141). Since Armando is treasurer of an instrument sufficient in form and
neither the donor nor heir of the donor, he has no effects to convey the property. Maria remained
personality to bring the action for annulment. owner of the land until another tax sale is to be
performed in favor of a qualified buyer.
Unenforceable Contracts
Q: In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead
Q: May a person sell something that does not belong patent to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead
to him? to B. A died in 1990, and his heirs filed an action to
recover the homestead from B on the ground that its
A: Yes, a person may sell something which does not sale by their father to the latter is void under Section
belong to him. For the sale to be valid, the law does not 118 of the Public Land Law. B contends, however, that
require the seller to be the owner of the property at the the heirs of A cannot recover the homestead from him
time of the sale. (Art. 1434, NCC). If the seller cannot anymore because their action has prescribed and that
transfer ownership over the thing sold at the time of furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide. (1999
delivery because he was not the owner thereof, he shall BAR)
be liable for breach of contract A: The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after issuance of
teh homestead patent, being in violation of Section 118 of
Void or Inexistent Contracts (1991, 1999 BAR) the Public Land Act, is void from its inception. The action
filed by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence
Q: Maria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her of teh contract and to recover the land should be given
unregistered agricultural land located in Magdugo, due course.
Toledo City. In 1989, to satisfy the taxes due, the City
sold it at public auction to Juan Miranda, an employee B’s defense of prescription is untenable because an action
at the Treasurer’s Office of said City, whose bid at which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence of a
P10, 000.00 was the highest. In due time, a final bill of contract does not prescribe. (Article 1410; Banga v. Soler,
sale was executed in his favor. 2 SCRA 755)

Maria refused to turn-over the possession of the On the other hand, B’s defense of pari delicto is equally
property to Juan alleging that (1) she had been, in the untenable. While as a rule, parties who are in pari delicto
meantime, granted a free pantent and on the basis have no recourse against each other on the principle that
thereof an Original Cetificate of Title was issued to a transgressor cannot profit from his own wrongdoing,
her, and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is void from the such rule does not apply to violations of Section 118 of
beginning in view of the provision in the the Public Land Act because of the underlying public
Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits officers policy in the said Act “to conserve the land which a
and employees of the government from purchasing homesteader has acquired by gratuitous grant from the
directly or indirectly any property sold by the government for himself and his family”. In keeping with
government for non-payment of any tax, fee or other this policy, it has been held that one who purchases a
public charge. homestead within the five-year prohibitory period can
only recover the price which he has paid by filing a claim
a) Is the sale to Juan valid? If so, is the effect of the against the estate of the deceased seller (Labrador vs.
issuance of the Certificate of Title to Maria? Delos Santos 66 Phil. 579) under the principle that no one
b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the P10, shall enrich himself at the expense of another. Applying
000.00? If not, why not? the pari delicto rule to violations of Section 118 of the
c) If the sale is void, did it not nevertheless, operate Public Land Act, the Court of Appeals has ruled that “the
to divent Maria of her ownership? If it did, who homesteader suffers the loss of the fruits realized by the
then is the owner of the property? (1991 BAR) vendee who in turn forfeits the improvement that he has
introduced into the land.” (Obot vs. Sandadlillas, 62 OG,
A: April 25, 1966)

a) The sale of the land to Juan is not valid, being NATURAL OBLIGATIONS
contrary to law. Therefore, no transfer of ownership
of the land was effected from the delinquent taxpayer Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between Civil
to him. The original certificates of title obtained by Obligation and Natural Obligation:
Maria thru a free patent grant from the Bureau of
Lands (under Chapter VII, CA 141) is valid but in view A: Civil obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do and
of her delinquency, the said title is subject to the right not to do. It gives the creditor the legal right to compel by
of the City Government to sell the land at public an action in court the performance of such obligation.
auction. The issuance of the OCT did not exempt the

UST BAR OPERATIONS 62

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law. Q: In an action brought to collect a sum of money
There is no legal right to compel performance thereof but based on a surety agreement, the defense of laches
if the debtor voluntarily pays it, he cannot recover what was raised as the claim was filed more than seven
was paid. years from the maturity of the obligation. However, the
action was brought within the ten-year prescriptive
ESTOPPEL (1998, 2000, 2002 BAR) period provided by law wherein actions based on
written contracts can be instituted.
Q: In 1965, Renren bought from Robyn a parcel of
registered land evidenced by a duly executed deed of a) Will the defense prosper? Reason.
sale. The owner presented the deed of sale and the b) What are the essential elements of laches? (2000
owner's certificate of title to the Register of Deeds. The BAR)
entry was made in the daybook and corresponding fees
were paid as evidenced by official receipt. However, A:
no transfer of certificate of title was issued to Renren
because the original certificate of title in Robyn's name a) No, the defense will not prosper. The problem did not
was temporarily misplaced after fire partly gutted the give facts from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay
Office of the Register of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land in filing an action, standing alone, does not constitute
had been possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, laches (Agra v. PNB, G.R. No. 133317, June 29, 1999).
Mikaelo, openly, adversely and continuously in the b) The four basic elements of laches are:
concept of owner since 1960. It was only in April 1998 1) Conduct on the part of the defendant or of one
that Renren sued Mikaelo to recover possession. under whom he claims, giving rise to the
Mikaelo invoked: situation of which complainant seeks a remedy;
2) Delay in asserting the complainant’s rights, the
a) acquisitive prescription complainant having had knowledge or notice of
b) laches, asking that he be declared owner of the the defendant’s conduct and having been
land. afforded an opportunity to institute suit;
3) Lack of knowledge on the part of the defendant
Decide the case by evaluating these defences. (1998 that the complainant would assert the right on
BAR) which he bases his suit; and
4) Injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event
A: relief is accorded to the complainant, or the suit
is not held to be barred.
a. Renren's action to recover possession of the land will
prosper. In 1965, after buying the land from Robyn, Q: Way back in 1948, Winda’s husband sold in favor of
he submitted the Deed of Sale to the Registry of Verde Sports Center Corp. (Verde) a 10-hectare
Deeds for registration together with the owner's property belonging to their conjugal partnership. The
duplicate copy of the title, and paid the sale was made without Winda’s knowledge, much less
corresponding registration fees. Under Sec. 56 of PD consent. In 1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she
No. 1529, the Deed of Sale to Renren is considered discovered the deed of sale among the documents in her
registered from the time the sale was entered in the husband’s vault after his demise. Soon after, she noticed
Day Book (now called the Primary Entry Book). For all that the construction of the sports complex had started.
legal intents and purposes, Renren is considered the Upon completion of the construction in 1952, she tried
registered owner of the land. After all, it was not his but failed to get free membership privileges in Verde.
fault that the Registry of Deeds could not issue the
corresponding transfer certificate of title. Mikaelo's Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment
defense of prescription cannot be sustained. A of the sale on the ground that she did not consent to the
Torrens title is imprescriptible. No title to registered sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with
land in derogation of the title of the registered the Spanish Civil Code which was then in force, the sale
owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse in 1948 of the property did not need her concurrence.
possession (Sec. 47, P.D. No. 1529). The right to recover Verde contends that in any case the action has
possession of registered land likewise does not prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda rejoins that
prescribe because possession is just a necessary her Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible,
incident of ownership. and imprescriptible.
b. Mikaelo's defense of laches, however, appears to be
more sustainable. Renren bought the land and had the A. Define or explain the term “laches”.
sale registered way back in 1965. From the facts, it B. Decide the case, stating your reasons for your
appears that it was only in 1998 or after an decision (2002 BAR)
inexplicable delay of 33 years that he took the first
step asserting his right to the land. It was not even A:
an action to recover ownership but only
possession of the land. By ordinary standards, 33 A. LACHES means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable
years of neglect or inaction is too long and may be and unexplained length of time, to do what, by
considered unreasonable. As often held by the exercising due diligence, could or should have been
Supreme Court, the principle of imprescriptibility done earlier. It is negligence or omission to assert a
sometimes has to yield to the equitable principle of right within a reasonable time (De Vera v. CA, G.R. No.
laches which can convert even a registered land 97761, April 14, 1999).
owner's claim into a stale demand. Mikaelo's claim of B. While Art. 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code did not
laches, however, is weak insofar as the element of require the consent of the wife for the validity of the
equity is concerned, there being no showing in the sale, an alienation by the husband in fraud of the wife is
facts how he entered into the ownership and possession void as held in Uy Coque v. Navas (G.R. No. L-20392,
of the land. November 20, 1923). Assuming that the alienation in
1948 was in fraud of Winda and, therefore, makes the
63
 CIVIL LAW
sale to Verde void, the action to set aside the sale,
nonetheless, is already barred byprescription and 1) Will the suit proper?
laches. More than 52 years have already elapsed from 2) Does Ray have any cause of action against Biong
her discovery of the sale in 1950. and Linda? Can he also recover damages from the
spouses? Explain. (2006 BAR)

PART V – SALES A:

1) The suit will propser. The sale was void because

NATURE AND FORM OF CONTRACT (1991, 1993, Linda did not give her written consent to the sale. In
2002, 2006 BAR) Jade-Manalo v. Camaisa, 374 SCRA 498 (2002), the
Supreme Court has ruled that the sale of conjugal
Q: Bert offers to buy Simeon’s property under the property is void if both spouses have not given their
following terms and conditions: P1 million purchase written consent to it and even if the spouse who did
price, 10% option money, the balance payable in cash not sign the Deed of Sale participated in teh
upon the clearance of the property of all illegal negotiation of the contract. In Abalos v. Macatangay,
occupants. The option money is promptly paid and 439 SCRA 649 (2004), the Supreme Court even held
Simeon clears the property of illegal occupants in no that for the sale to be valid, the signatures of the
time at all. However, when Bert tenders payment of spouses to signify their written consent must be on
the balance and ask Simeon for the deed for absolute the same document. In this case, Linda, although she
sale, Simeon suddenly has a change of heart, claiming was the one who negotiated the sale, did not give her
that the deal is disadvantageous to him as he has written consent to the sale. Hence, the sale is void.
found out that the property can fetch three time the However, Linda will nto be entitled to damages
agreed purchase price. Bert seeks specific performance because Ray is not in any way in bad faith.
but Simeon contends that he has merely given Bert 2) Yes, Ray has a cause of action against Linda and
an option to buy and nothing more, and offers to Biong for the return of the 2 million pesos he paid for
return the option money which Bert refuses to accept. the property. He may recover damages from the
spouses, if it can be proven that they were in bad
A. Will Bert’s action for specific performance faith in backing out from the contract, as this is an act
prosper? Explain. contrary to morals and good customs under Articles
B. May Simeon justify his refusal to proceed with 19 and 21 of the Civil Code.
the sale by the fact that the deal is financially
disadvantageous to him? Explain. (1993, 2002 OBLIGATIONS OF THE VENDOR (1990, 1991, 1996,
BAR) 1999, 2001, 2004, 2008 BAR)

A: Q: D sold a second-hand car to E for P150, 000.00. The

agreement between D and E was that half of the
A. Bert’s action for specific performance will prosper purchase price, or P75, 000.00 shall be paid in five
because there was a binding agreement of sale, not equal monthly instalments of P15, 000.00 each. That
just an option contract. The sale was perfected upon car was delivered to E, and E paid the amount of P75,
acceptance by Simeon of 10% of the agreed price. This 000.00 to D. Less than one month thereafter, the car
amount is in really earnest money which, under Art. was stolen from E’s garage with no fault on E’s art and
1482, “shall be considered as part of the price and as was never recovered. Is E legally bound to pay the
proof of the perfection of the contract.” (Topacio v. said unpaid balance of P75, 000.00? Explain your
CA, G.R. No. 102606, July 3, 1992; Villongco Realty v. answer. (1990 BAR)
Bormaheco, G.R. No. L-26872, July 25, 1975)
B. Simeon cannot justify his refusal to proceed with the A: Yes, E is legally bound to pay the balance of P75,
sale by the fact that the deal is financially 000.00. The ownership of the car sold was acquired by E
disadvantageous to him. Having made a bad bargain is from the moment it was delivered to him. Having
not a legal ground for pulling out a binding contract of acquired ownership. E bears the risk of the loss under the
sale, in the absence of some actionable wrong by the doctrine of res perit domino. (Articles 1496, 1497, Civil
other party (Vales v. Villa, G.R. No. 10028, December Code).
16, 1916) and no such wrong has been committed by
Bert. Q: Pablo sold his car to Alfonso who issued a
postdated check in full payment therefore. Before the
Q: Spouses Biong and Linda wanted to sell their house. maturity of the check, Alfonso sold the car to Gregorio
They found a prospective buyer, Ray. Linda negotiated who later sold it to Gabriel. When presented for
with Ray for the sale of the property. They agreed on payment, the check issued by Alfonso was
a fair price of P2 Million. Ray sent Linda a letter dishonoured by the drawee bank for the reason that
confirming his intention to buy the property. Later, he, Alfonso, had already closed his account even
another couple, Bernie and Elena, offered a similar before he issued his check.
house at a lower price of P1.5 Million. But Ray
insisted on buying the house of Biong and Linda for Pablo sued to recover the car from Gabriel alleging
sentimental reasons. Ray prepared a deed of sale to that he (Pablo) had been unlawfully deprived of it by
be signed by the couple and a manager's check for reason of Alfonso’s deception. Will the suit prosper?
P2 Million. After receiving the P2 Million, Biong (1991 BAR)
signed the deed of sale. However, Linda was not able to
sign it because she was abroad. On her return, she A: No. The suit will not prosper because Pablo was not
refused to sign the document saying she changed her unlawfully deprived of the car although he was
mind. Linda filed suit for nullification of the deed of unlawfully deprived of the price. The perfection of the
sale and for moral and exemplary damages against sale and the delivery of the car was enough to allow
Ray. Alfonso to have a right of ownership over the car, which

UST BAR OPERATIONS 64

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
can be lawfully transferred to Gregorio. Art. 559 applies deed or the instrument that is the operative act that
only to a person who is in possession in good faith of the conveys or affects the land (Sec. 51, P.D. No. 1529).
property, and not to the owner thereof. Alfonso, in the
problem, was the owner, and, hence, Gabriel acquired the In cases of double sale of titled land, it is a well-settled rule
title to the car. that the buyer who first registers the sale in good
faith acquires a better right to the land(Art. 1544).
Non-payment of the price in a contract of sale does not
render ineffective the obligation to deliver. Persons dealing with property covered by Torrens title
are not required to go beyond what appearsonitsface
The obligation to deliver a thing is different from teh (Orquiola v. CA 386, G.R. No. 141463, August 6, 2002; Spouses
obligation to pay its price. [EDCA Publishing Co. v. Santos Domingo v. Races, G.R. No. 147468, April 9, 2003). Thus,
(1990)] absent any showing that RR knew about, or ought to have
known the prior sale of the land to PP or that he acted in
Q: A granted B the exclusive right to sell his brand of bad faith, and being first to register the sale, RR acquired a
Maong pants in Isabela, the price for his merchandise good and a clean title to the property as against PP.
payable within 60 days from delivery, and promising
B a commission of 20% on all sales. After the delivery Q: Juliet offered to sell her house and lot, together with
of the merchandise to B but before he could sell any all the furniture and appliances therein to Dehlma.
of them, B’s store in Isabela was completely burned Before agreeing to purchase the property, Dehlma
without his fault, together will all of A’s pants. Must B went to the Register of Deeds to verify Juliet's title. She
pay A for his lost pants? Why? (1999 BAR) discovered that while the property was registered in
Juliet's name under the Land Registration Act, as
A: The contract between A and B is a sale not an agency to amended by the Property Registration Decree, it
sell because the price is payable by B upon 60 days from property, Dehlma told Juliet to redeem the property
delivery even if B is unable to resell it. If B were an agent, from Elaine, and gave her an advance payment to be
he is not bound to pay the price if he is unable to resell it. used for purposes of releasing the mortgage on the
property. When the mortgage was released, Juliet
As a buyer, ownership passed to B upon delivery and, executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the property
under Art. 1504 of the Civil Code, the thing perishes for which was duly registered with the Registry of Deeds,
the owner. Hence, B must still pay the price. and a new TCT was issued in Dehlma's name. Dehlma
immediately took possession over the house and lot
Q: On June 15, 1995, Jesus sold a parcel of registered and the movables therein. Thereafter, Dehlma went to
land to Jaime. On June 30, 1995, he sold the same land the Assessor's Office to get a new tax declaration
to Jose. Who has a better right if: under her name. She was surprised to find out that the
property was already declared for tax purposes in the
a) The first sale is registered ahead of the second name of XYZ Bank which had foreclosed the mortgage
sale, with knowledge of the latter. Why? on the property before it was sold to her. XYZ Bank
b) The second sale is registered ahead of the first was also the purchaser in the foreclosure sale of the
sale, with knowledge of the latter? Why? (2001 property. At that time, the property was still
BAR) unregistered but XYZ Bank registered the Sheriff's
Deed of Conveyance in the day book of the Register of
A: Deeds under Act. 3344 and obtained a tax declaration
in its name.
a) The first buyer has the better right if his sale was first
to be registered, even though the first buyer knew of a) Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith?
the second sale. The fact that he knew of the second b) Who as between Dehlma and XYZ Bank has a
sale at the time of his registration does not make him better right to the house and lot? (2008 BAR)
as acting in bad faith because the sale to him was
ahead in time, hence, has a priority in right. What A:
creates bad faith in the case of double sale of land is
knowledge of a previous sale. a) Yes, Dehlma is a purchaser in good faith. She learned
b) The first buyer is still to be preferred, where the about the XYZ tax declaration and foreclosure sale
second sale is registered ahead of the first sale but only after teh sale to her was registered. She relied on
with knowledge of the latter. This is because the the certificate of title of her predecessor-in-interest.
second buyer, who at the time he registered his sale Under the Torrens system, a buyer of registered
knew that the property had already been sold to lands is not required by law to inquire further than
someone else, acted in bad faith. (Article 1544) what the Torrens certificated indicates on its face. If a
person proceeds to buy it relying on the title, that
Q: JV, owner of a parcel of land, sold it to PP. But the person is considered a buyer in good faith.
deed of sale was not registered. One year later, JV sold
the parcel again to RR, who succeeded to register The “priority in time” rule could not be invoked by
the deed and to obtain a transfer certificate of title XYZ Bank because the foreclosure sale of the land in
over the property in his own name. Who has a better favor of the bank was recorded under Act No. 3344,
right over the parcel of land, RR or PP? Why? Explain the law governing transactions affecting unregistered
the legal basis for your answer. (2001, 2004 BAR) land, and thus, does not bind the land.

A: It depends on whether or not RR is an innocent b) Between Dehlma and the bank, the former has a
purchaser for value. Under the Torrens System, a deed or better right to the house and lot.
instrument operated only as a contract between the
parties and as evidence of authority to the Register of Q: In December 1985, Salvador and the Star
Deeds to make the registration. It is the registration of the Semiconductor Company (SSC) executed a Deed of
Conditional Sale wherein the former agreed to sell his
65
 CIVIL LAW
2,000 square meter lot in Cainta, Rizal, to the latter Secondly, notarial or judicial rescission under Art. 1592
for the price of P1,000,000.00, payable P100,000.00 and 1991 of the Civil Code is necessary (Taguba v. De
down, and the balance 60 days after the squatters in Leon, 132 SCRA 722)
the property have been removed. If the squatters are
not removed within six months, the P100, 000.00 Q: Priscilla purchased a condominium unit in Makati
down payment shall be returned by the vendor to the City from the Citiland Corporation for a price of P10
vendee. Million, payable P3 Million down and the balance
with interest thereon at 14% per annum payable in
Salvador filed ejectment suits against the squatters, sixty (60) equal monthly installments of P198,
but in spite of the decisions in his favor, the squatters 333.33. They executed a Deed of Conditional Sale in
still would not leave. In August, 1986, Salvador which it is stipulated that should the vendee fail to
offered to return the P100, 000.00 down payment to pay three (3) successive installments, the sale shall
the vendee, on the ground that he is unable to remove be deemed automatically rescinded without the
the squatters on the property. SSC refused to accept necessity of judicial action and all payments made by
the money and demands that Salvador executed a the vendee shall be forfeited in favor of the vendor by
deed of absolute sale of the property in its favor at way of rental for the use and occupancy of the unit
which time it will pay the balance of the price. and as liquidated damages. For 46 months, Priscilla
Incidentally, the value of the land had doubled by that paid the monthly installments religiously, but on the
time. 47th and 48th months, she failed to pay. On the 49th
month, she tried to pay the installments due but the
Salvador consigned the P100, 000.00 in court, and vendor refused to receive the payments tendered by
filed an action for rescission of the deed of her. The following month, the vendor sent her a
conditional sale, plus damages. Will the action notice that it was rescinding the Deed of Conditional
prosper? Explain (1996 BAR) Sale pursuant to the stipulation for automatic
rescission, and demanded that she vacate the
A: No, the action will not prosper. The action for premises. She replied that the contract cannot be
rescission may be brought only by the agrreived party to rescinded without judicial demand or notarial act
the contract. Since it was Salvador who failed to comply pursuant to Article 1592 of the Civil Code.
with his conditional obligation, he is not the aggrieved
party who may file the action for rescission buy the Star a) Is Article 1592 applicable?
Semiconductor Company. The company, however, is not b) Can the vendor rescind the contract? (2000, 2014
opting to rescind the contract but has chosen to waive BAR)
Salvador’s compliance with teh condition which it can do
under Art. 1545, NCC. A:

OBLIGATIONS OF THE VENDEE (1993, 2000, 2003, a) Article 1592 of the Civil Code does not apply to a
2014 BAR) conditional sale. In Valarao v. CA, 304 SCRA 155, the
Supreme Court held that Article 1592 applies only to
Q: LT applied with BPI to purchase a house and lot in a contract of sale and not to a Deed of Conditional
Quezon City, one of its acquired assets. The amount Sale where the seller has reserved title to the
offered was P1, 000, 000.00 payable, as follows: P200, property until full payment of the purchase price. The
000.00 down payment, the balance of P800, 000.00 law applicable is the Maceda Law.
payable within 90 days from June 1, 1985. BPI b) No, the vendor cannot rescind the contract under the
accepted the offer, whereupon LT drew a check for circumstances. Under the Maceda Law, which is the
P200, 000.00 in favor of BPI which the latter law applicable, the seller on installment may not
thereafter deposited in its account. On September 5, rescind the contract till after the lapse of the
1985, LT wrote BPI requesting extension until mandatory grace period of 30 days for every one year
October 10, 1985, within which to pay the balance, to of installment payments, and only after 30 days from
which BPI agreed. On October 5, 1985, due to the notice of cancellation or demand for rescission by a
expected delay in the remittance of the needed notarial act. In this case, the refusal of the seller to
amount by his financier from the United States, LT accept payment from the buyer on the 49th month was
wrote BPI requesting a last extension until October not justified because the buyer was entitled to 60
30, 1985, within which to pay the balance. BPI denied days grace period and the payment was tendered
LT’s request because another had offered to buy the within that period. Moreover, the notice of
same property for P1, 500, 000.00, cancelled its rescission served by the seller on the buyer was not
agreement with LT and offered to return to him the effective because the notice was not by a notarial act.
amount of P200, 000.00 that LT had paid to it. On Besides, the seller may still pay within 30 days from
October 20, 1985, upon receipt of the amount of such notarial notice before rescission may be effected.
P800, 000.00 from his US financier, LT offered to pay All these requirements for a valid rescission were not
the amount by tendering a cashier’s check therefor complied with by the seller. Hence, the rescission is
but which BPI refused to accept. LT then filed a invalid.
complaint against BPI in the RTC for specific
performance and deposited in court the amount of Q: X sold a parcel of land to Y on 01 January 2002,
P800, 000.00. payment and delivery to be made on 01 February
Is BPI legally correct in cancelling its contract with 2002. It was stipulated that if payment were not to be
LT? (1993 BAR) made by Y on 01 February 2002, the sale between
the parties would automatically be rescinded. Y
A: BPI is not correct in cancelling the contract with LT. In failed to pay on 01 February 2002, but offered to pay
Lina Topacio v. Court of Appeals and BPI Investment (G.R. three days later, which payment X refused to accept,
No. 102606, July 3, 1993, 211 SCRA 291), the Supreme claiming that their contract of sale had already been
Court held that the earnest mone is part of the purchase rescinded. Is X’s contention correct? Why? (2003 BAR)
price and is proof of the perfection of the contract.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 66

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
A: No, X is not correct. In the sale of immovable may cancel the contract after 30 days from receipt by
property, even though it may have been stipulated, as in the buyer of the notice of cancellation or demand for
this case, that upon failure to pay the price at the time rescission by notarial act.
agreed upon the rescission of the contract shall of right
take place, the vendee may pay, even after the expiration of The RECTO LAW (Art. 1484) refers to sale of movables
the period, as long as no demand for rescission of the payable in installments and limiting the right of seller, in
contract has been made upon him either judicially or by a case of default by the buyer, to one of three remedies:
notarial act (Art.1592). Since no demand for rescission was
made on Y, either judicially or by a notarial act, X cannot a) exact fulfillment;
refuse to accept the payment offered by Y three (3) days b) cancel the sale if two or more installments have not
after the expiration of the period. been paid;
c) foreclose the chattel mortgage on the things sold, also
BREACH OF CONTRACT (1999, 2016 BAR) in case of default of two or more installments, with no
further action against the purchaser.
Q: Peter and Paul entered into a Contract to Sell
whereby Peter, the lot owner, agreed to sell to Paul his EXTINGUISHMENT OF SALE (1991, 1993, 1995, 2001,
lot on November 6, 2016 for the price of P1, 000, 000.00 2002, 2005, 2016 BAR)
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 specified Q: On March 13, 2008, Ariel entered into a Deed of
time and place, then Peter will execute a Deed of Absolute Sale (DAS) with Noel where the former sold
Absolute Sale and deliver the title to Paul. his titled lot in Quezon City with an area of three
hundred (300) square meters to the latter for the price
On November 6, 2016, Paul did not show up and was not of P300, 000.00. The prevailing market value of the lot
heard of from that date on. In view of the was P3, 000.00 per square meter. On March 20, 2008,
nonperformance by Paul of his obligation, Peter sent a they executed another "Agreement To Buy
letter to Paul that he is expressly and extra-judicially Back/Redeem Property" where Ariel was given an
declaring the Contract to Sell rescinded and of no legal option to repurchase the property on or before March
and binding effect. Peter further stated that failure on 20, 2010 for the same price. Ariel, however, remained
the part of Paul to contest the rescission within thirty in actual possession of the lot. Since Noel did not pay
(30) days from receipt of said letter shall mean that the the taxes, Ariel paid the real property taxes to avoid a
latter agreed to the rescission. delinquency sale.

Paul did not reply to this letter for five (5) years. Thus, On March 21, 2010, Ariel sent a letter to Noel,
Peter decided to sell his lot to Henry in 2021. After attaching thereto a manager's check for P300, 000.00
hearing that Henry bought the lot, Paul now questions manifesting that he is redeeming the property. Noel
the sale of the lot to Henry and files a complaint for rejected the redemption claiming that the DAS was a
nullification of the sale. true and valid sale representing the true intent of the
parties. Ariel filed a suit for the nullification of the DAS
1. Is the exercise by Peter of his power to rescind or the reformation of said agreement to that of a Loan
extra-judicially the Contract to Sell the proper and with Real Estate Mortgage. He claims the DAS and the
legal way of rescinding said contract? Explain. redemption agreement constitute an equitable
2. In case Paul made a downpayment pursuant to a mortgage. Noel however claims it is a valid sale with
stipulation in the Contract to Sell, what is the legal pacto de retro and Ariel clearly failed to redeem the
remedy of Peter? (2016 BAR) property.

A: As the RTC judge, decide the case with reasons. (2016

BAR)

Q: What are the so-called "Maceda" and "Recto" laws A: I will decide in favor of Ariel and allow the reformation
in connection with sales on installments? Give the of the agreement. The DAS and the redemption agreement
most important features of each law. (1999 BAR) constitute an equitable mortgage and Ariel may ask for the
reformation of the agreement to that of a Loan with Real
A: The MACEDA LAW (RA 6552) is applicable to sales of Estate Mortgage as allowed by Article 1605 of the Civil
immovable property on installments. The most important Code. The circumstances clearly show that the agreement
features are (Rillo v. CA, G.R. No. 125347, June 19, 1997): is an equitable mortgage, such as the: a) price of the lot
was inadequate since it was only sold at P300, 000 when
1. After having paid installments for at least two years, the prevailing market value of such was P900, 000; b) the
the buyer is entitled to a mandatory grace period of vendor, Ariel, remained in the actual possession of the
one month for every year of installment payments property after the purported sale; and c) Ariel was the one
made, to pay the unpaid installments without interest. who paid the real property taxes. Under the circumstances,
a presumption arise under Art. 1602, CC that what was
If the contract is cancelled, the seller shall refund to really executed was an equitable mortgage. Moreover, Art.
the buyer the cash surrender value equivalent to fifty 1603, CC provides that in case of doubt, a contract
percent (50%) of the total payments made, and after purporting to be a sale with right to repurchase shall be
five years of installments, an additional five percent construed as an equitable mortgage.
(5%) every year but not to exceed ninety percent
(90%) of the total payments made. Q: On 20 December 1970, Juliet, a widow, borrowed
from Romeo P4, 000.00 and, as security therefore, she
2. In case the installments paid were less than 2 years, executed a deed of mortgage over one of her two (2)
the seller shall give the buyer a grace period of not less registered lots which has a market value of P15,
than 60 days. If the buyer fails to pay the installments 000.00. The document and the certificate of title of the
due at the expiration of the grace period, the seller property were delivered to Romeo.
67
 CIVIL LAW
expressed in Art. 1602. The reserved right to
On 2 June 1971, Juliet obtained an additional sum of repurchase is then deemed an original intention.
P3, 000.00 from Romeo. On this date, however, Romeo b) If I were to decide in favor of Romeo and Y, I would
caused the preparation of a deed of absolute sale of not uphold the validity of the promise to sell, so as to
the above property, to which Juliet affixed her enforce it by an action for specific performance. The
signature without first reading the document. The promise to sell would only amount to a mere offer
consideration indicated is P7, 000.00 She thought that and, therefore, it is not enforceable unless it was
this document was similar to the first she signed. sought to be exercised before a withdrawal or denial
When she reached home, her son X, after reading the thereof.
duplicate copy of teh deed, informed her that what
she signed was not a mortgage but a deed of absolute Even assuming the facts given at the end of the case
sale. On the following day, 3 June 1971, Juliet there would have been no separate consideration for
accompanied by X, went back to Romeo and such promise to sell. The contract would at most
demanded the reformation. Romeo prepared and amount to an option which again may not be the
signed a document wherein, as vendee in the deed of basis for an action for specific performance.
sale above mentioned, he obligated and bound himself
to resell the land to Juliet or her heirs and successors Q: On July 14, 2004, Pedro executed in favor of Juan a
for the same consideration as reflected in the deed of Deed of Absolute Sale over a parcel of land covered by
sale (P7, 000.00) within a period of two (2) years, or TCT No. 6245. It appears in the Deed of Sale that
until 3 June 1973. It is further stated therein that Pedro received from Juan P120, 000.00 as purchase
should the Vendor (Juliet) fail to exercise her right to price. However, Pedro retained the owner's duplicate
redeem within the said period, the conveyance shall of said title. Thereafter, Juan, as lessor, and Pedro, as
be deemed absolute and irrevocable. Romeo did not lessee, executed a contract of lease over the property
take possession of the property. He did not pay the for a period of one (1) year with a monthly rental of P1,
taxes thereon. 000.00. Pedro, as lessee, was also obligated to pay the
realty taxes on the property during the period of lease.
Juliet died in January 1973 without having Subsequently, Pedro filed a complaint against Juan for
repurchased the property. Her only surviving heir, the reformation of the Deed of Absolute Sale, alleging
her son X, failed to repurchase the property on or that the transaction covered by the deed was an
before 3 June 1973. In 1975, Romeo sold the property equitable mortgage. In his verified answer to the
to Y for P50, 000.00. Upon learning of the sale, X filed complaint, Juan alleged that the property was sold to
an action for the nullification of the sale and for the him under the Deed of Absolute Sale, and interposed
recovery of the property on the ground that the so- counterclaims to recover possession of the property
called deed of absolute sale executed by his mother and to compel Pedro to turn over to him the
was merely an equitable mortgage, taking into owner's duplicate of title. Resolve the case with reasons.
account teh inadequacy of the price and the failure of (2005 BAR)
Romeo to take possession of the property and to pay
the taxes thereon. Romeo and Y maintain that there A: An equitable mortgage arises from a transaction,
was a valid absolute sale and that the document regardless of its form, which results into a security, or an
signed by the former on 3 June 1973 was merely a offer or attempt to pledge land as security for a debt or
promise to sell. liability. Its essence is the intent of the parties to create a
mortgage, lien or charge on the property sufficiently
a) If you were the Judge, would you uphold the described or identified to secure an obligation, which intent
theory of X? must be clearly established in order that such a mortgage
b) If you decide in favor of Romeo and Y, would you may exist.
uphold the validity of the promise to sell? (1991
BAR) Defendant’s defense that he acquired the land through an
Absolute Deed of Sale and not through pacto de retro is
A: untenable. The presumption of equitable mortgage under
Art. 1602 of the Civil Code, equally applies to a contract
a) I will not uphold the theory of X for the nullification purporting to be an absolute sale (Art. 1604, NCC). The facts
of the sale and for the recovery of the property on the and circumstances that Pedro retained possession of the
ground that the so-called sale was only an equitable Owner’s Duplicate Copy of the Certificate of Title; that he
mortgage. An equitable mortgage may arise only if, in remained in possession of teh land as lessee; that he bound
truth, the sale was one with the right of repurchase. himself to pay the relaty taxes during the period of lease, are
The facts of the case state that the right to repurchase matters collectively and strongly indicating that the Deed of
was granted after the absolute deed of sale was Absolute Sale is an equitable mortgage. In case of doubt, the
executed. Following the rule in Cruzo v. Carriaga (174 Deed of Absolute Sale should be considered as a loan with
SCRA 330), a deed of repurchase executed mortgage, because this juridical relation involves a lesser
independently of the deed of sale where the two transmission of rights and interests.
stipulations are found in two instruments instead of
one document, the right of repurchase would amount If the transaction is proven to be an equitable mortgage,
only to one option granted by the buyer to the seller. Pedro’s prayer for reformation of the instrument should be
Since the contract cannot be upheld as a contract of granted in accordance with Art. 1605 of the Civil Code. Thus,
sale with the right to repurchase, Art. 1602 of the in case of non-payment, he may foreclose the mortgage and
Civil Code on equitable mortgage will not apply. The consolidate his ownership of the land. In that event, Juan’s
rule could have been different if both deeds were counterclaim to recover possession of the land and to
executed on the same occasion or date, in which case, compel Pedro to surrender the Owner’s Duplicate Copy of
under the ruling in spouses Claravall v. CA (190 SCRA the title becomes a consequential right.
439), the contract may still be sustained as an
equitable mortgage, given the circumstances Q: On January 2, 1980, A and B entered into a contract
whereby A sold to B a parcel of land for and in

UST BAR OPERATIONS 68

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
consideration of P10, 000.00, A reserving to himself A: No, Emma, the buyer, is not correct. Betty can still
the right to repurchase the same. Because they were enforce her right of legal redemption as a co-owner. Art.
friends, no period was agreed upon for the repurchase 1623 of the Civil Code gives a co-owner 30 days from
of the property. written notice of the sale by the vendor to exercise his
right of legal redemption. In the present problem, the 30-
1) Until when must A exercise his right of day period for the exercise by Betty of her right of
repurchase? redemption had not even begun to run because no notice
2) If A fails to redeem the property within the in writing of the sale appears to have been given to her by
allowable period, what would you advise B to do Lydia.
for his better protection? (1993 BAR)
Q: Adela and Beth are co-owners of a parcel of land.
A: Beth sold her undivided share of the property to
Xandro, who promptly notified Adela of the sale and
1) A can exercise his right of repurchase within four (4) furnished the latter a copy of the deed of absolute sale.
years from the date of the contract (Art. 1606, Civil When Xandro presented the deed for registration, the
Code). register of deeds also notified Adela of the sale,
2) I would advise B to file an action for consolidation of enclosing a copy of the deed with the notice.
title and obtain a judicial order of consolidation which However, Adela ignored the notices. A year later,
must be recorded in the Registry of Property (Art. Xandro filed a petition for the partition of the
1607, Civil Code). property. Upon receipt of summons, Adela
immediately tendered the requisite amount for the
Q: Sancho and Pacifico are co-owners of a parcel of redemption. Xandro contends that Adela lost her right
land. Sancho sold the property to Bart. Pacifico sued of redemption after the expiration of 30 days from her
Sancho and Bart for annulment of the sale and receipt of the notice of the sale given by him. May Adela
reconveyance of the property based on the fact that still exercise her right of redemption? Explain. (2001,
the sale included his one-half pro-indiviso share. 2002 BAR)
Pacifico had a notice of lis pendens annotated on the
title covering the property and ordered the A: Yes, Adela may still exercise her right of redemption
cancellation of the notice of lis pendens. The notice of notwithstanding the lapse of more than 30 days from notice
lis pendens could not be cancelled immediately of the sale given to her because Art. 1623 of the New Civil
because the title over the property was with a bank to Code requires that the notice in writing of the sale must
which the property had been mortgaged by Bart. come from the prospective vendor or vendor as the case
Pacifico appealed the case. While the appeal was may be. In this case, the notice of the sale was given by the
pending and with the notice of lis pendens still vendee and the Register of Deeds. The period of 30 days
uncancelled, Bart sold the property to Carlos, who never tolled. She can still avail of that right.
immediately caused the cancellation of the notice of lis
pendens, as well as the issuance of a new title in his
name. Is Carlos (a) a purchaser in good faith, or (b) a PART VI – LEASE
transferee pendente lite? (1995, 2002 BAR)

A: Carlos is a buyer in bad faith. The notice of lis

pendens was still annotated at the back of the title at the LEASE OF RURAL AND URBAN LANDS (1990, 1994, 2005
time he bought the land from Bart. The uncancelled notice BAR)
of lis pendens operates as constructive notice of its contents
as well as interests, legal or equitable, included therein. All Q: A leased a parcel of land to B for a period of two
persons are charged with the knowledge of what it contains. years. The lease contract did not contain any express
In an earlier case, it was held that a notice of an adverse prohibition against the assignment of the leasehold or
claim remains effective and binding notwithstanding the subleasing of the leased premises. During the third
the lapse of the 30 days from its inscription in the registry. year of the lease, B subleased the land to C. In turn, C,
This ruling is even more applicable in a lis pendens. Carlos is without A's consent, assigned the sublease to D. A then
a transferee pendente lite insofar as Sancho’s share in the filed an action for the rescission of the contract of
co-ownership in the land is concerned because the land lease on the ground that B has violated the terms and
was transferred to him during the pendency of the conditions of the lease agreement. If you were the
appeal. judge, how would you decide the case, particularly
with respect to the validity of:
If your answer is (a), how can the right of Pacifico as
co-owner be protected? Explain. a) B’s sublease to C? and
b) C’s assignment of the sublease to D?
A: Pacifico can protect his right as a co-owner by
pursuing his appeal; asking the Court of Appeals to order Explain your answers. (1990 BAR)
the re-annotation of the lis pendens on the title of Carlos;
and by invoking his right of redemption of Bart’s share A:
under Art. 1620.
a) B's sublease to C is valid. Although the original period
Q: Betty and Lydia were co-owners of a parcel of land. of two years for the lease contract has expired, the
Last January 31, 2001, when she paid her real estate lease continued with the acquiescence of the lessor
tax, Betty discovered that Lydia had sold her share to during the third year. Hence, there has been an
Emma on November 10, 2000. The following day, Betty implied renewal of the contract of lease. Under Art.
offered to redeem her share from Emma, but the latter 1650, the lessee may sublet the thing leased, in whole
replied that Betty's right to redeem has already or in part, when the contract of lease does not contain
prescribed. Is Emma correct or not? Why? (2001 BAR)

69
 CIVIL LAW
any express prohibition (Arts. 1650, 1670). A's action Ernie, who acted on the belief that Joel was the rightful
for rescission should not prosper on this ground. owner and possessor of the said lot. Joel has been
b) C's assignment of the sublease to D is not valid. Under faithfully paying the stipulated rentals to Victor. When
Art. 1649, the lessee cannot assign the lease without Victor learned on May 18, 1992 about the sublease
the consent of the lessor, unless there is a stipulation and assignment, he sued Joel, Conrad and Ernie for
to the contrary. There is no such stipulation in the rescission of the contract of lease and for damages.
contract. If the law prohibits assignment of the lease
without the consent of the lessor, all the more would a) Will the action prosper? If so, against whom?
the assignment of a sublease be prohibited without Explain.
such consent. This is a violation of the contract and is a b) In case of rescission, discuss the rights and
valid ground for rescission by A. obligations of the parties. (2005 BAR)

Q: In January 1993, Four-Gives Corporation leased the A:

entire twelve floors of the GQS Towers Complex, for a
period of ten years at a monthly rental of P3, 000, a) Yes, the action for rescission of the lease will prosper
000.00. There is a provision in the contract that the because Joel cannot assign the lease to Ernie without
monthly rentals should be paid within the first five the consent of Victor. (Art. 1649, Civil Code). But Joel
days of the month. For the month of March, May, June, may sublet to Conrad because there is no express
October and December 1993, the rentals were not paid prohibition (Art. 1650, Civil Code; Alipio v. Court of
on time with some rentals being delayed up to ten Appeals, 341 SCRA 441 [2000]).
days. The delay was due to the heavy paper work
involved in processing the checks. Four-Gives Victor can rescind the contract of lease with Joel, and
Corporation also subleased five of the twelve floors to the assignment of the lease to Ernie, on the ground of
wholly-owned subsidiaries. The lease contract violation of law and of contract. The sub-lease to
expressly prohibits the assignment of the lease Conrad remained valid for two (2) years from January
contract or any portion thereof. The rental value of the 1, 1991, and had notyeat lapsed when the action was
building has increased by 50% since its lease to Four- filed on May 15, 1992.
Gives Corporation.
b) In case of rescission, the rights and obligations of the
1) Can the building owner eject Four-Gives parties should be as follows: At the time that Victor
Corporation on grounds of the repeated delays in filed suit on May 15, 1992, the assignment had not yet
the payment of the rent? lapsed. It would lapse on December 1, 1994, the very
2) Can the building owner ask for the cancellation of same date that the 50-year basic lease would expire.
the contract for violation of the provision against Since the assignment is void, Victor can get the
assignment? (1994 BAR) property back because of the violation of the lease.
Both Joel and Ernie have to surrender possession and
A: are liable for damages. But Conrad has not yet
incurred any liability on the sublease which still
1) No. The building owner cannot eject Four-Gives subsisted at the time of the filing of the action on May
Corporation on the ground of repeated delays in the 15, 1992.
payment of rentals. The delay in the payment of the
rentals is minimal and cannot be made the basis of an Ernie can file a cross-claim against Joel for damages on
ejectment suit. The delay was due to the heavy account of the rescission of the contract of assignment.
paperwork involved in processing the checks. It would Conrad can file a counter-claim against Victor for
be otherwise if the lease contract stated that in the damages for lack of cause of action at the time of the
payment of rentals within the first five days of the filing of the suit.
month, time is of the essence or that the lessee will be
in delay if he falls to pay within the agreed period RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF LESSOR AND LESSEE
without need of demand. In this case he can judicially (1990, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2010)
eject the tenant on the ground of lack of payment of
the price stipulated after a demand to vacate (Art. Q: May a lessee sublease the property leased without
1673[2]). the consent of the lessor, and what are the respective
2) No, the lessor cannot have the lease cancelled for liabilities of the lessee and sub-lessee to the lessor
alleged violation of the provision against assignment. in case of such sublease? (1999 BAR)
The lessee did not assign the lease, or any portion
thereof, to the subsidiaries. It merely subleased some A: Yes, provided that there is no express prohibition
floors to its subsidiaries. Since the problem does not against subleasing. Under the law, when in the contract of
state that the contract of lease contains a prohibition lease of things there is no express prohibition, the lessee
against sublease, the sublease is lawful, the rule being may sublet the thing leased without prejudice to his
that in the absence of an express prohibition a lessee responsibility for the performance of the contract toward
may sublet the thing leased, in whole or in part, the lessor (Art. 1650). In case there is a sublease of the
without prejudice to his/its responsibility to the lessor premises being leased, the sublessee is bound to the lessor
for the performance of the contract. for all the acts which refer to the use and preservation of
the thing leased in the manner stipulated between the
Q: Under a written contract dated December 1, 1989, lessor and the lessee (Art. 1651). The sublessee is
Victor leased his land to Joel for a period of five (5) subsidiarily liable to the lessor for any rent due from the
years at a monthly rental of P1, 000.00, to be lessee. However, the sublessee shall not be responsible
increased to P1, 200.00 and P1, 500.00 on the third beyond the amount of the rent due from him (Art. 1652).
and fifth year, respectively. On January 1, 1991, Joel As to the lessee, the latter shall still be responsible to the
subleased the land to Conrad for a period of two (2) lessor for the rents; bring to the knowledge of the lessor
years at a monthly rental of P1, 500.00. On December every usurpation or untoward act which any third person
31, 1992, Joel assigned the lease to his compadre, may have committed or may be openly preparing to carry

UST BAR OPERATIONS 70

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
out upon the thing leased; advise the owner the need for and demanded that the latter execute a deed of absolute
all repairs; to return the thing leased upon the termination sale of the fishpond in his favor. Mario refused, on the
of the lease just as he received it, save what has been lost ground that Nestor no longer had an option to buy the
or impaired by the lapse of time or by ordinary wear and fishpond. Nestor filed an action for specific
tear or from an inevitable cause; responsible for the performance. Will the action prosper or not? Why?
deterioration or loss of the thing leased, unless he proves (2001 BAR)
that it took place without his fault.
A: No, the action will not prosper. The implied renewal of
Q: A leased his house to B with a condition that the the lease on a month-to-month basis did not have the
leased premises shall be used for residential purposes effect of extending the life of the option to purchase which
only. B subleased the house to C who used it as a expired at the end of the original lease period. The lessor is
warehouse for fabrics. Upon learning this, A correct in refusing to sell on the ground that the option
demanded that C stop using the house as a had expired.
warehouse, but C ignored the demand, A then filed
an action for ejectment against C, who raised the Q: TX filed a suit for ejectment against BD for non-
defense that there is no privity of contract between him payment of condominium rentals amounting to P150,
and A, and that he has not been remiss in the payment 000. During the pendency of the case, BD offered and
of rent. Will the action prosper? (2000 BAR) TX accepted the full amount due as rentals from BD,
who then filed a motion to dismiss the ejectment suit
A: Yes, the action will prosper. Under Art. 1651, the on the ground that the action is already extinguished.
sublessee is bound to the lessor for all acts which refer to Is BD’s contention correct? Why or why not? Reason.
the use and preservation of the thing leased in the manner (2004 BAR)
stipulated between the lessor and the lessee.
A: BD's contention is not correct. TX can still maintain
Q: A had a 4-storey building which was contructed by the suit for ejectment. The acceptance by the lessor of
Engineer B. After 5 years, the building developed the payment by the lessee of the rentals in arrears even
cracks and its stairway eventually gave way and during the pendency of the ejectment case does not
collapsed, resulting to injuries to some lessees. Who constitute a waiver or abandonment of the ejectment
should the lessees sue for damages? (2010 BAR) case (Spouses Clutario v. CA, G.R. No. 76656, December 11,
1992).
A: The lessees may proceed against A for breach of
contract, and against B for tort or statutory liability. Q: A vacant lot several blocks from the center of the
town was leased by its owner to a young businessman
Under Article 1654 (2) of the New Civil Code, the lessor is B, for a term of fifteen (15) years renewal upon
obliged to make all the necessary repairs in order to keep agreement of the parties. After taking possession of
the leased property suitable for the use to which it has the lot, the lessee built thereon a building of mixed
been devoted. Consequently, under Article 1659 NCC the materials and a store. As the years passed, he
proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the expanded his business, earning more profits. By the
damages resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it is tenth (10th) year of his possession, he was able to build
due to the lack of necessary repairs. a three (3) – storey building worth at least P300,
000.00 before the end of the term of the lease, B
Under Article 1723 NCC, the engineer or architect who negotiated with the landowner for its renewal, but
drew up the plans and specifications for a building is liable despite their attempts to do so, they could not agree on
for damages if within 15 years from the completion of the the new conditions for the renewal. Upon the
structure, the same should collapse by reason of a defect in expiration of the term of the lease, the landowner
those plans and specifications, or due to the defects in the asked B to vacate the premises and remove his
ground. This liability may be enforced against the architect building and other improvements. B refused unless he
or engineer even by a third party who has no privity of was reimbursed for necessary and useful expenses. B
contract with the architect or engineer under Article 2192 claimed that he was a possessor and builder in good
NCC. faith, with right of retention. This issue is now before
the court for resolution in a pending litigation.
Q: Under what circumstances would an implied new
lease or a tacita reconduccion arise? (1999 BAR) a) What are the rights of B?
b) What are the rights of the landowner? (1990 BAR)
A:An implied new lease or tacita reconduccion arises if at A:
the end of the contract the lessee should continue enjoying
the thing leased for 15 days with the acquiescence of the a) B has the right to remove the building and other
lessor, and unless a notice to the contrary by either parties improvements unless the landowner decides to retain
has previously been given (Art. 1670). In short, in order the building at the time of the termination of the lease
that there may be tacita reconduccion there must be and pay the lessee one-half of the value of the
expiration of the contract; there must be continuation of improvements at that time. The lessee may remove the
possession for 15 days or more; and there must be no building even though the principal thing may suffer
prior demand to vacate. damage but B should not cause any more impairment
Q: On January 1, 1980, Nestor leased the fishpond of upon the property leased than is necessary. The claim
Mario for a period of three years at a monthly rental of of B that he ws a possessor and builder in good faith
P1, 000.00, with an option to purchase the same with the right of retention is not tenable. B is not a
during the period of the lease for the price of P500, builder in good faith, because as lessee he does not
000.00. After the expiration of the three-year period, claim ownership over the property leased.
Mario allowed Nestor to remain in the leased b) The landowner/lessor may refuse to reimburse ½ of
premises at the same rental rate. On June 15, 1983, the value of the improvements and require the lessee
Nestor tendered the amount of P500, 000.00 to Mario to remove the improvements. (Art. 1678, Civil Code)

71
 CIVIL LAW
Q: Bartolome constructed a chapel on the land of Eric. liabilities of the partnership even if C is dead already
What are Batolome’s rights of he were a lessee of the but only up to the time that he remained a partner
land? (1996 BAR) (Art. 1829, 1835, par 2; Testate Estate of Mota v. Serra,
G.R. No. L-22825, February 14, 1925). However, the
A: The owner of the land, as lessor, can acquire the liability of C’s individual properties shall be subject to
improvement by paying for one-half of its value. Should the prior payment of his separate debts (Art. 1835, par
the lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may 3).
remove the improvement, even though the principal thing
may suffer damage thereby (Art. 1678, NCC). Q: Joe and Rudy formed a partnership to operate a car
repair shop in Quezon City. Joe provided the capital
Special Rules for Lease of Rural/Urban Lands (2000 while Rudy contributed his labor and industry. On
BAR) one side of their shop, Joe opened and operated a
coffee shop, while on the other side, Rudy put up a car
Q: In 1995, Mark leased the rice land of Narding in accessories store. May they engage in such separate
Nueva Ecija for an annual rental of P1, 000.00 per businesses? Why? (2001 BAR)
hectare. In 1998, due to the El Nino phenomenon, the
rice harvest fell to only 40% of the average harvest A: Joe, the capitalist partner, may engage in the
for the previous years. Mark asked Narding for a restaurant business because it is not the same kind of
reduction of the rental to P500.00 per hectare for that business the partnership is engaged in. On the other hand,
year but the latter refused. Is Mark legally entitled Rudy may not engage in any other business unless their
to such reduction? (2000 BAR) partnership expressly permits him to do so because as
an industrial partner he has to devote his full time to the
A: No, Mark is not entitled to a reduction. Under Art.1680, business of the partnership (Art. 1789).
the lessee of a rural land is entitled to a reduction of the
rent only in case of loss of more than 1/2 of the fruits RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF PARTNERS AMONG
through extraordinary and unforeseen fortuitous THEMSELVES (1992, 1995, 1998 BAR)
events. While the drought brought about by the "El Nino"
phenomenon may be classified as extraordinary, it is not Q: W, X, Y and Z organized a general partnership with
considered as unforeseen. W and X as industrial partners and Y and Z as capitalist
partners. Y contributed P50, 000.00 and Z contributed
P20, 000.00 to the common fund. By a unanimous vote
PART VII – PARTNERSHIP of the partners, W and X were appointed managing
partners, without any specification of their respective
powers and duties.
CONTRACT OF PARTNERSHIP (2001, 2010)
A applied for the position of Secretary and B applied
Q: True or False: for the position of Accountant of the partnership.

An oral partnership is valid. (2009 BAR) The hiring of A was decided upon by W and X, but was
opposed by Y and Z.
A: TRUE. Partnership is a consensual contract, hence, it is
valid even though not in writing. The hiring of B was decided upon by W and Z, but was
opposed by X and Y.
Q: A, B, and C entered into a partnership to operate a
restaurant business. When the restaurant had gone Who of the applicants should be hired by the
past break-even stage and started to garner partnership? Explain and give your reasons. (1992
considerable profits, C died. A and B continued the BAR)
business without dissolving the partnership. They in
fact opened a branch of the restaurant, incurring A: A should be hired as Secretary. The decision for the
obligations in the process. Creditors started hiring of A prevails because it is an act of administration
demanding for the payment of their obligations. which can be perfomed by the duly appointed managing
partners, W and X.
A. Who are liable for the settlement of the
partnership’s obligations? Explain? B cannot be hired, because in case of a tie in the decision of
B. What are the creditors’ recourse/s? Explain. (2010 the managing partners, the deadlock must be decided by
BAR) the partners owning the controlling interest. In this case,
the opposition of X and Y prevails because Y owns the
A: controlling interest. (Art. 1801, Civil Code)

A. The two remaining partners, A and B, are liable. When Q: Pauline, Patricia and Priscilla formed a business
any partner dies and the business is continued without partnership for the purpose of engaging in neon
any settlement of accounts as between him or his advertising for a term of five (5) years. Pauline
estate, the surviving partners are held liable for subsequently assigned to Philip her interest in the
continuing the business provided that A and B had partnership. When Patricia and Priscilla learned of the
knowledge or notice of the death of C (Art. 1841, 1785, assignment, they decided to dissolve the partnership
par 2, and Art 1833). before the expiration of its term as they had an
B. Creditors can file the appropriate actions, for instance, unproductive business relationship with Philip in the
an action for collection of sum of money against the past. On the other hand, unaware of the move of
“partnership at will” and if there are no sufficient Patricia and Priscilla but sensing their negative
funds, the creditors may go after the private reaction to his acquisition of Pauline's interest, Philip
properties of A and B (Art 1816). Creditors may also simultaneously petitioned for the dissolution of the
sue the estate of C. The estate is not excused from the partnership.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 72

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
be liquidated during the "winding up" of the partnership
1. Is the dissolution done by Patricia and Priscilla affairs (Arts. 1829 and 1830, par. 1[a]).
without the consent of Pauline or Philip valid?
Explain. Q: A, B, and C entered into a partnership to operate a
2. Does Philip have any right to petition for the restaurant business. When the restaurant had gone past
dissolution of the partnership before the break-even stage and started to garner considerable
expiration of its specified term? Explain. (1995 profits, C died. A and B continued the business without
BAR) dissolving the partnership. They in fact opened a branch
of the restaurant, incurring obligations in the process.
A: Creditors started demanding for the payment of their
obligations.
1. Under Art. 1830 (1) (c), the dissolution by Patricia and
Priscilla is valid and did not violate the contract of A. Who are liable for the settlement of the
partnership even though Pauline and Philip did not partnership’s obligations? Explain?
consent thereto. The consent of Pauline is not B. What are the creditors’ recourse/s? Explain. (2010
necessary because she had already assigned her BAR)
interest to Philip. The consent of Philip is not also
necessary because the assignment to him of Pauline's A:
interest did not make him a partner, under Art. 1813.
2. No, Philip has no right to petition for dissolution A. The two remaining partners, A and B, are liable. When
because he does not have the standing of a partner. any partner dies and the business is continued without
(Art. 1813) any settlement of accounts as between him or his
estate, the surviving partners are held liable for
Q: Dielle, Karlo and Una are general partners in continuing the business provided that A and B had
a merchandising firm. Having contributed equal knowledge or notice of the death of C (Art. 1841, 1785,
amounts to the capital, they also agree on equal par 2, and Art 1833).
distribution of whatever net profit is realized per B. Creditors can file the appropriate actions, for instance,
fiscal period. After two years of operation, however, an action for collection of sum of money against the
Una conveys her whole interest in the partnership to “partnership at will” and if there are no sufficient
Justine, without the knowledge and consent of Dielle funds, the creditors may go after the private
and Karlo. properties of A and B (Art 1816). Creditors may also
sue the estate of C. The estate is not excused from the
1. Is the partnership dissolved? liabilities of the partnership even if C is dead already
2. What are the rights of Justine, if any, should she but only up to the time that he remained a partner
desire to participate in the management of the (Art. 1829, 1835, par 2; Testate Estate of Mota v. Serra,
partnership and in the distribution of a net profit G.R. No. L-22825, February 14, 1925). However, the
of P360, 000.00 which was realized after her liability of C’s individual properties shall be subject to
purchase of Una’s interest? (1995, 1998 BAR) the prior payment of his separate debts. (Art. 1835,
par 3)
A:
Q: Can two corporations organize a general
1. No, a conveyance by a partner of his whole interest in a partnership under the Civil Code of the Philippines?
partnership does not of itself dissolve the partnership (1994 BAR)
in the absence of an agreement. (Art. 1813)
2. Justine cannot interfere or participate in the A: No. A corporation is managed by its board of directors.
management or administration of the partnership If the corporation were to become a partner, co-partners
business or affairs. She may, however, receive the would have the power to make the coporation party to
net profits to which Una would have otherwise been transactions in an irregular manner since the partners are
entitled. In this case, P120, 000 (Art. 1813). not agents subject to the control of the Board of Directors.
But a corporation may enter into a joint venture with
OBLIGATIONS OF PARTNERSHIP/PARTNERS TO THIRD another corporation as long as the nature of the venture is
PERSONS (1993, 1994, 2010 BAR) in line with the business authorized by its charter. (Tuason
& Co., Inc. v. Bolano, 95 Phil. 106)
Q: A, B and C formed a partnership for the purpose of
contracting with the Government in the construction of Q: Can a corporation and an individual form a general
one of its bridges. On June 30, 1992, after completion of partnership? (1994 BAR)
the project, the bridge was turned over by the partners
to the Government. On August 30, 1992, D, a supplier of A: No. A corporation may not be a general partner because
materials used in the project sued A for collection of the the principle of mutual agency in general partnership
indebtedness to him. A moved to dismiss the complaint allowing the other general partner to bind the corporation
against him on the ground that it was the ABC will violate the corporation law principle that only the
partnership that is liable for the debt. D replied that ABC board of directors may bind the corporation.
partnership was dissolved upon completion of the
project for which purpose the partnership was formed. DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP (1997 BAR)
Will you dismiss the complaint against A If you were the Q: Will death of a partner terminate the partnership?
Judge? (1993 BAR) (1997 BAR)

A: No, as Judge, I would not dismiss the complaint against A A: Yes. Death of a partner will terminate the partnership,
because A is still liable as a general partner for his pro rata by express provision of par. 5, Art. 1830 of the Civil Code.
share of 1/3 (Art. 1816). Dissolution of a partnership caused
by the termination of the particular undertaking specified in
the agreement does not extinguish obligations, which must
73
 CIVIL LAW

PART VIII – AGENCY sale of the Quezon City parcel to E is not valid and not
binding upon A. B needed a special power of attorney to
validly sell the land (Arts. 1877 and 1878). The sale of the
DEFINITION (2000, 2003 BAR) land at a very good price does not cure the defect of the
contract arising from lack of authority.
Q: A foreign manufacturer of computers and a
Philippine distributor entered into a contract whereby Q: CX executed a special power of attorney authorizing
the distributor agreed to order 1, 000 units of the DY to secure a loan from any bank and to mortgage his
manufacturer’s computers every month and to resell property covered by the owner’s certificate of title. In
them in the Philippines at the manufacturer’s securing a loan from MBank, DY did not specify that he
suggested prices plus 10%. All unsold units at the end was acting for CX in the transaction with said bank. Is
of the year shall be bought back by the manufacturer CX liable for the bank loan? Why or why not? Justify
at the same price they were ordered. The your answer. (2004 BAR)
manufacturer shall hold the distributor free and
harmless from any claim for defects in the units. Is the A: CX is liable for the bank loan because he authorized the
agreement one for sale or agency? (2000 BAR) mortgage on his property to secure the loan contracted by
DY. If DY later defaults and fails to pay the loan, CX is liable to
A: The contract is one of agency not sale. The notion of sale pay. However, his liability is limited to the extent of the value
is negated by the following indicia: (1) the price is fixed by of the said property.
the manufacturer with the 10% mark up constituting the
commission; (2) the manufacturer reacquires the unsold
units at exactly the same price; and (3) warranty for the PART IX – TRUST
units was borne by the manufacturer. The foregoing
indicia negate sale because they indicate that ownership
over the units was never intended to transfer to the KINDS OF TRUSTS (1993, 1995, 2007 BAR)
distributor.
Q: Joaquin Reyes bought from Julio Cruz a residential
Q: Jo-Ann asked her close friend, Aissa, to buy some lot of 300 square meters in Quezon City for which
groceries for her in the supermarket. Was there a Joaquin paid Julio the amount of P300, 000.00. When
nominate contract entered into between Jo-Ann and the deed was about to be prepared Joaquin told Julio
Aissa? In the affirmative, what was it? Explain. (2003 that it be drawn in the name of Joaquina Roxas, his
BAR) acknowledged natural child. Thus, the deed was so
prepared and executed by Julio. Joaquina then built a
A: Yes, there was a nominate contract. On the assumption house on the lot where she, her husband and children
that Aissa accepted the request of her close friend Jo-Ann resided. Upon Joaquin’s death, his legitimate children
to buy some groceries for her in the supermarket, what sought to recover possession and ownership of the lot,
they entered into was the nominate contract of Agency. claiming that Joaquina Roxas was but a trustee of their
Art. 1898 of the New Civil Code provides that by the father. Will the action against Joaquina Roxas prosper?
contract of agency a person binds himself to render some (1993 BAR)
service or to do something in representation or on behalf
of another, with the consent or authority of the latter. A: Yes, because there is a presumed donation in favor of
Joaquina under Art. 1448 of the Civil Code (De Los Santos
NATURE, FORM AND KINDS OF AGENCY (1992, 2004 v. Reyes, 27 January 1992, 206 SCRA 437). However, the
BAR) donation should be collated to the hereditary estate and
the legitime of the other heirs should be preserved.
Q: A as principal appointed B as his agent granting him
general and unlimited management over A's Q: In 1980, Maureen purchased two lots in a plush
properties, stating that A withholds no power from B subdivision registering Lot 1 in her name and Lot 2 in
and that the agent may execute such acts as he may the name of her brother Walter with the latter’s
consider appropriate. Accordingly, B leased A's parcel consent. The idea was to circumvent a subdivision
of land in Manila to C for four (4) years at P60, 000.00 policy against the acquisition of more than one lot by
per year, payable annually in advance. B leased one buyer. Maureen constructed a house on Lot 1 with
another parcel of land of A in Caloocan City to D an extension on Lot 2 to serve as a guest house. In
without a fixed term at P3, 000.00 per month payable 1987, Walter who had suffered serious business losses
monthly. B sold to E a third parcel of land belonging to demanded that Maureen remove the extension house
A located in Quezon City for three (3) times the price since the lot on which the extension was built was his
that was listed in the inventory by A to B. All those property. In 1992, Maureen sued for the reconveyance
contracts were executed by B while A was confined to her of Lot 2 asserting that a resulting trust was
due to illness in the Makati Medical Center. Rule on the created when she ha dteh lot registered in Walter’s
validity and binding effect of each of the above name even if she paid the purchase price. Walter
contracts upon A the principal. Explain your answers. opposed the suit arguing that assuming the existence
(1992 BAR) of a resulting trust the action of Maureen has already
prescribed since ten years have already elapsed from
A: The agency couched in general terms comprised only the registration of the title in his name. Decide. Discuss
acts of administration (Art. 1877). The lease contract on fully. (1995 BAR)
the Manila parcel is not valid, not enforceable and not
binding upon A. For B to lease the property to C, for more A: This is a case of an implied resulting trust. If Walter
than one (1) year, A must provide B with a special power claims to have acquired ownership of the land by
of attorney (Art. 1878). The lease of the Caloocan City prescription or if he anchors his defense on extinctive
property to D is valid and binding upon A. Since the lease is prescription, the ten year period must be reckoned from
without a fixed term, it is understood to be from month to 1987 when he demanded that Maureen remove the
month, since the rental is payable monthly (Art. 1687). The extension house on Lot No. 2 because such demand

UST BAR OPERATIONS 74

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
amounts to an express repudiation of the trust and it was No. 905, series of 1982 to be computed from default.
made known to Maureen. The action for reconveyance The twelve percent (12%) per annum legal interest
filed in 1992 is not yet barred by prescription. shall apply only until June 30, 2013. From July 1, 2013,
the new rate of six percent (6%) per annum shall be
Q: Explain the concept of trust de son tort the prevailing rate of interest when applicable. (Nacar
(Constructive Trust) (2007 BAR) v. Gallery Frames, 703 SCRA 439 [2013], applying BSP-
MB Circular No. 799)
A: A constructive trust is a trust not created by any word 2. The interest on the amount of damages awarded may
or phrase, either expressly or impliedly, evincing a direct be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of
intention to create a trust, but is one that arises in order to 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall be
satisfy the demands of justice. It does not come about by adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages, exept
agreement or intention but mainly operation of law and when or until the demand can be established with
construed as a trust against one who, by fraud, duress or reasonable uncertainty. Accordingly, where the
abuse of confidence, obtains or hilds the legal right to demand is established with reasonable certainty, the
property which he ought not, in equity and good interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is
conscience, to hold (Heirs of Lorenzo Yap v. Court of made judicially or extra-judicially, but when such
Appeals, 371 Phil. 523 [1999]). certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the
time the demand is made, the interest shall begin to
The following are examples of constructive trust: run only from the date the judgment of the court is
made (at which time the quantification of damages
1. Article 1456 NCC which provides: may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained).
“If property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the The actual base for the computation of legal interest
person obtaining it is, by force of law considered a shall, in any case, be on the amount finally adjudged.
trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of the person (Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 703 SCRA 439 [2013])
from whom the property comes.”
2. Article 1451 NCC which provides: Q: A, upon request, loaned his passenger jeepney to B
“When land passes by succession to any person and he to enable B to bring his sick wife from Paniqui, Tarlac
causes the legal title to be put in the name of another, to the Philippine General Hospital in Manila for
a trust is established by implication of law for the treatment. On the way back to Paniqui, after leaving
benefit of the true-owner.” his wife at the hospital, people stopped the passenger
3. Article 1454 NCC which provides: jeepney. B stopped for them and allowed them to ride
“If an absolute conveyance of property is made in on board, accepting payment from them just as in the
order to secure the performance of an obligation of the case of ordinary passenger jeepneys plying their route.
grantor toward the grantee, a trust by virtue of law is As B was crossing Bamban, there was an onrush of
established. If the fulfillment of the obligation is lahar from Mt. Pinatubo. The jeep that was loaned to
offered by the grantor when it becomes due, he may him was wrecked.
demand the reconveyance of the property to him.”
4. Article 1455 NCC which provides: 1) What do you call the contract that was entered into
“When any trustee, guardian or other person holding a by A and B with respect to the passenger jeepney
fiduciary relationship uses trust funds for the that was loaned by A to B to transport the latter’s
purchase of property, and causes the conveyance to be sick wife to Manila?
made to him or to a third person, a trust is established 2) Is B obliged to pay A for the use of the passenger
to whom the findings belong. jeepney?
3) Is B liable to A for the loss of the jeepney? (1993
BAR)
PART X – CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
A:

LOAN (1993, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2016 BAR) 1) The contract is called “commodatum”. (Art. 1933, Civil
Code)
Q: With regard to an award of interest in the concept of 2) No, B is not obliged to pay A for the use of the
actual and compensatory damages, please state the passenger jeepney because commodatum is
guidelines regarding the manner of computing legal essentially gratuitous. (Art. 1933, Civil Code)
interest in the following situations: 3) Yes, because B devoted the thing to a purpose
different from that for which it has been loaned (Art.
1. When the obligation is breached and it consists in 1942, par. 2 Civil Code)
the payment of a sum of money like a loan or
forbearance of money; Q: Distinguish briefly but clearly between Mutuum and
2. When the obligation does not constitute a loan or commodatum. (2004 BAR)
forbearance of money.
A: In mutuum, the object borrowed must be a consumable
Consider the issuance of BSP-MB Circular No. 799, thing the ownership of which is transferred to the
which became effective on July 1, 2013. (2016 BAR) borrower who incurs the obligation to return the same
consumable to the lender in an equal amount, and of the
A: same kind and quality. In commodatum, the object
borrowed is usually a non-consumable thing the
1. When the obligation is breached and it consists in the ownership of which is not transferred to the borrower
payment of sum of money like a loan or forbearance of who incurs the obligation to return the very thing to the
money, in the absence of stipulation, the rate of lender.
interest shall be the legal rate of 6% per annum, (Art.
2209, CC) which was increased to 12% per NB Circular Q: Before he left for Riyadh to work as a mechanic,
Pedro left his Adventure van with Tito, with the
75
 CIVIL LAW
understanding that the latter could use it for one year
for his personal or family use while Pedro works in Q: In the province, a farmer couple borrowed money
Riyadh. He did not tell Tito that the brakes of the van from the local merchant. To guarantee payment, they
were faulty. Tito had the van tuned up and the brakes left the Torrens Title of their land with the merchant,
repaired. He spent a total amount of P15, 000.00. for him to hold until they pay the loan. Is there a –
After using the vehicle for two weeks, Tito
discovered that it consumed too much fuel. To make up a) contract of pledge
for the expenses, he leased it to Annabelle. Two months b) contract of mortgage
later, Pedro returned to the Philippines and asked c) contract of antichresis, or
Tito to return the van. Unfortunately, while being d) none of the above?
driven by Tito, the van was accidentally damaged by a
cargo truck without his fault. Explain. (1996 BAR)

a) Who shall bear the P15, 000.00 spent for the repair A: None of the above. There is no pledge because only
of the van? Explain. movable property may be pledged (Art. 2094). If at all,
b) Who shall bear the costs for the van's fuel, oil and there was a pledge of the paper or document constituting
other materials while it was with Tito? Explain. the Torrens Title, as a movable by itself, but not of the land
c) Does Pedro have the right to retrieve the van even which the title represents. There is no mortgage because
before the lapse of one year? Explain. no deed or contract was executed in the manner required
d) Who shall bear the expenses for the accidental by law for a mortgage (Arts. 2085 to 2092; Arts. 2124 to
damage caused by the cargo truck, granting that 2131). There is no contract of antichresis because no right
the truck driver and truck owner are insolvent? to the fruits of the property was given to the creditor (Art.
Explain. (2005 BAR) 2132).

A: A contract of simple loan was entered into with security

arrangement agreed upon by the parties which is not one
a) The contract between Pedro and Tito is one of of those mentioned above.
commadatum. Of the P15, 000.00 spent, Pedro, the
bailor, shall bear the expenses for the repair of the Q: The parties in a contract of loan of money agreed
faulty brakes, they being extraordinary expenses that the yearly interest rate is 12% and it can be
incurred due to the non-disclosure by the bailor of the increased if there is a law that would authorize the
defect or fault; Tito, on the other hand, shall shoulder increase of interest rates. Suppose OB, the lender,
that part of the P15, 000.00 spent for the tune-up, said would increase by 5% the rate of interest to be paid
expense being ordinary for the use and preservation of by TY, the borrower, without a law authorizing
the van. such increase, would OB’s action be just and valid?
b) The costs for the fuel and other materials are Why? Has TY have a remedy against the imposition of
considered ordinary expenses, and consequently Tito, the rate increase? Explain. (2001, 2004 BAR)
the bailee, shall shoulder them. (Art. 1941, Civil Code)
c) No, Pedro cannot demand the return of the van until A: OB's action is not just and valid. The debtor cannot
after the expiration of the one-year period stipulated. be required to pay the increase in interest there being no
However, if in the meantime he should have urgent law authorizing it, as stipulated in the contract of loan.
need of the van, he may demand its return or Increasing the rate in the absence of such law violates the
temporary use. principle of mutuality of contractsunder Art. 1308.
d) Both Tito and Pedro shall bear equally the costs of the
extraordinary expenses, having been incurred on the DEPOSIT (1997, 1998 BAR)
occasion of actual use of the van by Tito, the bailee,
even though he acted without fault. Q: In order to secure a bank loan, XYZ Corporation
surrendered its deposit certificate, with a maturity date
Q: Distinguish usufruct from commodatum. (1998 of 01 September 1997 to the bank. The corporation
BAR) defaulted on the due repayment of the loan,
prompting the bank to encash the deposit certificate.
A: Usufruct is a right given to a person (usufructuary) to XYZ Corporation questioned the above action taken
enjoy the property of another with the obligation of by the bank as being a case of pactum
preserving its form and substance. (Art. 562, Civil Code) commissorium. The bank disagrees. What is your
opinion? (1997 BAR)
On the other hand, commodatum is a contract by which
one of the parties (bailor) delivers to another (bailee) A: There is no pactum commissorium here. Deposits of
something not consumable so that the latter may use it for money in banks and similar institutions are governed by
a certain time and return it. the provisions on simple loans (Art. 1980). The relationship
between the depositor and a bank is one of creditor and
In usufruct the usufructuary gets the right to the use and to debtor. Basically this is a matter of compensation as all
the fruits of the same, while in commodatum, the bailee the elements of compensation are present in this case (BPI
only acquires the use of the thing loaned but not its fruits. v. CA, G.R. No. 104612, May 10, 1994).

Usufruct may be constituted on the whole or a part of the Q: X, who has a savings deposit with Y Bank in the sum
fruits of the thing. (Art. 564, Civil Code) It may even be of P1, 000, 000.00 incurs a loan obligation with the
constituted over consumables like money (Alunan v. said Bank in the sum of P800 000.00 which has
Veloso, 52 Phil. 545). On the other hand, in commodatum, become due. When X tries to withdraw his deposit, Y
consumable goods may be subject thereof only when the Bank allows only P200, 000.00 to be withdrawn, less
purpose of the contract is not the consumption of the service charges, claiming that compensation has
object, as when it is merely for exhibition. (Art. 1936, Civil extinguished its obligation under the savings account
Code) to the concurrent amount of X’s debt. X contends that

UST BAR OPERATIONS 76

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
compensation is improper when one of the debts, as PLEDGE, MORTGAGE AND ANTICHRESIS (1991, 1994,
here, arises from a contract of deposit. Assuming that 1995, 1999, 2003 BAR)
the promissory note signed by X to evidence the loan
does not provide for compensation between said loan Q: Bruce is the registered owner, of a parcel of land
and his savings deposit, who is correct? (1998 BAR) with a building thereon and is in peacefull possession
thereof. He pays the real estate taxes and collects the
A: Y Bank is correct. Art. 1287, Civil Code, does not apply. rentals therefrom. Later, Catalino, the only brother of
All the requisites of Art. 1279, Civil Code are present. In Bruce, filed a petition where he, misrepresenting to be
the case of Gullas v. PNB (62 Phil. 519), The Supreme Court the attorney-in-fact of Bruce and falsely alleging that
held: “The Civil Code contains provisions regarding the certificate of title was lost, succeeded in obtaining
compensation (set off) and deposit. These portions of a second owner’s duplicate copy of the title and then
Philippine Law provide that compensation shall take place had the same transferred in his name through a
when two persons are reciprocally creditor and debtor of simulated deed of sale in his favor. Catalino then
each other. In this connection, it has been held that the mortgaged the property to Desiderio who had the
relation existing between a depositor and a bank is that of mortgage annotated on the title. Upon learning of the
creditor and debtor. xxx As a general rule, a bank has a fraudulent transaction, Bruce filed a complaint against
right of set off of the deposits in its hands for the payment Catalino and Desiderio to have the tilte of Catalino and
of any indebtedness to it on the part of a depositor.” Hence, the mortgage in favor of Desiderio declared null and
compensation took place between the mutual obligations void.
of X and Y Bank.
Will the complaint prosper, or will the tilte of Catalino
GUARANTY AND SURETYSHIP (1997, 2010) and the mortgage to Desiderio be sustained? (1991
BAR)
Q: What is the difference between "guaranty" and
"suretyship"? (2010 BAR) A: The complaint for the annulment of Catalino’s Title will
prosper. In the first place, the second owner’s copy of the
A: Guaranty and Suretyship distinguished: title secured by him form the Land Registration Court is
void ab initio, the owner’s copy thereof having never been
1. The obligation in guaranty is secondary; whereas, in lost let alone the fact that said second owner’s copy of the
suretyship, it is primary. title was fraudulently procured and improvidently issued
2. In guaranty, the undertaking is to pay if the principal by the Court. In the second place, the Transfer Certificate
debtor cannot pay; whereas, in suretyship, the of Title procured by Catalino is equally null and void, it
undertaking is to pay if the principal debtor does not having been issued on the basis of a simulated or forged
pay. Deed of Sale. A forged deed is an absolute nullity and
3. In guaranty, the guarantor is entitled to the benefit of conveys no title.
excussion; whereas, in suretyship the surety is not
entitled. The mortgage in favor of Desiderio is likewise null and
4. Liability in guaranty depends upon an independent void because the mortgagor is not the owner of the
agreement to pay the obligations of the principal if he mortgaged property. While it may be true that under the
fails to do so; whereas, in suretyship, the surety “Mirror Principle” of the Torrens System of Land
assumes liability as a regular party. Registration, a buyer or mortgagee has the right to rely on
5. The Guarantor insures the solvency of the principal what appears on the Certificate of Title, and in the absence
debtor; whereas, the surety insures the debt. of anything to excite suspicion, is under no obligation to
6. In a guaranty, the guarantor is subsidiarlty liable; look beyond the certificate and investigate the mortgagor’s
whereas, in a suretyship, the surety binds himself title, this rule does not find application in the case at hand
solidarity with the principal debtor (Art. 2047) because here, Catalino’s title suffers from two fatal
infirmities, namely:
Q: AB sold to CD a motor vehicle for and in
consideration of P120, 000, to be paid in twelve 1. The fact that it emanated from a forged deed of a
monthly equal instalments of P10, 000.00, each simulated sale;
instalment being due and payable on the 15th day of 2. The fact that it was derived from a fraudulently
each month starting January 1997. procured or improvidently issued second owner’s
copy, the real owner’s copy being still intact and in the
To secure the promissory note, CD (a) executed a possession of the true owner, Bruce.
chattel mortgage on the subject motor vehicle, and (b)
furnished a surety bond issued by Philamlife. CD failed The mortgage to Desiderio should be cancelled without
to pay more than two (2) instalments. prejudice to his right to go after Catalino and/or the
government for compensation from the assurance fund.
AB went after the surety but he was only able to obtain
three-fourths (3/4) of the total amount still due and Q: In 1982, Steve borrowed P400, 000.00 from Danny,
owing from CD. AB seeks your advice on how he might, collateralized by a pledge of shares of stock of
if at all recover the deficiency. Concepcion Corporation worth P800, 000.00. In 1983,
because of the economic crisis, the value of the shares
How would you counsel AB? (1997 BAR) pledged fell to only P100, 000.00. Can Danny demand
that Steve surrender the other shares worth P700,
A: Yes, he can recover the deficiency. The action of AB to 000.00? (1994 BAR)
go after the surety bond cannot be taken to mean a waiver
of his right to demand payment for the whole debt. The A: No. Bilateral contracts cannot be changed unilaterally. A
amount received from the surety is only payment pro pledge is only a subsidiary contract, and Steve is still
tanto, and an action may be maintained for a deficiency indebted to Danny for the amount of P400, 000.00 despite
debt. the fall in the value of the stocks pledged.

77
 CIVIL LAW
Q: Distinguish a contract of chattel mortgage from a acquire the enjoyment unless Peter compels Olivia to
contract of pledge. (1999 BAR) enter again the enjoyment of the property.

A: In a contract of CHATTEL MORTGAGE possession Q: X constructed a house on a lot which he was leasing
belongs to the creditor, while in a contract of PLEDGE from Y. Later, X executed a chattel mortgage over said
possession belongs to the debtor. house in favor of Z as security for a loan obtained
from the latter. Still later, X acquired ownership of the
A chattel mortgage is a formal contract while a pledge is a land where his house was constructed, after which he
real contract. mortgaged both house and land in favor of a bank,
which mortgage was annotated on the Torrens
A contract of chattel mortgage must be recorded in a Certificate of Title. When X failed to pay his loan to
public instrument to bind third persons while a contract of the bank, the latter, being the highest bidder at the
pledge must be in a public instrument containing foreclosure sale, foreclosed the mortgage and
description of the thing pledged and the date thereof to acquired X’s house and lot. Learning of the
bind third persons. proceedings conducted by the bank, Z is now
Q: Are the right of redemption and the equity of demanding that the bank reconvey to him X’s house
redemption given by law to a mortgagor the same? or pay X’s loan to him plus interests. Is Z’s demand
Explain. (1999 BAR) against the bank valid and sustainable? Why? (1994,
2003 BAR)
A: The equity of redemption is different from the right of
redemption. EQUITY OF REDEMPTION is the right of the A: No, Z’s demand is not valid. A building is immovable
mortgagor after judgment in a judicial foreclosure or real property whether it is erected by the owner of the
proceedings, within a period of not less than 90 days, land, by a usufructuary, or by a lessee. It may be
before the sale or confirmation of the sale, to pay into the treated as a movable by the parties to chattel
court the amount of the judgment debt. On the other hand, mortgage but such is binding only between them and
RIGHT OF REDEMPTION is the right of the mortgagor, not on third parties (Evangelista v. Alto Surety Col, Inc.,
after the sale of the mortgaged property, to redeem the G.R. No. L-11139, April 23, 1958). In this case, since the
property by paying to the purchaser in the sale or for him bank is not a party to the chattel mortgage, it is not bound
to the sheriff who made the sale, the amount paid by him, by it, as far as the Bank is concerned, the chattel mortgage,
with interest, within one year from the sale. There is no does not exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage does not
right of redemption, only equity of redemption, in a exist. Moreover, the chattel mortgage is void because it
judicial foreclosure under the Rules of Court. was not registered. Assuming that it is valid, it does not
bind the Bank because it was not annotated on the title of
Q: Olivia owns a vast mango plantation which she the land mortgaged to the bank. Z cannot demand that the
can no longer properly manage due to a lingering Bank pay him the loan Z extended to X, because the Bank
illness. Since she is indebted to Peter in the amount of was not privy to such loan transaction.
P500, 000.00 she asks Peter to manage the plantation
and apply the harvest to the payment of her
obligation to him, principal and interest, until her QUASI-CONTRACTS (1992, 1993, 1995, 2004 BAR)
indebtedness shall have been fully paid. Peter agrees.

1. What kind of contract is entered into between Q: In fear of reprisals from lawless elements besieging
Olivia and Peter? Explain. his barangay, X abandoned his fishpond, fled to Manila
2. What specific obligations are imposed by law on and left for Europe. Seeking that the fish in the fishpond
Peter as a consequence of their contract? were ready for harvest, Y, who is in the business of
3. Does the law require any specific form for the managing fishponds on a commission basis, took
validity of their contract? Explain possession of the property, harvested the fish and sold
4. May Olivia reacquire the plantation before her the entire harvest to Z. Thereafter, Y borrowed money
entire indebtedness shall have been fully paid? from W and used the money to buy new supplies of
Explain. (1995 BAR) fish fry and to prepare the fishpond for the next crop.

A: 1. What is the Juridical relation between X and Y

during X's absence?
1. A contract of antichresis was entered into between 2. Upon the return of X to the barangay, what are
Olivia and Peter. Under Art. 2132, by a contract of the obligations of Y to X as regards the contract with
antichresis the creditor acquires the right to receive Z?
the fruits of an immovable of his debtor, with the 3. Upon X's return, what are the obligations of X
obligation to apply them to the payment of the as regards Y's contract with W?
interest, and thereafter to the principal of his credit. 4. What legal effects will result if X expressly ratifies
2. Peter must pay taxes and charges upon the land and Y's management and what would be the
bear the necessary expenses for preservation and obligations of X in favor of Y? (1992 BAR)
repair which he may deduct from the fruits (Art. 2135).
3. The amount of the principal and interest must be A:
specified in writing, otherwise the antichresis will be
void (Art. 2134). 1. The juridical relation is that of the quasi-contract
4. No. Art. 2136 specifically provides that the debtor of "negotiorum gestio". Y is the "gestor" or "officious
cannot reacquire the enjoyment of the immovable manager" and X is the "owner." (Art. 2144)
without first having totally paid what he owes the 2. Y must render an account of his operations and deliver
creditor. However, it is potestative on the part of the to X the price he received for the sale of the harvested
creditor to do so in order to exempt him from his fish. (Art. 2145)
obligation under Art. 2135, the debtor cannot re-

UST BAR OPERATIONS 78

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
3. X must pay the loan obtained by Y from W because X 2. Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform his
must answer for obligations contracted with third duties with all the diligence of a good father of a
persons in the interest of the owner. (Art. 2150) family, and pay the damages which through his fault or
4. Express ratification by X provides the effects of an negligence may be suffered by the owner of the
express agency and X is liable to pay the property or business under management.
commissions habitually received by the gestor as
manager. (Art. 2149) The courts may, however, increase or moderate the
indemnity according to the circumstances of each case.
Q: In September 1972, upon declaration of martial rule
in the Philippines, A, together with his wife and Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to
children disappeared from his residence along A. another person all or some of his duties, he shall be
Mabini Street. Ermita, Manila. B, his immediate liable for the acts of the delegate, without prejudice to
neighbor, noticing that mysterious disappearance of A the direct obligation of the latter toward the owner of
and his family, closed the doors and windows of his the business.
house to prevent it from being burglarized. Years The responsibility of two or more officious managers
passed without B hearing from A and his family, B shall be solidary, unless management was assumed to
continued taking care of A's house, even causing minor save the thing or business from imminent danger.
repairs to be done at his house to preserve it. In 1976,
when business began to perk up in the area, an Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any
enterprising man, C, approached B and proposed that fortuitous event:
they build stores at the ground floor of the house and
convert its second floor into a pension house. B agreed 1. If he undertakes risky operations which the owner
to Cs proposal and together they spent for the was not accustomed to embark upon;
construction of stores at the ground floor and the 2. If he has preferred his own interest to that of the
conversion of the second floor into a pension house. owner;
While construction was going on, fire occurred at a 3. If he fails to return the property or business after
nearby house. The houses at the entire block, demand by the owner;
including A's were burned. After the EDSA revolution 4. If he assumed the management in bad faith.
in February 1986, A and his family returned from the
United States where they took refuge in 1972. Upon Art. 2148. Except when the management was assumed
learning of what happened to his house. A sued B for to save the property or business from imminent
damages, B pleaded as a defense that he merely took danger, the officious manager shall be liable for
charge of his house under the principle of negotiorum fortuitous events: (1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry
gestio. He was not liable as the burning of the house is on the management; (2) If by his Intervention h e
a fortuitous event. Is B liable to A for damages under prevented a more competent person from taking up
the foregoing circumstances? (1993 BAR) the management.

A: He would be liable under Art. 2147 (1), because he used Art. 2149. The ratification of the management by the
the property for an operation which the operator is not owner of the business produces the effects of an
accustomed to, and in so doing, he exposed the house to express agency, even if the business may not have
increased risk, namely the operation of a pension house on been successful.
the second floor and stores on the first floor.
Art. 2150. Although the officious management may not
Q: Armando owns a row of residential apartments in have been expressly ratified, the owner of the
San Juan, Metro Manila, which he rents out to tenants. property or business who enjoys the advantages of the
On 1 April 1991 he left for the United States without same shall be liable for obligations incurred in his
appointing any administrator to manage his interest, and shall reimburse the officious manager for
apartments such that uncollected rentals accumulated the necessary and useful expenses and for the
for three (3) years. Amparo, a niece of Armando, damages which the latter may have suffered in the
concerned with the interest of her uncle, took it upon performance of his duties.
herself to administer the property. As a consequence, The same obligation shall be incumbent upon him
she incurred expenses in collecting the rents and in when the management had for its purpose the
some instances even spent for necessary repairs to prevention of an imminent and manifest loss, although
preserve the property. no benefit may have been derived.

1. What juridical relation between Amparo and Art. 2151. Even though the owner did not derive any
Armando, if any, has resulted from Amparo’s benefit and there has been no imminent and manifest
unilateral act of assuming the administration of danger to the property or business, the owner is liable
Armando’s apartments? Explain. as under the first paragraph of the preceding article,
2. What rights and obligations, if any, does Amparo provided:
have under the circumstances? Explain. (1995
BAR) 1. The officious manager has acted in good faith, and
2. The property or business is intact, ready to be
A: returned to the owner.

1. Negotiorum gestio existed between Amparo and Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally liable
Armando. She voluntarily took charge of the angency for contracts which he has entered into with third
or management of the business or property of her persons, even though he acted in the name of the
uncle without any power from her uncle whose owner, and there shall be no right of action between
property was neglected. She is called the gestor the owner and third persons. These provisions shall
negotiorum or officious manager. (Art. 2144, NCC) not apply:

79
 CIVIL LAW
1. If the owner has expressly or tacitly ratified the compulsory heirs. Divino failed to fulfill the obligation
management, or under the Codicil. Betina brings suit against Divino for
2. When the contract refers to things pertaining to the reversion of the tract of land.
the owner of the business.
1. Distinguish between modal institution and
Q: DPO went to a store to buy a pack of cigarettes substitution of heirs.
worth P225.00 only. He gave the vendor, RRA, a P500- 2. Distinguish between simple and
peso bill. The vendor gave him the pack plus P375.00 fideicommissary substitution of heirs.
change. Was there a discount, an oversight, or an error 3. Does Betina have a cause of action against
in the amount given? What would be DPO’s duty, if any, Divino? Explain. (2002 BAR)
in case of an excess in the amount of change given by
the vendor? How is this situational relationship A:
between DPO and RRA denominated? Explain. (2004
BAR) 1. A MODAL INSTITUTION is the institution of an heir
made for a certain purpose or cause (Arts. 871 and
A: There was error in the amount of change given by RRA. 882). SUBSTITUTION is the appointment of another
This is a case of solution indebiti in that DPO received heir so that he may enter into the inheritance in
something that is not due him. He has the obligation to default of the heir originality instituted (Art. 857).
return the P100.00; otherwise, he will unjustly enrich 2. In a SIMPLE SUBSTITUTION of heirs, the testator
himself at the expense of RRA (Art. 2154). designates one or more persons to substitute the heirs
instituted in case such heir or heirs should die before
him, or should not wish or should be incapacitated to
PART XI – SUCCESSION accept the inheritance. In a FIDEICOMMISSARY
SUBSTITUTION, the testator institutes a first heir and
charges him to preserve and transmit the whole or
TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION (1990, 1994, 1996, part of the inheritance to a second heir. In a simple
1997, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, substitution, only one heir inherits. In a
2012, 2014, 2015 BAR) fideicommissary substitution, both the first and
Q: What do you understand by "presumptive legitime", second heirs inherit (Art. 859 and 869)
in what case or cases must the parent deliver such 3. Yes, Betina has a cause of action against Divino. This is
legitime to the children, and what are the legal effects a case of a testamentary disposition subject to a mode
in each case if the parent fails to do so? (1999 BAR) and the will itself provides for the consequence if the
mode is not complied with. To enforce the mode, the
A: PRESUMPTIVE LEGITIME is not defined in the law. Its will itself gives Betina the right to compel the return of
definition must have been taken from Act 2710, the Old the property to the heirs of Theodore (Rabadilla v.
Divorce Law, which required the delivery to the legitimate Conscoluella, G.R. No. 113725, June 29, 2000).
children of “the equivalent of what would have been due to
them as their legal portion if said spouse had died intestate Q: Crispin died testate and was survived by Alex and
immediately after the dissolution of the community of Josine, his children from his first wife; Rene and Ruby,
property.” As used in the Family Code, presumptive his children from his second wife; and Allan, Bea, and
legitime is understood as the equivalent of the legitimate Cheska, his children from his third wife. One
children’s legitimes assuming that the spouses had died important provision in his will reads as follows:
immediately after the dissolution of the community of
property. "Ang lupa at bahay sa Lungsod ng Maynila ay ililipat at
ilalagay sa pangalan nila Alex at Rene hindi bilang
Presumptive legitime is required to be delivered to the pamana ko sa kanila kundi upang pamahalaan at
common children of the spouses when the marriage is pangalagaan lamang nila at nang ang sinuman sa aking
annulled or declared void ab initio and possibly, when the mga anak, sampu ng aking mga apo at kaapuapuhan
conjugal partnership or absolute community is dissolved ko sa habang panahon, ay may tutuluyan kung
as in the case of legal separation. Failure of the parents to magnanais na mag-aral sa Maynila o sa kalapit na mga
deliver the presumptive legitime will make their lungsod."
subsequent marriage null and void under Art. 53, FC. Is the provision valid? (2014 BAR)

Q: How can RJP distribute his estate by will, if his heirs A: No. The provision imposing the division of the property
are JCP, his wife; HBR and RVC, his parents; and an “habang panahon” is invalid. In Santiago v. Santiago (G.R.
illegitimate child, SGO? (2012 BAR) No. 179859, August 9, 2010), a similar provision appears in
the will. However, Art. 1083 provides that the period of
A: testator may dispose of by will the free portion of his indivision imposed by the testator shall not exceed 20
estate. Since the legitime of JCP is 1/8 of the estate, SGO is years. Hence, the provision leaving the administration of
1⁄4 of the estate and that of HBR and RVC is 1⁄2 of the the house and lot to Alex and Rene is valid but the
hereditary estate under Art. 889 of the Civil Code, the provision “habang buhay” is invalid as to the excess
remaining 1/8 of the estate is the free portion which the beyond 20 years.
testator may dispose of by will.
Q: Raymond, single, named his sister Ruffa in his will
Q: By virtue of a Codicil appended to his will, Theodore as a devisee of a parcel of land which he owned. The
devised to Divino a tract of sugar land, with the will imposed upon Ruffa the obligation of preserving
obligation on the part of Divino or his heirs to deliver the land and transferring it, upon her death, to her
to Betina a specified volume of sugar per harvest illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was then only one
during Betina’s lifetime. It is also stated in the Codicil year old. Raymond later died, leaving behind his
that in the event the obligation is not fulfilled, Betina widowed mother, Ruffa and Scarlet.
should immediately seize the property from Divino or
latter’s heirs and turn it over to Theodore’s

UST BAR OPERATIONS 80

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
1. Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to preserve
the property and to transmit it upon her death to A:
Scarlet, valid?
2. If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who inherits the 1. Yes. Assuming that he is of legal age (Art. 797) and of
property? sound mind at the time of execution of the will (Art.
3. If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can Scarlet inherit 798), Stevie, a blind person, can make a notatial will,
the property directly from Raymond? (2008 BAR) subject to compliance with the “two-reading rule”
(Art. 808) and the provisions of Arts. 804 and 806 of
A: the Civil Code.
2. No. Stevie cannot be a witness to a will. Art. 820 of the
1. When an obligation to preserve and transmit the Civil Code provides that “any person of sound mind
property to Scarlet was imposed on Ruffa, the testator and of age of eighteen years or more, and not blind,
Raymond intended to create a fideicommissary deaf or dumb, and able to read and write, may be a
substitution where Ruffa is the fiduciary and Scarlet is witness to the execution of a will.
the fideicommissary. Having complied with the 3. Yes. The will must be read to him twice, once by one of
requirements of Arts. 863 and 869, the fideicommisary the subscribing witnesses, and again, by the notary
substitution is valid. public before whom the will is acknowledged (Art.
2. If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, the fideicommissary 808).
substitution is rendered null or ineffective under Art.
863, the fideicommisary clause is disregarded without Q: Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a
prejudice to the validity of the institution of the provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for
fiduciary. In such case, Ruffa shall inherit the devise running off with a married man, and (ii) a provision
free from the condition. disposing of his share in the family house and lot in
3. In a fideicommissary substitution, the intention of the favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He did not
testator is to make the second heir his ultimate heir. make any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, because
The right of the second heir is simply postponed by as the will stated, she would anyway get ½ of the
the delivery of the inheritance to the first heir for him house and lot as her conjugal share. The will was very
to enjoy the usufruct over the inheritance. Hence, brief and straightforward and both the above
when the first heir predeceased the testator, the first provisions were contained in page 1, which Arthur and
heir did not qualify to inherit and the right of the his instrumental witness, signed at the bottom. Page 2
second heir to receive the inheritance will no longer contained the attestation clause and the signatures, at
be delayed provided the second heir is qualified to the bottom thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses
inherit at the time of the testator’s death. In which included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, the
fideicommissary substitution, the first and the second family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer who
heirs inherit from the testator, hence, both should be prepared the will. There was a 3 rd page, but this only
qualified to inherit from the testator at the time of his contained the notarial acknowledgement.
death. In the problem, when Ruffa predeceased
Raymond, she did not qualify to receive the The attestation clause stated the will was sighed on
inheritance to enjoy its usufruct, hence, the right of the same occasion by Arthur and his instrumental
Scarlet to receive the inheritance upon the death of the witnesses who all signed in the presence of each other,
testator will no longer be delayed. However, Scarlet is and the notary public who notarized the will. There
not qualified to inherit from Raymond because she is are no marginal signatures or pagination appearing on
barred by Art. 992 of the New Civil Code being an any of the 3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered
illegitimate child of Raymond’s legitimate father. The that apart from the house and lot, he has a P1 million
devise will therefore be ineffective and the property account deposited with ABC back.
will be disposed of by intestacy.
1. Was Erica preterited?
Q: If a will is executed by a testator who is a Filipino 2. What other defects of the will, if any, can cause
citizen, what law will govern if the will is executed in denial of probate?
the Philippines? What law will govern if the will is 3. Was the disinheritance valid? (2008 BAR)
executed in another country? Explain your answers. If
a will is executed by a foreigner, for instance, a A:
Japanese, residing in the Philippines, what law will 1. No. Erica was not preterited. Art. 854 of the Civil Code
govern if the will is executed in the Philippines? And provides that only compulsory heirs in the direct line
what law will govern if the will is executed in Japan, or can be preterited.
some other country, for instance, the U.S.A.? Explain 2. The other defects of the will that can cause its denial
your answers. (1990 BAR) are as follows: (a) Atty. Zorba, the one who prepared
the will was one of the three witnesses , violating the
A: If the testator who is a Filipino citizen executes his will three-witnesses rule; (b) no marginal signature at the
in the Philippines, Philippine law will govern the last page; (c) the attestation did not state the number
formalities. If said Filipino testator executes his will in of pages upon which the will is written; and, (d) no
another country, the law of the country where he maybe or pagination appearing correctively in letters on the
Philippine law will govern the formalities (Art. 815) upper part of the three pages (Azuela v. CA, G.R. No.
122880, April 12, 2006 and cited cases therein, Art. 805
Q: Stevie was born blind. He went to school for the and 806).
blind, and learned to read in Braille Language. He 3. Yes, the disinheritance was valid. When a child or
Speaks English fluently. Can he: descendant leads a dishonorable or disgraceful life,
like running of with a married man, there is sufficient
1. Make a will? cause for disinheritance (Art. 919, par. 7).
2. Act as a witness to a will?
3. In either of the above instances, must the will be Q: Mr, Cruz, widower, has three legitimate children, A,
read to him? (2008 BAR) B and C. He executed a Will instituting as his heirs to
81
 CIVIL LAW
his estate of One Million (P1, 000, 000.00) Pesos his
two children A and B, and his friend F. Q: Clara, thinking of her mortality, drafted a will and
asked Roberta, Hannah, Luisa and Benjamin to be
1. Upon his death, how should Mr. Cruz's estate be witnesses. During the day of signing of her will, Clara
divided? Explain. fell down the stairs and broke her arms. Coming from
2. In the preceding question, suppose Mr. Cruz the hospital, Clara insisted on signing her will by
instituted his two children A and B as his heirs in thumb mark and said that she can sign her full name
his Will, but gave a legacy of P 100,000.00 to his later. While the will was being signed, Roberta
friend F. How should the estate of Mr, Cruz be experienced a stomach ache and kept going to the
divided upon his death? Explain. (1999 BAR) restroom for long periods of time. Hannah, while
waiting for her turn to sign the will, was reading the
A: 7th Harry Potter book on the couch, beside the table on
which everyone was signing. Benjamin, aside from
1. Assuming that the institution of A, B and F were to the witnessing the will, also offered to notarize it. A week
entire estate, there was preterition of C since C is a after, Clara was run over by a drunk driver while
compulsory heir in the direct line. The preterition will crossing the street in Greenbelt. May the will of Clara
result in the total annulment of the institution of heirs. be admitted to probate? Give your reasons briefly.
Therefore, the institution of A, B and F will be set aside (1994, 2007 BAR)
and Mr. Cuz's estate will be divided, as in intestacy,
equally among A, B and C as follows: A - P333,333.33; A: No. Probate should be denied. The requirement that the
B - P333.333.33; and C - P333,333.33. testator and at least three (3) witnesses must sign all in
2. On the same assumption as letter (a), there was the “presence” of one another was not complied with.
preterition of C. Therefore, the institution of A and B is Benjamin who notarized the will is disqualified as a
annulled but the legacy of P100.000.00 to F shall be witness, hence he cannot be counted as one of the three
respected for not being inofficious. Therefore, the witness (Cruz v. Villasor, G.R. No. L-32213, November 26,
remainder of P900.000.00 will be divided equally 1973). The testatrix and the other witnesses signed the will
among A, B and C. not in the presence of Roberta because she was in the
restroom for extended periods of time. Inside the
Q: H died leaving a last will and testament wherein it restroom, Roberta could not have possibly seen the
is stated that he was legally married to W by whom testatrix and the other witnesses sign the will by merely
he had two legitimate children A and B. H devised to casting her eyes in the proper direction (Jaboneta v.
his said forced heirs the entire estate except the free Gustilo, G.R. No. 1641, January 19, 1906); (Nera v. Rimando,
portion which he gave to X who was living with him at G.R. No. L-5971, February 27, 1911). Therefore, the testatrix
the time of his death. In said will he explained that he signed the will in the presence of only two witnesses, and
had been estranged from his wife W for more than 20 only two witnesses signed the will in the presence of the
years and he has been living with X as man and wife testatrix and of one another.
since his separation from his legitimate family. In the
probate proceedings, X asked for the issuance of It is to be noted, however, that the thumb mark intended
letters testamentary in accordance with the will by the testator to be his signature in executing his last will
wherein she is named sole executor. This was and testatment is valid (Payad v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 42258,
opposed by W and her children. September 5, 1936; Matias v. Salud, G.R. No. L-10751, June
23, 1958). The problem, however, states that Clara “said
1. Should the will be admitted in said probate that she can sign her full name later;” Hence, she did not
proceedings? consider her thumb mark as her “complete” signature, and
2. Is the said devise to X valid? intended further action on her part. The testatrix and the
3. Was it proper for the trial court to consider the other witness signed the will in the presence of Hannah,
intrinsic validity of the provisions of said will? because she was aware of her function and role as witness
Explain your answers. (1990 BAR) and was in a position to see the testatrix and the other
witnesses sign by merely casting her eyes in the proper
A: direction.

1. Yes, the will may be probated if executed according to Q: Johnny, with no known living relatives, executed a
the formalities prescribed by law. notarial will giving all his estate to his sweetheart. One
2. No, the institution giving X the free portion is not day, he had a serious altercation with his sweetheart. A
valid, because the prohibitions under Art. 739 of the few days later, he was introduced to a charming lady
Civil Code on donations also apply to testamentary who later became a dear friend. Soon after, he
dispositions (Art. 1028), among donations which are executed a holographic will expressly revoking the
considered void are those made between persons who notarial will and so designating his new friend as sole
were guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time of heir. One day when he was clearing up his desk,
the donation. Johnny mistakenly burned, along with other papers, the
3. As a general rule, the will should be admitted in probate only copy of his holographic will. His business
proceedings if all the necessary requirements for its associate, Eduardo knew well the contents of the
extrinsic validity have been met and the court should will which was shown to him by Johnny the day it
not consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions of was executed. A few days after the burning
said will. However, the exception arises when the will incident, Johnny died. Both wills were sought to be
in effect contains only one testamentary disposition. probated in two separate petitions. Will either or both
Ineffect, the only testamentary disposition under the petitions prosper? (1997 BAR)
will is the giving of the free portion to X, since
legitimes are provided by law. Hence, the trial court A: The probate of the notarial will shall prosper.The
may consider the intrinsic validity of the provisions of holographic will cannot be admitted to probate because a
said will. (Nuguid v. Nuguid, G.R. No. L-23445, June 23, holographic will can only be probated upon evidence of the
1966; Nepomuceno v. CA, G.R. L-62952, October 9 1985) will itself unless there is a photographic copy. But since the

UST BAR OPERATIONS 82

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
holographic will was lost and there was no other copy, it Michelle, and his legitimate son Jayson, how will
cannot be probated and therefore the notarial will shall you distribute his estate? Explain. (2006 BAR)
be admitted to probate because there is no revoking will.
A:
Q: Mr. Reyes executed a will completely valid as to 1. Yes, Don's testamentary disposition of his estate is in
form. A week later, however, he executed another accordance with the law on succession. Don has no
will which expressly revoked his first will, which he compulsory heirs not having ascendants, descendants
tore his first will to pieces. Upon the death of Mr. nor a spouse (Art. 887). Brothers and sisters are not
Reyes, his second will was presented for probate by compulsory heirs. Thus, he can bequeath his entire
his heirs, but it was denied probate due to formal estate to anyone who is not otherwise incapacitated
defects. Assuming that a copy of the first will is to inherit from him. A common-law wife is not
available, may it now be admitted to probate and incapacitated under the law, as Don is not married to
given effect? Why? (2003 BAR) anyone.
2. After paying the legal obligations of the estate, I will
A: Yes, the first will may be admitted to probate and give Ronie, as full-blood brother of Don, 2/3 of the net
given effect. When the testator tore first will, he was estate, twice the share of Michelle, the half-sister who
under the mistaken belief that the second will was shall receive 1/3. Roshelle will not receive anything
perfectly valid and he would not have destroyed the first as she is not a legal heir (Art.1006).
will had he known that the second will is not valid. The 3. Jayson will be entitled to the entire P12 Million as the
revocation by destruction therefore is dependent on the brother and sister will be excluded by a legitimate son
validity of the second will. Since it turned out that the of the decedent. This follows the principle of proximity,
second will was invalid, the tearing of the first will did where "the nearer excludes the farther."
not produce the effect of revocation.This is known as the 4. Jayson will still be entitled to the entire P12 Million
doctrine of dependent relative revocation (Molo v. Molo, G.R. as the father, brother and sister will be excluded by a
No. L-2538, September 21, 1951). legitimate son of the decedent (Art. 887). This follows
the principle that the descendants exclude the
Q: In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In ascendants from inheritance.
1989, because a certain Picasso painting reminded
Brad of her, Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his Q: Mario executed his last will and testament where he
bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While acknowledges the child being conceived by his live-in
Brad was mending his broken heart, he met Angie and partner Josie as his own child; and that his house and
fell in love. Because the Picasso painting reminded lot in Baguio City be given to his unborn conceived
Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the painting child. Are the acknowledgment and the donation
to Angie. Brad died in 1995. Saddened by Brad's death, mortis causa valid? Why? (2014 BAR)
Jennifer asked for the Picasso painting as a
remembrance of him. Angie refused and claimed that A: Yes, the acknowledgment is considered valid because a
Brad, in his will, bequeathed the painting to her. Is will (although not required to be filed by the notary
Angie correct? Why or why not? (2007 BAR) public) may still constitute a document, which contains an
admission of illegitimate filiation. The recognition of an
A: No, Angie is not correct. The Picasso painting is not illegitimate child does not lose its legal effect even though
given or donated by Jennifer to Brad. She merely “placed it the will wherein it was made should be revoked (Art. 834).
in his bedroom.” Hence, she is still the owner of the This provision by itself warrants a conclusion that a will
painting. Not being the owner of the Picasso painting, Brad may be considered as proof of filiation. The donation
cannot validly bequeath the same to Angie (Art. 930). Even mortis causa may be considered valid because although
assuming that the painting was impliedly given or donated unborn, a fetus has a presumptive personality for all
by Jennifer to Brad, the donation is nevertheless void for purposes favorable to it provided it be born under the
not being in writing. The Picasso painting must be worth conditions specified in Art. 41.
more that 5,000 pesos. Under Art. 748, the donation and
acceptance of a movable worth more than 5,000 pesos Q: Alfonso, a bachelor without any descendant or
must be in writing, otherwise the donation is void, Jennifer ascendant, wrote a last will and testament in which he
remained the owner of the Picasso painting and Brad could devised." all the properties of which I may be
not have validly disposed of said painting in favor of Angie possessed at the time of my death" to his favorite
in his will. brother Manuel. At the time he wrote the will, he
owned only one parcel of land. But by the time he died,
Q: Don died after executing a Last Will and Testament he owned twenty parcels of land. His other brothers
leaving his estate valued at P12 Million to his and sisters insist that his will should pass only the
common-law wife Roshelle. He is survived by his parcel of land he owned at the time it was written, and
brother Ronie and his half-sister Michelle. did not cover his properties acquired, which should be
by intestate succession. Manuel claims otherwise. Who
1. Was Don's testamentary disposition of his estate is correct? Explain. (1996 BAR)
in accordance with the law on succession?
Whether you agree or not, explain your answer. A: Manuel is correct because property acquired after the
Explain. making of a will shall only pass thereby, as if the testator
2. If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as had possessed it at the time of making the will, should it
his lawyer, how will you distribute his estate? expressly appear by the will that such was his
Explain. intention(Art. 793). Since Alfonso's intention to devise all
3. Assuming he died intestate survived by his properties he owned at the time of his death expressly
brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, and his appears on the will, then all the 20 parcels of land are
legitimate son Jayson, how will you distribute his included in the devise.
estate? Explain.
4. Assuming further he died intestate, survived by his Q: Natividad’s holographic will, which had only one (1)
father Juan, his brother Ronie, his half-sister substantial provision, as first written, named Rosa as
83
 CIVIL LAW
her sole heir. However, when Gregorio presented it for 2. No, Jay cannot insist because under New York law he
probate, it already contained an alteration, naming is not a compulsory heir entitled to a legitime. The
Gregorio, instead of Rosa, as sole heir, but without national law of the testator determines who his heirs
authentication by Natividad’s signature. Rosa opposes are, the order that they succeed, how much their
the probate alleging such lack of proper successional rights are, and whether or not a
authentication. She claims that the unaltered form of testamentary disposition in his will is valid (Art 16).
the will should be given effect. Whose claim should be Since, Dr. Fuentes was a US citizen, the laws of the
granted? Explain. (1996, 2012 BAR) New York determines who his heirs are. And since the
New York law does not recognize the concept of
A: It depends. If the cancellation of Rosa's name in the will compulsory heirs, Jay is not a compulsory heir of Dr.
was done by the testator himself, Rosa's claim that the Fuentes entitled to a legitime.
holographic will in its original tenor should be given effect
must be denied. The said cancellation has revoked the Q: Alden and Stela were both former Filipino citizens.
entire will as nothing remains of the will after the name of They were married in the Philippines but they later
Rosa was cancelled. Such cancellation is valid revocation of migrated to the United States where they were
the will and does not require authentication by the full naturalized as American citizens. In their union they
signature of the testator to be effective. However, if the were able to accumulate several real properties both
cancellation of Rosa's name was not done by the testator in the US and in the Philippines. Unfortunately, they
himself, such cancellation shall not be effective and the will were not blessed with children. In the US, they
in its original tenor shall remain valid. The efficacy of a executed a joint will instituting as their common heirs
holographic will cannot be left to the mercy of to divide their combined estate in equal shares, the
unscrupulous third parties. The writing of Gregorio‘s name five siblings of Alden and the seven siblings of Stela.
as sole heir was ineffective, even though written by the Alden passed away in 2013 and a year later, Stela also
testator himself, because such is an alteration that requires died. The siblings of Alden who were all citizens of the
the authentication by the full signature of the testator to be US instituted probate proceedings in a US court
valid and effective. Not having been authenticated. The impleading the siblings of Stela who were all in the
designation of Gregorio as an heir was ineffective. (Kalaw Philippines.
v. Relova, G.R. No. L-40207, September 28, 1984).
1. Was the joint will executed by Alden and Stela who
Q: On December 1, 2000, Dr. Juanito Fuentes executed were both former Filipinos valid? Explain with
a holographic will, wherein he gave nothing to his legal basis.
recognized illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the 2. Can the joint will produce legal effect in the
United States, passed the New York medical licensure Philippines with respect to the properties of
examinations, resided therein, and became a Aldenand Stela found here? If so, how?
naturalized American citizen. He died in New York in 3. Is the situation presented in Item I an example of
2007. The laws of New York do not recognize dépeçage? (2015 BAR)
holographic wills or compulsory heirs.
A:
1. Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be 1. Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela is valid. Being no
admitted to probate in the Philippines? Why or longer Filipino citizens at the time they executed their
why not? joint will, the prohibition under our Civil Code on joint
2. Assuming that the will is probated in the wills will no longer apply to Alden and Stela. For as
Philippines, can Jay validly insist that he be given long as their will was executed in accordance with the
his legitime? Why or why not? (2009 BAR) law of the place where they reside, or the law of the
country of which they are citizens or even in
A: accordance with the Civil Code, a will executed by an
alien is considered valid in the Philippines. (Art. 816)
1. Yes, the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes may be 2. Yes, the joint will of Alden and Stela can take effect
admitted to probate in the Philippines because there is even with respect to the properties located in the
no public policy violated by such probate. The only Philippines because what governs the distribution of
issue at probate is the due execution of the will which their estate is no longer Philippine law but their
includes the formal validity of the will. As regards national law at the time of their demise. Hence, the
formal validity, the only issue the court will resolve at joint will produces legal effect even with respect to the
probate is whether or not the will was executed in properties situated in the Philippines.
accordance with the form prescribed by the law 3. No, because dépeçage is a process of applying rules of
observed by the testator in the execution of his will. different states on the basis of the precise issue
For purposes of probate in the Philippines, an alien involved. It is a conflict of laws where different issues
testator may observe the law of the place where the within a case may be governed by the laws of different
will was executed (Art 17), or the formalities of the law states. In the situation in letter (a) no conflict of laws
of the place where he resides, or according to the will arise because Alden and Stela are no longer
formalities of the law of his own country, or in Filipino citizens at the time of the execution of their
accordance with the Philippine Civil Code (Art. 816). joint will and the place of execution is not the
Since Dr. Fuentes executed his will in accordance with Philippines.
the Philippine law, the Philippine court shall apply the
New Civil Code in determining the formal validity of Q: Manuel, a Filipino, and his American wife Eleanor,
the holographic will. The subsequent change in the executed a Joint Will in Boston, Massachusetts when
citizenship of Dr. Fuentes did not affect the law they were residing in said city. The law of
governing the validity of his will. Under the New Civil Massachusetts allows the execution of joint wills.
Code, which was the law used by Dr. Fuentes, the law Shortly thereafter, Eleanor died. Can the said Will be
enforced at the time of execution of the will shall probated in the Philippines for the settlement of her
govern the formal validity of the will (Art. 795). estate? (2000 BAR)

UST BAR OPERATIONS 84

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
A: Yes, the will may be probated in the Philippines insofar ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of
as the estate of Eleanor is concerned. While the Civil Code his father or mother(Art. 992). Arnel is disqualified to
prohibits the execution of Joint wills here and abroad, such Inherit from Ricky because Arnel is an illegitimate child of
prohibition applies only to Filipinos. Hence, the joint will Franco and Ricky is a legitimate relative of Franco.
which is valid where executed is valid in the Philippines
but only with respect to Eleanor. It is void with respect to Q: True or False.
Manuel whose joint will remains void in the Philippines
despite being valid where executed (Art. 819). X, a widower, died leaving a will stating that the house
and lot where he lived cannot be partitioned for as
Q: John Sagun and Maria Carla Camua, British citizens long as the youngest of his four children desires to stay
at birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by there. As coheirs and co-owners, the other three may
naturalization after their marriage. During their demand partition anytime. (2010 BAR)
marriage, the couple acquired substantial
landholdings in London and in Makati. Maria begot A: FALSE, The other three co–heirs may not anytime
three (3) children, Jorge, Luisito, and Joshur. In one of demand the partition of the house and lot since it was
their trips to London, the couple executed a joint will expressly provided by the decedent in his will that the
appointing each other as their heirs and providing that same cannot be partitioned while his youngest child
upon the death of the survivor between them, the desires to stay there. A decedent to prohibit, by will, the
entire estate would go to Jorge and Luisito only but the partition of a property and his estate for a period not
two (2) could not dispose of nor divide the London longer than 20 years no matter what his reason maybe
estate as long as they live. John and Maria died (Art. 1083). Hence, the three co-heir can demand its
tragically in the London subway terrorist attack in partition only after 20 years from the death of their father.
2005. Jorge and Luisito filed a petition for probate of Even if the deceased parent did not leave a will, if the
their parents’ will before a Makati RTC. Joshur house and lot constituted their family home, partition is
vehemently objected because he was preterited. prohibited for a period of ten (10) years, or for as long as
1. Should the will be admitted to probate? Explain. there is a minor beneficiary living in the family home(Art.
2. Are the testamentary dispositions valid? Explain. 159).
3. Is the testamentary prohibition against the
division of the London estate valid? Explain. (2000, LEGAL OR INTESTATE SUCCESSION (1992, 1993, 1995,
2008, 2012 BAR) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008,
2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016 BAR)
A:
Q: Princess married Roberto and bore a son, Onofre.
1. No, the will should not be admitted to probate since Roberto died in a plane crash. Princess later married
the couple are both Filipino citizens. Arts. 818 and 819 Mark and they also had a son - Pepito. Onofre donated
shall apply. Said Articles prohibit the execution of joint to Pepito, his half-brother, a lot in Makati City worth
wills and make them void, even though authorized by P3, 000, 000.00. Pepito succumbed to an illness and
the laws of the country where they were executed. died intestate. The lot given to Pepito by Onofre was
2. No. Since the joint will is void, all the testamentary inherited by his father, Mark. Mark also died intestate.
dispositions written therein are also void. However, if Lonely, Princess followed Mark to the life beyond. The
the will is valid, the institutions of heirs shall be claimants to the subject lot emerged - Jojo, the father
annulled because Joshur was preterited. He was of Princess; Victor, the father of Mark; and Jerico, the
preterited because he will receive nothing from the father of Roberto. Who among the three (3)
will, will receive nothing by intestacy, and the facts do ascendants is entitled to the lot? Explain. (2016 BAR)
not show that he received anything as an advance on
his inheritance. He was totally excluded from the A: Jojo, Princess’ father, is entitled to the lot.
inheritance of his parents.
3. Assuming the will of John and Maria is valid, the This is a clear case of reserva troncal. The origin is Onofre.
testamentary prohibition on the division of the The Prepositus is Pepito. The mode of transmission from
London estate shall be valid but only for 20 years. A Onofre to Pepito is donation (hence, by gratuitous title).
testamentary disposition of the testator cannot forbid The Reservista is Mark, who acquired it from his
the partition of all or part of his estate for a period descendant (son) Pepito by legitime and intestacy (hence,
longer than twenty (20) years (Arts. 1083 and 494). by operation of law).

Q: Ricky and Arlene are married. They begot Franco The Reservatario is Princess, a relative of the Prepositus
during their marriage. Franco had an illicit Pepito within the third degree and who belonged to the
relationship with Audrey and out of which, they begot line of origin is the maternal line because Onofre (the
Arnel. Franco predeceased Ricky, Arlene and Arnel. Origin) and Pepito (the Prepositus) are maternal half-blood
Before Ricky died, he executed a will which when siblings.
submitted to probate was opposed by Arnel on the
ground that he should be given the share of his father, When Mark (Reservista) died, the property passed to
Franco. Is the opposition of Arnel correct? Why? (2012 Princess as sole reservatario, thus extinguishing the
BAR) reserve troncal.

A: No, his opposition is not correct. Arnel cannot inherit Upon Princess’ death, the property was transmitted ab
from Ricky in representation of his father, Franco. The intestate to her father Jojo. Transmission to Joj is by the
representative must not only be a legal heir of the person ordinary rules of compulsory and intestate succession, not
he is representing but he must also be a legal heir of the by reserva troncal, because the reserve was extinguished
decedent he seeks to inherit from. upon the transmission of the property to Princess, this
making Princess the absolute owner subject to no reserva.
While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he is not a legal heir of
Ricky becausean illegitimate child has no right to inherit
85
 CIVIL LAW
Q: Don Ricardo had 2 legitimate children - Tomas and Bert’s nephew, he cannot inherit from Bert as a legal
Tristan. Tristan has 3 children. Meanwhile, Tomas had heir since he is excluded by his father under the
a relationship with Nancy, who was also single and had proximity rule (Art. 962). He cannot invoke the rights
the legal capacity to marry. Nancy became pregnant of an adopted child to inherit from Bert since the boy
and gave birth to Tomas, Jr. After the birth of Tomas, was not legally adopted. A mere ward or “ampon” has
Jr., his father, Tomas, died. Later, Don Ricardo died no right to inherit from the adopting parents (Manuel
without a will and Tristan opposed the motion of v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 117246, August 21, 1995).
Tomas, Jr. to be declared an heir of the deceased since 3. No, Bert and Joe could not have jointly adopted the
he is an illegitimate child. Tomas, Jr. countered that boy. Under the Domestic Adoption Act, joint adoption
Article 992 of the Civil Code is unconstitutional for is permitted, and in certain cases mandated, for
violation of the equal protection of the laws. He spouses. Here, Bert and Joe are not spouses.
explained that an illegitimate child of an illegitimate
parent is allowed to inherit under Articles 902, 982 Q: Ernesto, an overseas Filipino worker, was coming
and 990 of the Civil Code while he - an illegitimate home to the Philippines after working for so many years
child of a legitimate father - cannot. Civil Law in the Middle East. He has saved P100, 000 in his savings
commentator Arturo Tolentino opined that Article 992 account in Manila which intended to use to start a
created an absurdity and committed an injustice business in his home country. On his flight home,
because while the illegitimate descendant of an Ernesto has a fatal heart attack. He left behind his
illegitimate child can represent, the illegitimate widowed mother, his common-law wife and their twin
descendant of a legitimate child cannot. Decide the sons. He left no will, no debts, no other relatives and no
case and explain. (2016 BAR) other properties except the money in his savings
account. Who are the heirs entitled to inherit from him
A: I will deny the motion of Tomas, Jr. to be declared as an and how much should each receive? (2008 BAR)
heir of the deceased. Tomas Jr., being an illegitimate child
of the deceased legitimate son, Tomas, cannot inherit ab A: The mother and twin sons are entitled to inherit from
intestate from the deceased, Don Ricardo, because of the Ernesto. If legitimate ascendants are left, the twin sons
iron curtain rule under Art. 992 of the Civil Code. shall divide the inheritance with them taking one-half of
the estate (Art. 991). Thus, the widowed mother gets P50,
Tomas cannot argue that Art. 992 is violative of the equal 000.00 while the twin sons shall receive P25, 000.00 each.
protection clause because equal protection simply The common-law wife cannot inherit from him because
requires that all persons or things similarly situated when the law speaks “widow or widower” as a compulsary
should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and heir, the law refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. 887, par 3).
responsibilities imposed (Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil.
1155, May 31, 1957). It, however, does not require the Q: The spouses Peter and Paula had three (3) children.
universal application of the laws to all persons or things Paula later obtained a judgment of nullity of marriage.
without distinction. What it simply requires is equality Their absolute community of property having been
among equals as determined according to a valid dissolved, they delivered P1 million to each of their 3
classification. Indeed, the equal protection clause permits children as their presumptive legitimes. Peter later re-
classification. married and had two (2) children by his second wife
Marie. Peter and Marie, having successfully engaged in
Q: Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together as business, acquired real properties. Peter later died
common law spouses and agreed to raise a son of intestate.
Bert's living brother as their child without legally
adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took care of their 1. Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will his estate
home and the boy. In their 20 years of cohabitation be divided among them?
they were able to acquire real estate assets registered 2. What is the effect of the receipt by Peter’s 3
in their names as co-owners. Unfortunately, Bert died children by his first marriage of their presumptive
of cardiac arrest, leaving no will. Bert was survived by legitimes on their right to inherit following Peter’s
his biological siblings, Joe, and the boy. death? (2010 BAR)

1. Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to Bert and A:

Joe, whereby all properties they acquired will be
presumed to have been acquired by their joint 1. The legal heirs of Peter are his children by the first and
industry and shall be owned by them in equal second marriages and his surviving second wife.
shares?
2. What are the successional rights of the boy Bert Their shares in the estate of Peter will depend,
and Joe raised as their son? however, on the cause of the nullity of the first
3. If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of marriage. If the nullity of the first marriage was
their cohabitation to jointly adopt the boy, would psychological incapacity of one or both spouses, the
they have been legally allowed to do so? Explain three children of that void marriage are legitimate and
with legal basis. (2015 BAR) all of the legal heirs shall share the estate of Peter in
equal shares. If the judgment of nullity was for other
A: causes, the three children are illegitimate and the
1. No, Article 147 cannot apply to Bert and Joe because estate shall be distributed such that an illegitimate
the law only applies to a man and a woman who are child of the first marriage shall receive half of the
capacitated to marry each other who live together as share of a legitimate child of the second marriage, and
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or the second wife will inherit a share equal to that of a
under a void marriage. In the case of Bert and Joe, legitimate child. In no case may the two legitimate
they are both men so the law does not apply. children of the second marriage receive a share less
2. The boy has no successional rights. Since Bert died than one-half of the estate which is their legitime.
without a will, intestate succession shall apply. While When the estate is not sufficient to pay all the
the boy is the son of Bert’s living brother, and hence is legitimes of the compulsory heirs, the legitime of the

UST BAR OPERATIONS 86

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
spouse is preferred and the illegitimate children suffer 2. The wife will receive one half (1/2) of the estate or P5,
the reduction. 000, 000.00. The other half shall be inherited by (1)
the full-blood brother, represented by his three
Computation: children, and (2) the half-sister. They will divide the
other half between them such that the share of the
(A) If the ground of nullity is psychological incapacity: half-sister is just half the share of the full-blood
3 children by first marriage 1/6 of the estate for each brother. The share of the full-blood brother shall in
turn be inherited by the three nephews in equal shares
2 children by second marriage 1/6 of the estate for each
by right of representation.
Surviving second spouse 1/6 of the estate
Therefore, the three (3) nephews will receive P1, 111,
(B) If the ground of nullity is not psychological capacity: 111.10 each the half- sister will receive the sum of P1,
1⁄4 of the estate for each of 666, 666.60.
2 legitimate children
second marriage
Surviving second spouse 1⁄4 of the estate Q: Mr. XT and Mrs. YT have been married for 20 years.
3 illegitimate children 1/12 of estate for each of first Suppose the wife, YT, died childless, survived only by
her husband, XT. What would be the share of XT from
marriage
her estate as inheritance? Why? Explain. (2004 BAR)
NOTE: The legitime of an illegitimate child is supposed to A: Under the Civil Code, the widow or widower is a legal
be 1⁄2 the legitime of a legitimate child or 1/8 of the and compulsory heir of the deceased spouse. If the widow
estate. But the estate will not be sufficient to pay the said is the only surviving heir, there being no legitimate
legitime of the 3 illegitimate children, because only 1⁄4 of ascendants, descendants, brothers, and sisters, nephews
the estate is left after paying the legitime of the surviving and nieces, she gets the entire estate.
spouse which is preferred.
Q: Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, who are childless, met with a
Hence, the remaining 1⁄4 of the estate shall be divided serious motor vehicle accident with Mr. Cruz at the
among the 3 illegitimate children. wheel and Mrs. Cruz seated beside him, resulting in
the instant death of Mr. Cruz. Mrs. Cruz was still alive
2. In the distribution of Peter’s estate, 1⁄2 of the when help came but she also died on the way to the
presumptive legitime received by the 3 children of the hospital. The couple acquired properties worth One
first marriage shall be collated to Peter’s estate and Million (P1, 000, 000.00) Pesos during their marriage,
shall be imputed as an advance of their respective which are being claimed by the parents of both
inheritance from Peter. Only half of the presumptive spouses in equal shares. Is the claim of both sets of
legitime is collated to the estate of Peter because the parents valid and why? (1999 BAR)
other half shall be collated to the estate of his first
wife. A: No, the claim of both parents is not valid. When Mr. Cruz
died, he was succeeded by his wife and his parents as his
Q: Ramon Mayaman died intestate, leaving a net estate intestate heirs who will share his estate equally. His estate
of P10, 000, 000.00. Determine how much each heir was 0.5 Million pesos which is his half share in the
will receive from the estate: absolute community amounting to 1 Million Pesos. His
wife, will, therefore, inherit O.25 Million Pesos and his
1. If Ramon is survived by his wife, three full- blood parents will inherit 0.25 Million Pesos.
brothers, two half-brothers, and one nephew (the
son of a desceased full-blood brother)? Explain. When Mrs. Cruz died, she was succeeded by her parents as
2. If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half-sister, and her intestate heirs. They will inherit all of her estate
three nephews (sons of a deceased full-blood consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the absolute
brother)? Explain. (2008 BAR) community and her 0.25 Million inheritance from her
husband, or a total of 0.750 Million Pesos.
A:
In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit 250,000 Pesos
1. Having died intestate, the estate of Ramon shall be while the parents of Mrs. Cruz will inherit 750,000 Pesos.
inherited by his wife and his full and half blood
siblings or their respective representatives. In Q: Esteban and Martha had four (4) children: Rolando,
intestacy, if the wife concurs with no one but the Jun, Mark, and Hector. Rolando had a daughter, Edith,
siblings of the husband, all of them are the intestate while Mark had a son, Philip. After the death of
heirs of the deceased husband. The wife will receive Esteban and Martha, their three (3) parcels of land
half of the intestate estate, while the siblings or their were adjudicated to Jun. After the death of Jun, the
respective representatives, will inherit the other half properties passed to his surviving spouse Anita, and
to be divided among them equally. If some siblings are son Cesar. When Anita died, her share went to her son
of the full-blood and the other of the half blood, a half Cesar. Ten (10) years after, Cesar died intestate
blood sibling will receive half the share of a full-blood without any issue. Peachy, Anita’s sister, adjudicated
sibling. to herself the properties as the only surviving heir of
a) The wife of Ramon will, therefore, receive one half Anita and Cesar. Edith and Philip would like to recover
(1⁄2) of the estate or the amount of P5, 000, the properties claiming that they should have been
000.00. reserved by Peachy in their behalf and must now
b) The three (3) full-blood brothers, will, therefore, revert back to them. Is the contention of Edith and
receive P1, 000, 000.00 each. Philip valid? (2014 BAR)
c) The nephew will receive P1, 000, 000.00 by right
of representation. A: No, the contention is not valid. The property
d) The two (2) half-brothers will receive P500, adjudicated to Jun from the estate of his parents which he
000.00 each. in turn left to Anita and Cesar is not subject to reservation
87
 CIVIL LAW
in favor of Edith and Philip. In Mendoza et. al. v. Policarpio, between them, the child excluding the parents of Isidro. An
et. al. (G.R. No. 176422, March 20 2013) the court ruled that unborn child is considered born for all purposes favorable
lineal character of the reservable property is reckoned to it provided it is born later. The child was considered born
from the ascendant from whom the propositus received because, having an intra-uterine life of more than seven
the property by gratuitous title. The ownership should be months, it lived for a few minutes after its complete
reckoned only from Jun, as he is the ascendant from where delivery. It was legitimate because it was born within
the first transmission occurred or from whom Cesar the valid marriage of the parents. Succession is favorable
inherited the properties. Moreover, Art. 891 provides that to it. When the child died, Irma inherited the share of the
the person obliged to reserve the property should be an child. However, the share of the child in the hands of
ascendant. Peachy is not Cesar’s ascendant but a mere Irma is subject to reserva troncal for the benefit of the
collateral relative. On the assumption that the property is relatives of the child within the third degree of
reservable, Edith and Philip being first cousins of Cesar consanguinity and who belong to the line of Isidro.
who is the propositus are disqualified to be reservatarios
as they are not third degree relatives of Cesar. Q: Mr. Luna died, leaving an estate of Ten Million (P1
0,000,000.00) Pesos. His widow gave birth to a child
Q: On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and was four months after Mr, Luna's death, but the child died
survived by his wife, Leonora, and children, Danilo and five hours after birth. Two days after the child's death,
Carlito. One of the properties he left was a piece of the widow of Mr. Luna also died because she had
land in Alabang where he built his residential house. suffered from difficult childbirth. The estate of Mr.
Luna is now being claimed by his parents, and the
After his burial, Leonora and Mariano’s children parents of his widow. Who is entitled to Mr. Luna'a
extrajudicially settled his estate. Thereafter, Leonora estate and why? (1999 BAR)
and Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to
partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking A: Half of the estate of Mr. Luna will go to the parents of
Article 159 of the Family Code. Carlito alleged that Mrs. Luna as their inheritance from Mrs. Luna, while the
since his minor child Lucas still resides in the other half will be inherited by the parents of Mr. Luna as
premises, the family home continues until that minor the reservatarios of the reserved property inherited by
beneficiary becomes of age. Is the contention of Carlito Mrs. Luna from her child.
tenable? (2014 BAR)
A: No, the contention of Carlito is not tenable. To qualify as When Mr. Luna died, his heirs were his wife and the
beneficiary of the family home, the person must be among unborn child. The unborn child inherited because the
those mentioned in Art. 154, he/she must be actually living inheritance was favorable to it and it was born alive later
in the family home and must be dependent for legal though it lived only for five hours. Mrs. Luna inherited half
support upon the head of the family (Patricio v. Dario, G.R. of the 10 Million estate while the unborn child inherited
No. 170829, November 20, 2006). While Lucas, the son of the other half. When the child died, it was survived by its
Carlito satisfies the first and second requisites, he cannot mother, Mrs. Luna. As the only heir, Mrs. Luna inherited,
however, directly claim legal support from his by operation of law, the estate of the child consisting of its
grandmother, Leonora because the person primarily 5 Million inheritance from Mr. Luna. In the hands of Mrs.
obliged to give support to Lucas is his father, Carlito. Thus, Luna, what she inherited from her child was subject to
partition may be successfully claimed by Leonora and reserva troncal for the benefit of the relatives of the child
Danilo. within the third degree of consanguinity and who belong
to the family of Mr. Luna, the line where the property came
Q: Isidro and Irma, Filipinos, both 18 years of age, were from.
passengers of Flight No. 317 of Oriental Airlines. The
plane they boarded was of Philippine registry. When Mrs. Luna died, she was survived by her parents as
While en route from Manila to Greece some her only heirs. Her parents will inherit her estate
passengers hijacked the plane, held the chief pilot consisting of the 5 Million she inherited from Mr. Luna.
hostage at the cockpit and ordered him to fly instead The other 5 Million she inherited from her child will be
to Libya. During the hijacking Isidro suffered a heart delivered to the parents of Mr. Luna as beneficiaries of the
attack and was on the verge of death. Since Irma was reserved property.
already eight months pregnant by Isidro, she pleaded
to the hijackers to allow the assistant pilot to In sum, 5 Million Pesos of Mr. Luna's estate will go to the
solemnize her marriage with Isidro. Soon after the parents of Mrs. Luna, while the other 5 Million Pesos will
marriage, Isidro expired. As the plane landed in go to the parents of Mr. Luna as reservatarios.
Libya Irma gave birth. However, the baby died a few
minutes after complete delivery. Back in the Q: TRUE or FALSE. In reserve troncal, all reservatarios
Philippines, Irma Immediately filed a claim for (reservees) inherit as a class and in equal shares
inheritance. The parents of Isidro opposed her claim regardless of their proximity in degree to the
contending that the marriage between her and Isidro prepositus. (2009 BAR)
was void ab initio on the following grounds: (a) they
had not given their consent to the marriage of their A: FALSE. Not all the relatives within the third degree will
son; (b) there was no marriage license; (c) the inherit as reservatario, and not all those who are entitled
solemnizing officer had no authority to perform the to inherit will inherit in the equal shares. The applicable
marriage; and, (d) the solemnizing officer did not file laws of intestate succession will determine who among the
an affidavit of marriage with the proper civil registrar. relatives will inherit as reservatarios and what shares they
Does Irma have any successional rights at all? will take, i.e., the direct line excludes the collateral, the
Discuss fully. (1995, 1999 BAR) descending direct line excludes the ascending, the nearer
excludes the more remote, the nephews and nieces exclude
A: Irma succeeded to the estate of Isidro as his surviving the uncles and the aunts, and half blood relatives inherit
spouse to the estate of her legitimate child. When Isidro half the share of full-blooded relatives.
died, he was succeeded by his surviving wife Irma, and his
legitimate unborn child.They divided the estate equally

UST BAR OPERATIONS 88

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Q: F had three (3) legitimate children: A, B, and C. B Franco. Is the opposition of Arnel correct? Why? (2012
has one (1) legitimate child X. C has two (2) legitimate BAR)
children: Y and Z. F and A rode together in a car and
perished together at the same time in a vehicular A: No, his opposition is not correct. Arnel cannot inherit
accident, F and A died, each of them leaving from Ricky in the representation of his father Franco. In
substantial estates in intestacy. representation, the representative must not only be a legal
heir of the person he is representing, he must also be a
1. Who are the intestate heirs of F? What are their legal heir of the decedent he seeks to inherit from.
respective fractional shares?
2. Who are the intestate heirs of A? What are While Arnel is a legal heir of Franco, he is not a legal heir of
their respective fractional shares? Ricky because under Art 992, an illegitimate child has no
3. If B and C both predeceased F, who are F’s right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children
intestate heirs? What are their respective and relatives of his father or mother. Arnel is disqualified
fractional shares? Do they inherit in their own to inherit from Ricky because Arnel is an illegitimate child
right or by representation? Explain your answer. of Franco and Ricky is a legitimate relative of Franco.
4. If B and C both repudiated their shares in the
estate of F who are F's intestate heirs? What are Q: Tessie died survived by her husband Mario, and two
their respective fractional shares? Do they inherit nieces, Michelle and Jorelle, who are the legitimate
in their own right or by representation? Explain children of an elder sister who had predeceased her.
your answer. (1992, 2008 BAR) The only property she left behind was a house and lot
worth two million pesos, which Tessie and her
A: husband had acquired with the use of Mario's savings
from his income as a doctor. How much of the property
1. B = ½, C= ½ or its value, if any, may Michelle and Jorelle claim as
2. Under Art. 1005, should brothers ad sisters survive their hereditary shares? (1998 BAR)
together with nephews and nieces, who are the children
of the decedent’s brothers and sisters of the full blood, A: Art. 1001 of the Civil Code provides, "Should brothers
the former shall inherit per capita, and the latter per and sisters or their children survive with the widow
stripes. B and C should inherit both ½ of the whole or widower, the latter shall be entitled to one-half of the
estate. inheritance and the brothers and sisters or their children
3. Under Art. 982, the grandchildren and other to the other half." Tessie's gross estate consists of a
descendants shall inherit by right of representation, house and lot acquired during her marriage, making it
and if any one of themshould have died, leaving part of the community property. Thus, one-half of the said
several heirs, the portion pertaining to him shall be property would have to be set aside as Mario's conjugal
divided among the latter in equal portions. X should share from the community property. The other half,
inherit½ share by representation of B. Y and Z should amounting to one million pesos, is her conjugal share (net
inherit ¼ share each by representation of C. estate), and should be distributed to her intestate heirs.
4. X inherits 1/3 in his own right; Y inherits 1/3 in his Applying the above provision of law, Michelle and Jorelle,
own right; Z inherits 1/3 in his own right; Art. Tessie's nieces, are entitled to one-half of her conjugal
977providesthatheirswho repudiate their share cannot share worth one million pesos, or 500, 000 pesos, while
be represented. the other one-half amounting to P500, 000 will go to Mario,
Tessie's surviving spouse. Michelle and Jorelle are then
Q: Enrique died, leaving a net hereditary estate of P1.2 entitled to P250, 000 pesos each as their hereditary share.
million. He is survived by his widow, three legitimate
children, two legitimate grandchildren sired by a Q: Luis was survived by two legitimate children, two
legitimate child who predeceased him, and two illegitimate children, his parents, and two brothers. He
recognized illegitimate children. Distribute the estate left an estate of P1 million. Luis died intestate. Who
in intestacy. (1997, 1998, 2003 BAR) are his intestate heirs, and how much is the share of
each in his estate? (2003 BAR)
A: Under the theory of Concurrence, the shares are as
follows: A: The intestate heirs are the two (2) legitimate children
A (legitimate child) = P200, 000 and the two (2) illegitimate children. In intestacy the
B (legitimate child) = P200, 000 estate of the decedent is divided among the legitimate and
C (legitimate child) = P200, 000 illegitimate children such that the share of each
D (legitimate child) = 0 (predeceased] illegitimate child is one -half the share of each legitimate
E (legitimate child of D) = P100, 000 - by right of child.Their share are:
representation
F (legitimate child of D) = P100, 000 - by right of For each legitimate child – P333, 333.33
representation For each illegitimate child – P166, 666.66 (Art. 983, NCC;
G (illegitimate child) = P100,000 - 1/2 share of the Art. 176, FC)
legitimate child
H (illegitimate child) = P100, 000 - 1/2 share of the Q: Eugenio died without issue, leaving several parcels
legitimate child of land in Bataan. He was survived by Antonio, his
W (Widow) = P200, 000 - same share as legitimate child legitimate brother; Martina, the only daughter of his
predeceased sister Mercedes; and five legitimate
Q: Ricky and Arlene are married. They begot Franco children of Joaquin, another predeceased brother.
during their marriage. Franco had an illicit Shortly after Eugenio's death, Antonio also died,
relationship with Audrey and out of which, they begot leaving three legitimate children. Subsequently,
Arnel. Franco predeceased Ricky, Arlene and Arnel. Martina, the children of Joaquin and the children of
Before Ricky died, he executed a will which when Antonio executed an extrajudicial settlement of the
submitted to probate was opposed by Arnel on the estate of Eugenio, dividing it among themselves. The
ground that he should be given the share of his father, succeeding year, a petition to annul the extrajudicial
89
 CIVIL LAW
settlement was filed by Antero, an illegitimate son of
Antonio, who claims he is entitled to share in the 1. Between Marian and the baby, who is
estate of Eugenio. The defendants filed a motion to presumed to have died ahead?
dismiss on the ground that Antero is barred by 2. Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of the
Article 992 of the Civil Code from inheriting from baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds of the
the legitimate brother of his father. How will you life insurance on the life of Marian? (2008
resolve the motion? (2000 BAR) BAR)

A: The motion to dismiss should be granted. Art. 992 does A:

not apply. Antero is not claiming any inheritance from
Eugenio. He is claiming his share in the inheritance of his 1. Marian is presumed to have died ahead of the baby.
father consisting of his father's share in the inheritance of Art. 43 applies to persons who are called to succeed
Eugenio (Dela Merced v. Dela Merced, G.R. No. 126707, each other. The proof of death must be established by
February 25, 1999). positive or circumstatial evidence derived from facts. It
can never be established from mere inference. In the
Q: Dr. Lopez, a 70-year old widower, and his son present case, it is very clear that only Marian and
Roberto both died in a fire that gutted their home Pietro were hacked with bolos. There was no showing
while they were sleeping in their air-conditioned that the baby was also hacked to death. The baby’s
rooms. Roberto’s wife, Marilyn, and their two children death could have been due to lack of nutrition.
were spared because they were in the province at the 2. Pietro, as the biological father of the baby, shall be
time. Dr. Lopez left an estate worth P20M and a life entitled to claim the proceeds of life insurance of
insurance policy in the amount of P1M with his three Marian because he is a compulsory heir of his child.
children --- one of whom is Roberto --- as beneficiaries.
Marilyn is now claiming for herself and her children Q: A is the acknowledged natural child of B who died
her husband’s share in the estate left by Dr. Lopez, and when A was already 22 years old. When B's full blood
her husband’s share in the proceeds of Dr. Lopez’s life brother, C, died, he (C) was survived by his widow and
insurance policy. Rule on the validity of Marilyn’s four children of his other brother D. Claiming that he
claims with reasons. (1999, 2009 BAR) is entitled to inherit from his father's brother C. A
brought suit to obtain his share in the estate of C. Will
A: As to the estate of Dr. Lopez: his action prosper? (1993 BAR)

Marilyn is not entitled to a share in the estate of Dr. Lopez. A: No, the action of A will not prosper. On the premise that
For purposes of succession, Dr. Lopez and his son Roberto B, C and D are legitimate brothers, as an illegitimate child of
are presumed to have died at the same time, there being B, A cannot inherit in intestacy from C who is a
no evidence to prove otherwise, and there shall be no legitimate brother of B. Only the wife of C in her own
transmission of rights from one to the other (Article 43). right and the legitimate relatives of C (i.e. the children of D
Hence, Roberto inherited nothing form his father that as C's legitimate nephews inheriting as collateral relatives)
Marilyn would in turn inherit from Roberto. The children can inherit in intestacy (Arts. 992, 1001, 1OO5 and 975).
of Roberto, however, will succeed their grandfather, Dr.
Lopez, in representation of their father Roberto and Q: Cristina the illegitimate daughter of Jose and
together will receive 1/3 of the estate of Dr. Lopez since Maria, died intestate, without any descendant or
their father Roberto was one of the three children of Dr. ascendant. Her valuable estate is being claimed by
Lopez. Marilyn cannot represent her husband Roberto Ana, the legitimate daughter of Jose, and Eduardo, the
because the right is not given by law to a surviving spouse. legitimate son of Maria. Is either, both, or neither of
them entitled to inherit? Explain. (1996 BAR)
As to the proceeds of the insurance on the life of Dr. Lopez:
A: Neither Ana nor Eduardo is entitled to inherit of ab
Since succession is not involved as regards the insurance intestato from Cristina. Both are legitimate relatives of
contract, the provisions of the Rules of Court on Cristina's illegitimate parents and therefore they fall
survivorship shall apply. Under the Rules, Dr. Lopez, who under the prohibition prescribed by Art. 992 (Manuel v.
was 70 years old, is presumed to have died ahead of Ferrer, G.R. No. 117246, August 21, 1995; Diaz v. IAC, G.R.
Roberto, who is presumably between the ages of 15 and No. L-66574, February 21, 1990).
60. Having survived the insured, Roberto’s right as a
beneficiary became vested upon the death of Dr. Lopez. Q: For purpose of this question, assume all formalities
When Roberto died after Dr. Lopez, his right to receive the and procedural requirements have been complied
insurance proceeds became part of his hereditary estate, with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior to
which in turn was inherited in equal shares by his legal their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In 1971 and
heirs, namely, his spouse and children. Therefore, 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and
Roberto’s children and his spouse are entitled to Roberto’s Michelle respectively. In 1973, Dessa died while giving
one-third share in the insurance proceeds. birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never
married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted
Q: At the age 18, Marian found out that she was Shelly. Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his
pregnant. She insured her own life and named her girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died
unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who may
already due to give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, inherit from Ramon and who may not? Give your
the father of her unborn child, were kidnapped in a reason brieftly. (2007 BAR)
resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. The
military gave chase and after one week, they were A:
found in an abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro
were hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby were The following may inherit from Ramon:
both found dead, with the baby’s umbilical cord
already cut. Pietro survived. 1. Michelle, as an adopted child of Ramon, will inherit as

UST BAR OPERATIONS 90

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
a legitimate child of Ramon. As an adopted child, D P166, 666.66
Michelle has all the rights of a legitimate child (Sec 18, D-l P166, 666.66 + P250.000.00
Domestic Adoption Law). D-2 P166, 666.66 + P250,000.00
2. Lia will inherit in representation of Anna. Although Lia
is an illegitimate child, she is not barred by Articles Q: In his last will and testament, Lamberto 1)
992, because her mother Anna is an illegitimate disinherits his daughter Wilma because "she is
herself. She will represent Anna as regards Anna's disrespectful towards me and raises her voice talking
legitime under Art. 902 and as regards Anna's intestate to me", 2) omits entirely his spouse Elvira, 3) leaves a
share under Art. 990. legacy of P100, 000.00 to his mistress Rosa and P50,
000.00 to his driver Ernie and 4) institutes his son
The following may not inherit from Ramon: Baldo as his sole heir. How will you distribute his
estate of P1, 000, 000.00? (2000 BAR)
1. Shelly, being an adopted child, she cannot represent
Cherry. This is because adoption creates a personal A: The disinheritance of Wilma was ineffective because the
legal relation only between the adopter and the ground relied upon by the testator does not constitute
adopted. The law on representation requires the maltreatment under Art. 919(6). Hence, the testamentary
representative to be a legal heir of the person he is provisions in the will shall be annulled but only to the
representing and also of the person from whom the extent that her legitime was impaired.
person being represented was supposed to inherit.
While Shelly is a legal heir of Cherry, Shelly is not a The total omission of Elvira does not constitute preterition
legal heir of Ramon. Adoption created a purely because she is not a compulsory heir in the direct line.
personal legal relation only between Cherry and Only compulsory heirs in the direct line may be the subject
Shelly. of preterition. Not having been preterited, she will be
2. Hans and Gretel are barred from inheriting from entitled only to her legitime.
Ramon under Art. 992. Being illegitimate children, they
cannot inherit ab intestato from Ramon. The legacy in favor of Rosa is void under Article 1028 for
being in consideration of her adulterous relation with the
PROVISIONS COMMON TO TESTATE AND INTESTATE testator. She is, therefore, disqualified to receive the legacy
SUCCESSION (1993, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2009 of 100,000 pesos. The legacy of 50,000 pesos in favor of
BAR) Ernie is not inofficious not having exceeded the free
portion. Hence, he shall be entitled to receive it.
Q: Maria, to spite her husband Jorge, whom she
suspected was having an affair with another woman, The institution of Baldo, which applies only to the free
executed a will, unknown to him, bequeathing all the portion, shall be respected. In sum, the estate of Lamberto
properties she inherited from her parents, to her will be distributed as follows:
sister Miguela. Upon her death, the will was Baldo-----------------450,000
presented for probate. Jorge opposed probate of the Wilma---------------250,000
will on the ground that the will was executed by his Elvira-----------------250,000
wife without his knowledge, much less consent, and Ernie-----------------50,000
that it deprived him of his legitime. After all, he had 1,000,000
given her no cause for disinheritance, added Jorge
in his opposition. How will you rule on Jorge's Q: Emil, the testator, has three legitimate children, Tom,
opposition to the probate of Maria's will. If you were Henry and Warlito; a wife named Adette; parents
the Judge? (1993 BAR) named Pepe and Pilar; an illegitimate child, Ramon;
brother, Mark; and a sister, Nanette. Since his wife
A: As Judge, I shall rule as follows: Jorge's opposition Adette is well-off, he wants to leave to his illegitimate
should be sustained in part and denied in part. Jorge's child as much of his estate as he can legally do. His
omission as spouse of Maria is not preterition of a estate has an aggregate net amount of P1, 200,
compulsory heir in the direct line. Hence, Art. 854 of the 000.00, and all the above-named relatives are still
Civil Code does not apply, and the institution of Miguela as living. Emil now comes to you for advice in making a
heir is valid, but only to the extent of the free portion of will. How will you distribute his estate according to
one-half. Jorge is still entitled to one-half of the estate as his wishes without violating the law on testamentary
his legitime (Art. 1001). succession? (2005 BAR)

Q: Mr. Palma, widower, has three daughters D, D-1 A: P600, 000.00 — legitime to be divided equally between
and D-2. He executes a Will disinheriting D because Tom, Henry and Warlito as the legitimate children. Each
she married a man he did not like, and instituting will be entitled to P200, 000.00. (Art. 888) P100, 000.00 –
daughters D-1 and D-2 as his heirs to his entire estate share of Ramon the illegitimate child. Equivalent to 1/2 of
of P 1,000,000.00, Upon Mr, Palma's death, how should the share of each legitimate child. (Art. 176, FC) P200,
his estate be divided? Explain. (1999, 2000 BAR) 000.00 — Adette the wife. Her share is equivalent to the
share of one legitimate child. (Art.892, par.2). Pepe and
A: This is a case of ineffective disinheritance because Pilar, the parents are only secondary compulsory heirs
marrying a man that the father did not approve of is not a and they cannot inherit if the primary compulsory heirs
ground for disinheriting D. Therefore, the institution of D- (legitimate children) are alive. (Art. 887, par. 2). Brother
1 and D-2 shall be annulled insofar as it prejudices the Mark and sister Nanette are not compulsory heirs since
legitime of D, and the institution of D-1 and D-2 shall only they are not included in the enumeration under Article 887
apply on the free portion in the amount of P500, 000.00. of the Civil Code.
Therefore, D, D-1 and D-2 will get their legitimes of P500,
000.00 divided into three equal parts and D-1 and D-2 The remaining balance of P300, 000.00 is the free
will get a reduced testamentary disposition of portion which can be given to the illegitimate child
P250,b000.00 each. Hence, the shares will be:

91
 CIVIL LAW
Ramon as an instituted heir (Art. 914). If so given by the
decedent, Ramon would receive a total of P400, 000.00. TORRENS SYSTEM (GENERAL PRINCIPLES) (1990, 1991,
1992, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2008, 2016
Q: Four children, namely: Alberto, Baldomero, Caridad, BAR)
and Dioscoro, were born to the spouses Conrado and
Clarita de la Costa. The children’s birth certificates Q: Macario bought a titled lot from Ramon, got the title
were duly signed by Conrado, showing them to be the and took possession of the lot. Since Macario did not
couple’s legitimate children. Later, one Edilberto de la have the money to pay the taxes, fees and registration
Cruz executed a notarial document acknowledging expenses, he was not able to register the Deed of
Alberto and Baldomero as his illegitimate children Absolute Sale. Upon advice, he merely executed an
with Clarita. Edilberto died leaving substantial Affidavit of Adverse Claim and had it annotated at the
properties. In the settlement of his estate, Alberto and back of the title. A few years after, he received a Notice
Baldomero intervened claiming shares as the of Levy on Attachment and Writ of Execution in favor of
deceased’s illegitimate children. The legitimate family Alex. The notice, writ and certificate of sale were
of Edilberto opposed the claim. Are Alberto and annotated at the back of the title still in Ramon's name.
Baldomero entitled to share in the estate of Edilberto? Alex contends that since the Affidavit of Adverse Claim
Explain. (2009 BAR) is effective only for 30 days from the date of its
registration, then its validity has expired. Macario
A: No, Alberto and Baldomero are not entitled to share in posits that the annotation of his adverse claim is notice
Edilberto’s estate. They are not related at all to Edilberto. to the whole world of his purchase of the lot in question.
They were born during the marriage of Conrado and Who has the superior right over the disputed property -
Clarita, hence, are considered legitimate children of the Macario or Alex? Explain. (2016 BAR)
said spouses. This status is conferred on them at birth by
law. A: Macario is preferred since the registration of his adverse
claim was made ahead of the notice of levy and writ of
Under Philippine law, a person cannot have more than one execution in favor of Alex. Macario’s adverse claim, coupled
natural filiation. The legitimate filiation of a person can be with the fact that he was in possession of the disputed
changed only if the legitimate father will successfully property, are circumstances which should have put Alex on
impugn such status. In the problem, therefore, the filiation constructive notce that the property being offered to him
of Alberto ad Baldomero as the legitimate children of had already been sold to another (Ching v. Enrile, G.R. No.
Conrado cannot be changed by their recognition by 156076 [2008]). The contention tht the adverse claim is
Edilberto as his illegitimate children. Before they can be effective only for 30 years is puerile. In Sajonas v. Court of
conferred the status of Edilberto’s illegitimate children, Appeals, 258 SCRA 79, (1996), the Court held that the
Conrado must first impugn their legitimacy. Since Conrado adverse claim does not ipso facto lose its validity since an
has not initiated any action to impugn their legitimacy, independent action is still necessary to render it ineffective.
they continue to be the legitimate children of Conrado. Until then, the adverse claim shal continue as a prior lien on
They cannot be the illegitimate children of Edilberto at the the property.
same time. Not being the illegitimate children of Edilberto,
they have no right to inherit from him. Q: Section 70 of Presidential Decree No. 1529,
concerning adverse claims on registered land,
Q: Because her eldest son Juan had been pestering provides a 30-day period of effectivity of an adverse
her for capital to start a business, Josefa gave him claim, counted from the date of its registration.
P100, 000. Five years later, Josefa died, leaving a last Suppose a notice of adverse claim based upon a
will and testament in which she instituted only her contract to sell was registered on March 1, 1997 at the
four younger children as her sole heirs. At the time of instance of the BUYER, but on June 1, 1997, or after
her death, her only properly left was P900, 000.00 in the lapse of the 30-day period, a notice of levy on
a bank. Juan opposed the will on the ground of execution in favor of a JUDGMENT CREDITOR was also
preterition. How should Josefa's estate be divided registered to enforce a final judgment for money
among her heirs? State briefly the reason(s) for your against the registered owner. Then, on June 15, 1997
answer. (2001 BAR) there having been no formal cancellation of his notice of
adverse claim, the BUYER pays to the seller-owner the
A: There was no preterition of the oldest son because agreed purchase price in full and registers the
the testatrix donated 100 ,000 pesos to him. This corresponding deed of sale. Because the annotation
donation is considered an advance on the son's inheritance. of the notice of levy is carried over to the new title in
There being no preterition, the institutions in the will shall his name, the BUYER brings an action against the
be respected but the legitime of the oldest son has to be JUDGMENT CREDITOR to cancel such annotation, but
completed if he received less. After collating the donation the latter claims that his lien is superior because
of P100, 000 to the remaining property of P900, 000, it was annotated after the adverse claim of the BUYER
the estate of the testatrix is P1, 000, 000. Of this had ipso facto ceased to be effective. Will the suit
amount, one-half or P500, 000, is the legitime of the prosper? (1998 BAR)
legitimate children and it follows that the legitime of
one legitimate child is P100, 000. The legitime, therefore, A: The suit will prosper. While an adverse claim duly
of the oldest son is P100, 000. However, since the donation annotated at the back of a title under Sec. 7O of P.D. 1529 is
given him was P100, 000, he has already received in full good only for 30 days, cancellation thereof is still
his legitime and he will not receive anything anymore from necessary to render it ineffective, otherwise, the
the decedent. The remaining P900, 000, therefore, shall go inscription thereof will remain annotated as a lien on the
to the four younger children by institution in the will, to be property. While the life of adverse claim is 3O days under
divided equally among them. Each will receive P225, 000. P.D. 1529, it continuous to be effective until it is cancelled
by formal petition filed with the Register of Deeds. The
cancellation of the notice of levy is justified under Sec.
PART XII – LAND TITLES AND DEEDS 108 of P.D. 1529 considering that the levy on execution
cannot be enforced against the buyer whose adverse

UST BAR OPERATIONS 92

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
claim against the registered owner was recorded ahead will prosper because she has a lease contract for the
of the notice of levy on execution. same land with the government.

Q: Mario sold his house and lot to Carmen for P1 Q: In 1979, Nestor applied for and was granted a Free
million payable in five (5) equal annual installments. Patent over a parcel of agricultural land with an area of
The sale was registered and title was issued in 30 hectares, located in General Santos City. He
Carmen's name. Carmen failed to pay the last three presented the Free Patent to the Register of Deeds, and
installments and Mario filed an action for collection, he was issued a corresponding Original Certificate of
damages and attorney’s fees against her. Upon filing Title (OCT) No. 375, Subsequently, Nestor sold the
of the complaint, he caused a notice of lis pendens to land to Eddie. The deed of sale was submitted to the
be annotated on Carmen's title. Is the notice of lis Register of Deeds and on the basis thereof, OCT No.
pendens proper or not? Why? (2001 BAR) 375 was cancelled and Transfer Certificate of Title
(TCT) No. 4576 was issued in the name of Eddie. In
A: The notice of lis pendens is not proper for the reason 1986, the Director of Lands filed a complaint for
that the case filed by Mario against Carmen is only for annulment of OCT No, 375 and TCT No. 4576 on the
collection, damages, and attorney's fees. Annotation of a ground that Nestor obtained the Free Patent through
lis pendens can only be done in cases involving fraud. Eddie filed a motion to dismiss on the ground
recovery of possession of real property, or to quiet title that he was an innocent purchaser for value and in
or to remove cloud thereon, or for partition or any other good faith and as such, he has acquired a title to the
proceeding affecting title to the land or the use or property which is valid, unassailable and indefeasible.
occupation thereof. The action filed by Mario does not fall Decide the motion. (2000 BAR)
on anyone of these.
A: The motion of Nestor to dismiss the complaint for
Q: Regina has been leasing foreshore land from the annulment of O.C.T. No. 375 and T.C.T. No. 4576 should be
Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources for the past denied for the following reasons:
15 years. Recently, she learned that Jorge was able to
obtain a free patent from the Bureau of Agriculture, 1. Eddie cannot claim protection as an innocent
covering the same land, on the basis of a certification purchaser for value nor can he interpose the defense of
by the District Forester that the same is already indefeasibility of his title, because his TCT is rooted on a
"alienable and disposable". Moreover, Jorge had void title. Under Section 91 of CA No. 141, as amended,
already registered the patent with the Register of otherwise known as the Public Land Act, statements
Deeds of the province, and he was issued an Original of material facts in the applications for public land
Certificate of Title for the same. Regina filed an must be under oath. Section 91 of the same act provides
action for annulment of Jorge's title on the ground that such statements shall be considered as essential
that it was obtained fraudulently. Will the action conditions and parts of the concession, title, or
prosper? (2000 BAR) permit issued any false statement therein, or
omission of facts shall ipso facto produce the
A: An action for the annulment of Jorge's Original cancellation of the concession. The patent issued to
Certificate of Title will prosper on the following grounds: Nestor in this case is void ab initio not only because it
was obtained by fraud but also because it covers 30
1. Under Chapter IX of C .A, No. 141, otherwise known as hectares which is far beyond the maximum of 24
the Public Land Act, foreshore lands are disposable for hectares provided by the free patent law.
residential, commercial, industrial, or similar 2. The government can seek annulment of the original
productive purposes, and only by lease when not and transfer certificates of title and the reversion of the
needed by the government for public service. land to the state. Eddie's defense is untenable. The
2. If the land is suited or actually used for fishpond or protection afforded by the Torrens System to an
aquaculture purposes, it comes under the Jurisdiction of innocent purchaser for value can be availed of only if
the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) the land has been titled thru judicial proceedings
and can only be acquired by lease. (P.D. 705) where the issue of fraud becomes academic after the
3. Free Patent is a mode of concession under Section 41, lapse of one year from the issuance of the decree of
Chapter VII of the Public Land Act, which is registration. In public land grants, the action of the
applicable only for agricultural lands. government to annul a title fraudulently obtained does
4. The certificate of the district forester that the land is not prescribe such action and will not be barred by the
already "alienable and disposable" simply means transfer of the title to an innocent purchaser for value.
that the land is no longer needed for forest purposes,
but the Bureau of Lands could no longer dispose of it by Q: Rod, the owner of an FX taxi, found in his
free patent because it is already covered by a lease vehicle an envelope containing TCT No. 65432 over a
contract between BFAR and Regina. That contract lot registered in Cesar's name. Posing as Cesar, Rod
must be respected. forged Cesar's signature on a Deed of Sale in Rod's
5. The free patent of Jorge is highly irregular and void ab favor. Rod registered the said document with the
initio, not only because the Bureau has no statutory Register of Deeds, and obtained a new title in his
authority to issue a free patent over a foreshore name. After a year, he sold the lot to Don, a buyer in
area, but also because of the false statements made good faith and for value, who also registered the lot in
in his sworn application that he has occupied and his name.
cultivated the land since July 4, 1945, as required by
the free patent law. Under Section 91 of the Public Land 1. Did Rod acquire title to the land? Explain.
Act, any patent concession or title obtained thru false 2. Discuss the rights of Don, if any, over the
representation is void ab initio. In cases of this nature, property. (1991, 2005 BAR)
it is the government that shall institute annulment
proceedings considering that the suit carries with it a A:
prayer for the reversion of the land to the estate.
However, Regina is a party in interest and the case
93
 CIVIL LAW
1. No, Rod did not acquire title to the land. The into the unit, but somehow he was not given the
inscription in the registry, to be effective, must be Condominium Certificate of Title covering the
made in good faith. The defense of indefeasibility of property. Unknown to him, High Rise Co. subsequently
a Torrens Title does not extend to a transferee who mortgaged the entire condominium building to
takes the certificate of title with notice of a flaw. A Metrobank as security for a loan of P500 million. High
holder in bad faith of a certificate of title is not Rise Co. failed to pay the loan and the bank
entitled to the protection of the law, for the law foreclosed the mortgage. At the foreclosure sale, the
cannot be used as a shield for frauds (Samonte v. bank acquired the building, being the highest
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104223, July 12, 2001). In the bidder. When Cesar learned about this, he filed an
case at bar, Rod only forged Cesar's signature on the action to annul the foreclosure sale insofar as his unit
Deed of Sale. It is very apparent that there was bad faith was concerned. The bank put up the defense that it
on the part of Rod from the very beginning. As such, he relied on the condominium certificates of title
is not entitled to the protection of the Land Registration presented by High Rise Co., which were clean. Hence, it
Act. was a mortgagee and buyer in good faith. Is this defense
2. It is a well-known rule in this jurisdiction that persons tenable or not? Why? (2001 BAR)
dealing with registered land have the legal right to
rely on the face of the Torrens Certificate of Title and A: Metrobank's defense is untenable. As a rule, an
to dispense with the need to inquire further, except innocent purchaser for value acquires a good and a clean
when the party concerned has actual knowledge of title to the property. However, it is settled that one who
facts and circumstances that would impel a closes his eyes to facts that should put a reasonable man on
reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry guard is not an innocent purchaser for value. In the
(Naawan Community Rural Bank v. Court of Appeals, present problem the bank is expected, as a matter of
G.R. No. 128573, January 13, 2003). In the given standard operating procedure, to have conducted an
problem, the property was already registered in the ocular inspection, of the promises before granting any
name of Rod when he bought the same from the latter. loan. Apparently, Metrobank did not follow this
Thus, Don could be considered as a buyer in good faith procedure. Otherwise, it should have discovered that the
and for value. However, since Rod did not actually condominium unit in question was occupied by Cesar and
sell any property to him, Don has no right to retain that fact should have led it to make further inquiry. Under
ownership over the property. He has only the right to the circumstances, Metrobank cannot be considered a
recover the purchase price plus damages. mortgagee and buyer in good faith.

Q: In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead Q: In 1950's, the Government acquired a big landed
patent to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to estate in Central Luzon from the registered owner for
B. A died in 1990, and his heirs filed an action to subdivision into small farms and redistribution of
recover the homestead from B on the ground that its bonafide occupants, F was a former lessee of a parcel of
sale by their father to the latter is void under Section land, five hectares in area. After completion of the
118 of the Public Land Law. B contends, however, that resurvey and subdivision, F applied to buy the said land
the heirs of A cannot recover the homestead from him in accordance with the guidelines of the implementing
anymore because their action has prescribed and that agency. Upon full payment of the price in 1957, the
furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide. (1999 BAR) corresponding deed of absolute sale was executed in
his favor and was registered, and in 1961, a new title
A: The sale of the land by A to B 3 years after issuance of was issued in his name. In 1963, F sold the said land to X;
the homestead patent, being in violation of Sec. 118 of the and in 1965 X sold it to Y, new titles were
Public Land Act, is void from its inception The action filed successively issued in the names of the said
by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence of purchasers. In 1977, C filed an action to annul the deeds
the contract and to recover the land should be given due of sale to F, X and Y and their titles, on the ground that
course. B's defense of prescription is untenable because he (C) had been in actual physical possession of the
an action which seeks to declare the nullity or inexistence land, and that the sale to F and the subsequent sales
of A contract does not prescribe. On the other hand, B's should be set aside on the ground of fraud. Upon
defense of pari delicto is equally untenable. While as a motion of defendants, the trial court dismissed the
rule, parties who are in pari delicto have no recourse complaint, upholding their defenses of their being
against each other on the principle that a transgressor innocent purchasers for value, prescription and
cannot profit from his own wrongdoing, such rule does laches. Plaintiff appealed.
not apply to violations of Sec. 118 of the Public Land Act
because of the underlying public policy in the said Act "to 1. Is the said appeal meritorious? Explain your answer.
conserve the land which a homesteader has acquired by 2. Suppose the government agency concerned joined C
gratuitous grant from the government for himself and his in filing the said action against the defendants,
family". In keeping with this policy, it has been held that would that change the result of the litigation?
one who purchases a homestead within the five-year Explain. (1990 BAR)
prohibitory period can only recover the price which he has
paid by filing a claim against the estate of the deceased A:
seller (Labrador v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 44947, November
26, 1938) under the principle that no one shall enrich 1. No, the appeal is not meritorious. The trial court
himself at the expense of another. Applying the pari delicto ruled correctly in granting defendant's motion to
rule to violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, the dismiss for the following reasons:
Court of Appeals has ruled that "the homesteader suffers a) While there is the possibility that F, a former lessee
the loss of the fruits realized by the vendee who in turn of the land was aware of the fact that C was the
forfeits the improvement that he has introduced into the bonafide occupant thereof and for this reason his
land." (Obot v. Sandadiuas, 69 OG, April 35, 1966) transfer certificate of title may be vulnerable, the
transfer of the same land and the issuance of new
Q: Cesar bought a residential condominium unit TCTs to X and Y who are innocent purchasers for
from High Rise Co. and paid the price in full. He moved value render the latter's titles indefeasible. A

UST BAR OPERATIONS 94

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
person dealing with registered land may safely
rely on the correctness of the certificate of title Q: Rommel was issued a certificate of title over a parcel
and the law will not in any way oblige him to go of land in Quezon City. One year later Rachelle, the
behind the certificate to determine the condition legitimate owner of the land, discovered the
of the property in search for any hidden defect fraudulent registration obtained by Rommel. She filed
or inchoate right which may later invalidate or a complaint against Rommel for reconveyance and
diminish the right to the land. This is the mirror caused the annotation of a notice of lis pendens on
principle of the Torrens System of land registration. the certificate of title issued to Rommel. Rommel
b) The action to annul the sale was instituted in now invokes the indefeasibility of his title
1977 or more than (10) years from the date of considering that one year has already elapsed from its
execution thereof in 1957, hence, it has long issuance. He also seeks the cancellation of the notice of
prescribed. Lis pendens.
c) Under Sec 45 of Act 496, “the entry of a
certificate of title shall be regarded as an 1. May the court cancel the notice of lis pendens even
agreement running with the land, and binding before final judgment is rendered? Explain.
upon the applicant and all his successors in title 2. Will Rachelle's suit for reconveyance prosper?
that the land shall be and always remain Explain. (1995 BAR)
registered land. A title under Act 496 is A:
indefeasible and to preserve that character, the
title is cleansed anew with every transfer for 1. A Notice of Lis Pendens may be cancelled even
value (De Jesus v. City of Manila, G.R. No. 9337, before final Judgment upon proper showing that the
December 24, 1914; Laperal v. City of Manila, G.R. notice is for the purpose of molesting or harassing the
No. L-42792, October 23, 1935; Penullar v. PNB, G.R. adverse party or that the notice of lis pendens is not
No. L-32762, January 27, 1983). necessary to protect the right of the party who caused it
2. Even if the government joins C, this will not alter the to be registered. (Sec. 77, P.D. No. 1529) In this case, it is
outcome of the case so much because of estoppel as given that Rachelle is the legitimate owner of the land
an express provision in Sec. 45 of Act 496 and Sec. 31 in question. It can be said, therefore, that when she
of PD 1529 that a decree of registration and the filed her notice of lis pendens her purpose was to
certificate of title issued in pursuance thereof “shall be protect her interest in the land and not just to
conclusive upon and against all persons, including the molest Rommel. It is necessary to record the lis
national government and all branches thereof, pendens to protect her interest because if she did not
whether mentioned by name in the application or do it, there is a possibility that the land will fall into
not.” the hands of an innocent purchaser for value and in
that event, the court loses control over the land
Q: The spouses X and Y mortgaged a piece of registered making any favorable judgment thereon moot and
land to A, delivering as well the OCT to the latter, academic. For these reasons, the notice of lis pendens
but they continued to possess and cultivate the land, may not be cancelled.
giving 1/2 of each harvest to A in partial payment of 2. Yes, Rachelle's suit will prosper because all elements for
their loan to the latter, A, however, without the an action for reconveyance are present, namely:
knowledge of X and Y, forged a deed of sale of the a. Rachelle is claiming dominical rights over the same
aforesaid land in favor of himself, got a TCT in his land.
name, and then sold the land to B, who bought the land b. Rommel procured his title to the land by fraud.
relying on A's title, and who thereafter also got a TCT c. The action was brought within the statutory period
in his name. It was only then that the spouses X of four (4) years from discovery of the fraud and not
and Y learned that their land had been titled in B's later than ten (10) years from the date of
name. May said spouses file an action for registration of Rommel's title.
reconveyance of the land in question against b? Reason. d. Title to the land has not passed into the hands of an
(1999 BAR) innocent purchaser for value.

A: The action of X and Y against B for reconveyance of the Rommel can invoke the indefeasibility of his title if
land will not prosper because B has acquired a clean title to Rachelle had filed a petition to reopen or review the
the property being an innocent purchaser for value. A decree of registration. But Rachelle instead filed an
forged deed is an absolute nullity and conveys no title. ordinary action in personam for reconveyance. In the
The fact that the forged deed was registered and a latter action, indefeasibility is not a valid defense
certificate of title was issued in his name, did not operate to because, in filing such action, Rachelle is not seeking to
vest upon an ownership over the property of XandY. nullify nor to impugn the indefeasibility of Rommel's
The registration of the forged deed will not cure the title. She is only asking the court to compel Rommel to
infirmity. However, once the title to the land is registered in reconvey the title to her as the legitimate owner of the
the name of the forger and title to the land thereafter land.
falls into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, the
latter acquires a clean title thereto. A buyer of a Q: Sancho and Pacifico are co-owners of a parcel of
registered land is not required to explore beyond what land. Sancho sold the property to Bart. Pacifico sued
the record in the registry indicates on its face inquest for Sancho and Bart for annulment of the sale and
any hidden defector inchoate right which may reconveyance of the property based on the fact that
subsequently defeat his right thereto. This is the "mirror the sale included his one-half pro-indiviso share.
principle” of the Torrens system which makes it possible Pacifico had a notice of lis pendens annotated on the
for a forged deed to be the root of a good title. Besides, it title covering the property and ordered the
appears that spouses X and Y are guilty of contributory cancellation of the notice of lis pendens. The notice of
negligence when they delivered this OCT to the lis pendens could not be cancelled immediately
mortgagee without annotating the mortgage thereon. because the title over the property was with a bank to
Between them and the innocent purchaser for value, they which the property had been mortgaged by Bart.
should bear the loss. Pacifico appealed the case. While the appeal was
95
 CIVIL LAW
pending and with the notice of lis pendens still the certificate of title of her predecessor-in-interest.
uncancelled, Bart sold the property to Carlos, who Under the Torrens system, a buyer of registered lands
immediately caused the cancellation of the notice of lis is not required by law to inquire further than what the
pendens, as well as the issuance of a new title in his Torrens certificate indicates on its face. If a person
name. proceeds to buy it relying on the title, that person is
considered as buyer in good faith
1. Is Carlos (a) a purchaser in good faith, or (b) a
transferee pendente lite? The “priority in time” rule could not be invoked by XYZ
2. If your answer is (a), how can the right of Bank because the foreclosure sale of the land in favour
Pacifico as co-owner be protected? Explain. (1995, of the bank was recorded under Act No. 3344, the law
2002 BAR) governing transaction affecting unregistered land, and
thus, does not bind the land.
A:
2. Between Dehlma and the bank, the former has a better
1. Carlos is a buyer in bad faith. The notice of lis right to the house and lot.
pendens was still annotated at the back of the title at
the time he bought the land from Bart. The Q: In an action brought to collect a sum of money
uncancelled notice of lis pendens operates as based on a surety agreement, the defense of laches
constructive notice of its contents as well as interests, was raised as the claim was filed more than seven
legal or equitable, included therein. All persons are years from the maturity of the obligation. However, the
charged with the knowledge of what it contains. In an action was brought within the ten-year prescriptive
earlier case, it was held that a notice of an adverse period provided by law wherein actions based on
claim remains effective and binding written contracts can be instituted. Will the defense
notwithstanding the lapse of the 30 days from its prosper? Reason. (2000 BAR)
inscription in the registry. This ruling is even more
applicable in a lis pendens. Carlos is a transferee A: No, the defense will not prosper. The problem did not
pendente lite insofar as Sancho’s share in the co- give facts from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay in
ownership in the land is concerned because the land filing an action, standing alone, does not constitute laches
was transferred to him during the pendency of the (Agra v. PNB, G.R. No. 133317, June 29, 1999).
appeal.
2. Pacifico can protect his right as a co-owner by Q: Way back in 1948, Winda’s husband sold in favor of
pursuing his appeal; asking the Court of Appeals to Verde Sports Center Corp. (Verde) a 10-hectare
order the re-annotation of the lis pendens on the title property belonging to their conjugal partnership. The
of Carlos; and by invoking his right of redemption sale was made without Winda’s knowledge, much less
of Bart’s share under Art. 1620. consent. In 1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she
discovered the deed of sale among the documents in her
Q: Juliet offered to sell her house and lot, together with husband’s vault after his demise. Soon after, she noticed
all the furniture and appliances therein to Dehlma. that the construction of the sports complex had started.
Before agreeing to purchase the property, Dehlma Upon completion of the construction in 1952, she tried
went to the Register of Deeds to verify Juliet's title. She but failed to get free membership privileges in Verde.
discovered that while the property was registered in
Juliet's name under the Land Registration Act, as Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment
amended by the Property Registration Decree, it of the sale on the ground that she did not consent to the
property, Dehlma told Juliet to redeem the property sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with
from Elaine, and gave her an advance payment to be the Spanish Civil Code which was then in force, the sale
used for purposes of releasing the mortgage on the in 1948 of the property did not need her concurrence.
property. When the mortgage was released, Juliet Verde contends that in any case the action has
executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the property prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda rejoins that
which was duly registered with the Registry of Deeds, her Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible,
and a new TCT was issued in Dehlma's name. Dehlma and imprescriptible.
immediately took possession over the house and lot
and the movables therein. Thereafter, Dehlma went to 1. Define or explain the term ―laches.
the Assessor's Office to get a new tax declaration 2. Decide the case, stating your reasons for your
under her name. She was surprised to find out that the decision. (2002 BAR)
property was already declared for tax purposes in the A:
name of XYZ Bank which had foreclosed the mortgage
on the property before it was sold to her. XYZ Bank 1. LACHES means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable
was also the purchaser in the foreclosure sale of the and unexplained length of time, to do what, by
property. At that time, the property was still exercising due diligence, could or should have been
unregistered but XYZ Bank registered the Sheriff's done earlier. It is negligence or omission to assert a
Deed of Conveyance in the day book of the Register of right within a reasonable time (De Vera v. CA, G.R. No.
Deeds under Act. 3344 and obtained a tax declaration 97761, April 14, 1999).
in its name. 2. While Art. 1413 of the Spanish Civil Code did not
require the consent of the wife for the validity of the
1. Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith? sale, an alienation by the husband in fraud of the wife is
2. Who as between Dehlma and XYZ Bank has a void as held in Uy Coque v. Navas (G.R. No. L-20392,
better right to the house and lot? (2008 BAR) November 20, 1923). Assuming that the alienation in
A: 1948 was in fraud of Winda and, therefore, makes the
sale to Verde void, the action to set aside the sale,
1. Yes, Dehlma is a purchaser in good faith. She learned nonetheless, is already barred byprescription and
about the XYZ tax declaration and foreclosure sale laches. More than 52 years have already elapsed from
only after the sale to her was registered. She relied on her discovery of the sale in 1950.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 96

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
the sale, X took possession of the Pangasinan parcel
Q: In 1965, Renren bought from Robyn a parcel of in the belief that it was the Tarlac parcel covered by
registered land evidenced by a duly executed deed of the deed of sale executed by A and X. After twelve (12)
sale. The owner presented the deed of sale and the years, a controversy arose between B and X on the
owner's certificate of title to the Register of Deeds. The issue of the ownership of the Pangasinan parcel, B
entry was made in the daybook and corresponding fees claims a vested right of ownership over the
were paid as evidenced by official receipt. However, Pangasinan parcel because B never sold that parcel
no transfer of certificate of title was issued to Renren to X or to anyone else. On the other hand, X claims a
because the original certificate of title in Robyn's name vested right of ownership over the Pangasinan parcel
was temporarily misplaced after fire partly gutted the by acquisitive prescription, because X possessed this
Office of the Register of Deeds. Meanwhile, the land parcel for over ten (10] years under claim of
had been possessed by Robyn's distant cousin, ownership. Decide on these claims, giving your reasons.
Mikaelo, openly, adversely and continuously in the (1992 BAR)
concept of owner since 1960. It was only in April 1998
that Renren sued Mikaelo to recover possession. A: At this point in time, X cannot claim the right of
Mikaelo invoked: vested ownership over the Pangasinan parcel by
acquisitive prescription. In addition to the requisites
a) acquisitive prescription common to ordinary and extraordinary acquisitive
b) laches, asking that he be declared owner of the prescription consisting of uninterrupted, peaceful,
land. public, adverse and actual possession in the concept of
owner, ordinary acquisitive prescription for ten (10)
Decide the case by evaluating these defenses. (1998 years requires (1) possession in good faith and (2) just
BAR) title. "Just title" means that the adverse claimant came into
possession of the property through one of the modes
A: recognized by law for the acquisition of ownership but
the grantor was not the owner or could not transmit
a) Renren's action to recover possession of the land will any right (Art.1129). In this case, there is no "just title"
prosper. In 1965, after buying the land from Robyn, and no "mode" that can be invoked by X for the
he submitted the Deed of Sale to the Registry of acquisition of the Pangasinan parcel. There was no
Deeds for registration together with the owner's constructive delivery of the Pangasinan parcel because it
duplicate copy of the title, and paid the was not the subject-matter of the deed of sale. Hence, B
corresponding registration fees. Under Sec. 56 of PD retains ownership of the Pangasinan parcel of land.
No. 1529, the Deed of Sale to Renren is considered
registered from the time the sale was entered in the ORIGINAL REGISTRATION (1992, 1994, 2003, 2013,
Day Book (now called the Primary Entry Book). For all 2014 BAR)
legal intents and purposes, Renren is considered the
registered owner of the land. After all, it was not his Q: Louie, before leaving the country to train as a chef in
fault that the Registry of Deeds could not issue the a five-star hotel in New York, U.S.A., entrusted to his
corresponding transfer certificate of title. Mikaelo's first-degree cousin Dewey an application for
defense of prescription cannot be sustained. A registration, under the Land Registration Act, of a
Torrens title is imprescriptible. No title to registered parcel of land located in Bacolod City. A year later,
land in derogation of the title of the registered Louie returned to the Philippines and discovered that
owner shall be acquired by prescription or adverse Dewey registered the land and obtained an Original
possession (Sec. 47, P.D. No. 1529). The right to recover Certificate of Title over the property in his Dewey’s
possession of registered land likewise does not name. Compounding the matter, Dewey sold the land
prescribe because possession is just a necessary to Huey, an innocent purchaser for value. Louie
incident of ownership. promptly filed an action for reconveyance of the
b) Mikaelo's defense of laches, however, appears to be parcel of land against Huey.
more sustainable. Renren bought the land and had the
sale registered way back in 1965. From the facts, it 1. Is the action pursued by Louie the proper remedy?
appears that it was only in 1998 or after an 2. Assuming that reconveyance is the proper remedy,
inexplicable delay of 33 years that he took the first will the action prosper if the case was filed beyond
step asserting his right to the land. It was not even one year, but within ten years, from the entry of
an action to recover ownership but only the decree of registration? (2003 BAR)
possession of the land. By ordinary standards, 33
years of neglect or inaction is too long and maybe A:
considered unreasonable. As often held by the
Supreme Court, the principle of imprescriptibility 1. An action for reconveyance against Huey is not the
sometimes has to yield to the equitable principle of proper remedy, because Huey is an innocent
laches which can convert even a registered land purchaser for value. The proper recourse is for
owner's claim into a stale demand. Mikaelo's claim of Louie to go after Dewey for damages by reason of the
laches, however, is weak insofar as the element of fraudulent registration and subsequent sale of the
equity is concerned, there being no showing in the land. If Dewey is insolvent, Louie may file a claim
facts how he entered into the ownership and possession against the Assurance Fund (Heirs of Pedro Lopez v. De
of the land. Castro, G.R. No. 112905, February 3, 2000 citing Sps.
Eduarte v. CA, G.R. No. 105944, February 9, 1996).
Q: A owned a parcel of unregistered land located on the 2. Yes, the remedy will prosper because the action
Tarlac side of the boundary between Tarlac and prescribes in ten (10) years, not within one (1) year
Pangasinan. His brother B owned the adjoining parcel when a petition for the reopening of the registration
of unregistered land on the Pangasinan side. A sold the decree may be filed. The action for reconveyance is
Tarlac parcel to X in a deed of sale executed as a public distinct from the petition to reopen the decree of
instrument by A and X. After X paid in full the price of registration (Grey Alba v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 5246,
97
 CIVIL LAW
September 16, 1910). There is no need to reopen the
registration proceedings, but the property should just A:
be reconveyed to the real owner. The action for
reconveyance is based on implied or constructive 1. No, I will not grant the application. To be entitled to
trust, which prescribes in ten (10) years from the registration of the parcel of land, the applicant must
date of issuance of the original certificate of title. This show that the land being applied for is alienable land.
rule assumes that the defendant is in possession of the At the time of the filing of the application, the land has
land. Where it is the plaintiff who is in possession of the not yet been declared alienable by the state (Republic
land, the action for reconveyance would be in the v. CA, G.R. No. 144057, January 17, 2005).
nature of a suit for quieting for the title which action is 2. Cornelio can acquire the land by acquisitive
imprescriptible (David v. Malay, G.R. No. 132644, prescription only after it was declared part of
November 19, 1999). alienable land by the state by possession for the
required number of years for ordinary prescription,
Q: What are the essential requisites or elements for ten years possession in good faith with just title or
the allowance of the reopening or review of a decree extraordinary prescription by possession for thirty
of registration? (1992 BAR) years without need of any other condition (Art. 1134).

A: The essential elements are: (1) that the petitioner has a Q: Manuel was born on 12 March 1940 in a 1000-
real or dominical right; (2) that he has been deprived square meter property where he grew up helping his
thereof through fraud; (3) that the petition is filed within father, Michael, cultivate the land. Michael has lived on
one (1) year from the issuance of the decree; and (4) that the property since the land was opened for settlement
the property has not yet been transferred to an innocent at about the time of the Commonwealth government in
purchaser (Rublico vs. Orellana, G.R. No. L-26582, 193 5, but for some reason never secured any title to
November 28, 1969; Libudan vs. Palma Gil, G.R. No. L-21163, the property other than a tax declaration in his name.
May 17, 1972). He has held the property through the years in the
concept of an owner and his stay was uncontested by
Q: Distinguish the Torrens system of land registration others. He has also conscientiously and continuously
from the system of recording of evidence of title. (1994 paid the realty taxes on the land. Michael died in 2000
BAR) and Manuel - as Michael’s only son and heir -now
wants to secure and register title to the land in his own
A: name. He consults you for legal advice as he wants to
perfect his title to the land and secure its registration
1. The TORRENS SYSTEM OF LAND REGISTRATION is a in his name.
system for the registration of title to the land. Thus,
under this system what is entered in the Registry of 1. What are the laws that you need to consider in
Deeds, is a record of the owner's estate or interest in advising Manuel on how he can perfect his title
the land, unlike the system under the Spanish and register the land in his name? Explain the
Mortgage Law or the system under Sec. 194 of the relevance of these laws to your projected course of
Revised Administrative Code as amended by Act 3344 action.
where only the evidence of such title is recorded. In 2. What do you have to prove to secure Manuel's
the latter system, what is recorded is the deed of objectives and what documentation is necessary?
conveyance from hence the owner's title emanated— (2013 BAR)
and not the title itself.
2. Torrens system of land registration is that which is A:
prescribed in Act 496 (now PD 1529), which is either
Judicial or quasi-judicial. System or recording of 1. I would advise Manuel to file an application for
evidence of title is merely the registration of evidence registration under Sec. 14 of Pres. Decree No. 1529, or
of acquisitions of land with the Register of Deeds, who the Property Registration Decree (PRD), specifically
annotates the same on the existing title, cancels the Sec. 14 (1)which requires (a) that the land applied for
old one and issues a new title based on the document forms part of the alienable and disposable (A & D)
presented for registration. portion of the public domain, and (b) that the
applicant has been in open, continuous and notorious
Q: On March 27, 1980, Cornelio filed an application for possession and occupation thereof under a bona fide
land registration involving a parcel of agricultural claim of ownership since June 12, 1945, or earlier.
land that he had bought from Isaac identified as Lot However, it is only necessary that the land is already
No. 2716 with an area of one (1) hectare. During the declared A & D land “at the time the application for
trial, Cornelio claimed that he and his predecessors-in- registration is filed" (Malabanan v. Republic, G.R. No.
interest had been in open, continuous, uninterrupted, 180067, June 30, 2009).
public and adverse possession and occupation of the
land for more than thirty (30) years. He likewise Manuel could also invoke Sec. 14 (2) of the same
introduced in evidence a certification dated February Decree, which allows registration through ordinary
12, 1981 citing a presidential declaration to the effect acquisitive prescription for thirty years, provided,
that on June 14, 1980, agricultural lands of the public however, that the land is “patrimonial” in character,
domain, including the subject matter of the i.e., already declared by the government (a) as A & D
application, were declared alienable and disposable land, and (b) no longer needed for public use or public
agricultural land. service (Id).

1. If you are the judge, will you grant the application Manuel could also file an application for “confirmation
for land registration of Cornelio? of imperfect or incomplete title" through "judicial
2. Can Cornelio acquire said agricultural land legalization under Sec. 48 (b) of CA No. 141 or the
through acquisitive prescription, whether Public Land Act (PLA). But, as held in Malabanan, there
ordinary or extraordinary? (2014 BAR) is no substantial difference between this provision and

UST BAR OPERATIONS 98

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Sec. 14 (1), PRD. Both refer to agricultural lands deed of sale, the sellers expressly undertook to submit
already classified us alienable and disposable at the the deed of sale to the land registration court so that
time the application is filed, and require possession the title to the property would be directly issued in
and occupation since June 12, 1945. The only Juan's name.
difference is that under the PRD, there already exists a
title which is to he confirmed, whereas under the PLA, 1. Is such a stipulation valid?
the presumption is that land is still public land 2. Distinguish a direct attack from a collateral attack
(Republic v. Aquino, G.R. No. L-33983, January 27, on a title.
1983). 3. If the title in Item XX.A is issued in the names of
the original sellers, would a motion filed by Juan in
Manuel may also invoke “vested rights" acquired the same case to correct or amend the title in
under R.A. No. 1942 dated June 2, 1957, which order to reflect his name as owner considered be
amended Sec. 48 (b), PLA by providing for a collateral attack? (2015 BAR)
prescriptive period of thirty years or judicial
confirmation of imperfect title. It must only be A:
demonstrated that possession and occupation
commenced on January 24, 1947 and the 30-year 1. Yes, because when one who is not the owner of the
period was completed prior to the effectivity of PD No. property sells or alienates it and later the seller or
1073 on January 25, 1977. PD No. 1073 now requires grantor acquires title, such title passes by operation of
possession and occupation since June 12, 1945 law to the buyer or grantee (Art. 1434).
(Republic v. Espinosa, G.R. No. 171514, July 18, 2012). 2. A direct attack on a title is one where the action filed is
precisely for the purpose of pointing out the defects in
Another alternative is for Manuel to secure title the title with a prayer that it be declared void. A
through administrative proceedings under the collateral attack is one where the action is not
homestead or free patent provisions of the PLA. The instituted for the purpose of attacking the title but the
title issued has the same efficacy and validity as a title nullity of the title is raised as a defense in a different
issued through judicial proceedings, but with the action.
limitation that the land cannot be sold or disposed of 3. No, because Juan is not attacking the title but merely
within five years from the issuance of patent (Sec. 118, invoking his right as transferee. Hence, it does not
CA No. 141, as amended). involve a collateral attack on the title.

2. Manuel has the burden to overcome the presumption NON-REGISTRABLE PROPERTIES (2007 BAR)
of State ownership by “well-nigh incontrovertible”
evidence (Ong v. Republic, G.R. No. 175746, March 12, Q: Bedrock Land & Property Development Corp. is a
2008). Accordingly, he must show that the land is development company engaged in developing and
already classified as A & D “at the time the application selling subdivisions, condominium units and
for registration is filed" and that he has been in industrial estates. In order to replenish its inventories,
“possession and occupation thereof" in the manner it embarked on an aggressive land banking program. It
required by law since June 12, 1945, or earlier. employed "scouts" who roam all over the Philippines
to look for and conduct investigations on prospective
Manuel may tack his possession to that of his sites for acquisition and development, whether
predecessor-in-interest (Michael) by the testimony of developed, semi-developed or raw land. The
disinterested and knowledgeable eyewitnesses. Overt management of Bedrock asks you as the company
acts of possession may consist in introducing valuable counsel to prepare a manual containing a summary of
improvements like fencing the land, constructing a the pertinent laws and regulations relating to land
residential house thereon, cultivating the land and registration and acquisition of title to land. The
planting fruit hearing trees, declaring the land for manual should include the following items:
taxation purposes and paying realty taxes, all of which
are corroborative proof of possession. 1. What is the governing law?
2. What properties are not registrable? (2007 BAR)
To identify the land, he must submit the tracing cloth
plan or a duly-certified blueprint or whiteprint copy A:
thereof (Director of Lands v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-27594,
November 28, 1975; Director of Lands v. CA and Iglesia 1. The governing law is the Land Registration Act as
ni Cristo, GR No. L-56613, March 14, 1988). amended by Property Registration Decree (Act 496 as
amended by PD 1529).
To show the classification of the land as A & D, the 2. The following properties are not registrable:
application must be accompanied by (1) a CENRO or a. Properties of the Public Dominion;
PENRO certification; and (2) a certified true copy of b. Properties for publis use or public service;
the original classification approved by the DENR c. Inalienable lands of the public domain;
Secretary (Republic v. Bantigue, G.R. No. 162322, March d. Military installations, civil and quasi public lands;
14, 2012). A presidential or legislative act may also be and
considered. e. All lands not classified as alienable and disposable.

SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION (2015 BAR) DEALINGS WITH UNREGISTERED LANDS (2000 BAR)

Q: Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz filed an Q: Republic Act 1899 authorizes municipalities and
application for registration of a parcel of land which chartered cities to reclaim foreshore lands bordering
after due proceedings was granted by the RTC acting them and to construct thereon adequate docking and
registration as land court. However, before the decree harbor facilities. Pursuant thereto, the City of Cavite
of registration could be issued, the spouses Roman and entered into an agreement with the Fil-Estate Realty
the spouses Cruz sold the lot to Juan. In the notarized Company, authorizing the latter to reclaim 300 hectares
99
 CIVIL LAW
of land from the sea bordering the city, with 30% of the To prove actual damages, aside from the testimony of my
land to be reclaimed to be owned by Fil-Estate as client, I will present his hospital and medical bills. Receipts
compensation for its services. The Solicitor General of the fees paid on the rehabilitation will also be presented.
questioned the validity of the agreement on the ground Furthermore, I will present income tax returns, contracts
that it will mean reclaiming land under the sea which is and other documents to prove unrealized profits as a
beyond the commerce of man. The City replies that this result of this temporary injury.I will also call the attending
is authorized by RA. 1899 because it authorizes the physician to testify as to the extent of the injuries suffered
construction of docks and harbors. Who is correct? by my client, and to corroborate the contents of the
(2000 BAR) medical documents.

A: The Solicitor General is correct. The authority of the City Based on Art. 2202, in quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be
of Cavite under RA 1899 to reclaim land is limited to liable for all damages which are the natural and probable
foreshore lands. The Act did not authorize it to reclaim land consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is
from the sea. "The reclamation being unauthorized, the City not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or
of Cavite did not acquire ownership over the reclaimed land. could have been foreseen by the defendant.
Not being the owner, it could not have conveyed any portion
thereof to the contractor. Unlike actual damages, no proof of pecuniary loss is
necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate,
liquidated or exemplary damages may be adjudicated. The
PART XIII – TORTS AND DAMAGES assessment is left to the discretion of the Court (Art. 2216).
There must still be proof of pecuniary estimation,
however.
Book I – Torts/Quasi-Delicts
Articles 2176 – 2194 (Civil Code) Moral damages can be recovered by my client under Arts.
2219 and 2200. Moral damages may be recovered in case
DEFINITION, ELEMENTS (1994, 2002, 2010, 2012, 2013 of a quasi-delict causing physical injuries. Additionally, it
BAR) must be proved that such damages were the proximate
result of the act complained of. Medical certificates will be
Q: A collision occurred at an intersection involving a presented, along with the testimony from my client and
bicycle and a taxicab. Both the bicycle rider (a other eyewitness accounts, in order to support the award
businessman then doing his morning exercise) and the for moral damages.
taxi driver claimed that the other was at fault. Based
on the police report, the bicycle crossed the Exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted
intersection first but the taxicab, crossing at a fast clip in wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent
from the bicycle's left, could not brake in time and hit manner. While the amount of exemplary damages need not
the bicycle's rear wheel, toppling it and throwing the be proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to
bicycle rider into the sidewalk 5 meters away. moral or compensatory damages. In support of this, I will
present the police report showing the circumstances under
The bicycle rider suffered a fractured right knee, which the accident took place, taking into account the
sustained when he fell on his right side on the concrete actions of the parties. I will ask the officials who responded
side walk. He was hospitalized and was subsequently to the accident to testify as to the conduct of the parties at
operated on, rendering him immobile for 3 weeks and the time of the accident in order to determine whether
requiring physical rehabilitation for another 3 defendant was guilty of gross negligence.
months. In his complaint for damages, the rider
prayed for the award of P1, 000, 000 actual damages, Finally, attorney’s fees may be recovered when exemplary
P200, 000 moral damages, P200, 000 exemplary damages are awarded (Art. 2208).
damages, P100, 000 nominal damages and P50, 000
attorney's fees. Q: Roberto was in Nikko Hotel when he bumped into a
friend who was then on her way to a wedding
Assuming the police report to be correct and as the reception being held in said hotel. Roberto alleged that
lawyer for the bicycle rider, what evidence he was then invited by his friend to join her at the
(documentary and testimonial) and legal arguments wedding reception and carried the basket full of fruits
will you present in court to justify the damages that which she was bringing to the affair. At the reception,
your client claims? (1994, 2002, 2013 BAR) the wedding coordinator of the hotel noticed him and
asked him, allegedly in a loud voice, to leave as he was
A: I will base the claim of my client on quasi-delict under not in the guest list. He retorted that he had been
Art. 2176. invited to the affair by his friend, who however denied
doing so. Deeply embarrassed by the incident, Roberto
The requisites for a claim under quasi-delict to prosper are then sued the hotel for damages under Articles 19 and
as follows: 21 of the Civil Code. Will Roberto’s action prosper?
Explain. (2012 BAR)
1. Act or omission, there being fault or negligence;
2. Damage or injury; and A: It depends. While the hotel has the right to exclude an
3. Causal connection between the damage and the act or uninvited guest from the wedding reception, that does not
omission. give the hotel the license to humiliate Roberto. If the
wedding coordinator of the hotel acted wrongfully e.g.
The case clearly involves a quasi-delict where my client, with abuse of right, unfairly, or in a manner that exposed
the bicycle rider, suffered injury as a result of the Roberto to unnecessary ridicule or shame, his action will
negligence of the over-speeding taxi driver, without fault proper. Otherwise, Roberto’s action will prosper. The hotel
on my client’s part. is liable for the wrongful acts of its employees.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 100

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
Q: Define quasi tort. Who are the persons liable under Q: Liwayway Vinzons-Chato was then the
quasi torts and what are the defenses available to Commissioner of Internal Revenue while Fortune
them? (2010 BAR) Tobacco Corporation is an entity engaged in the
manufacture of different brands of cigarettes, among
A: Quasi-tort is considered as the equivalent of quasi- which are "Champion," "Hope," and "More" cigarettes.
delict. Hence the rules of the latter pertaining to persons
who can be held liable and their defenses would also apply. Fortune filed a complaint against Vinzons-Chato to
recover damages for the alleged violation of its
Those liable for quasi-delict include: constitutional rights arising from Vinzons-Chato’s
issuance of Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 37-934
1. Those tortfeasor or the person causing damage to (which re-classified Fortune cigarettes as locally
another through fault or negligence (Art. 2176); and manufactured with foreign brands and thereby
2. Persons vicariously liable under Art. 2180. imposed higher taxes), which the Supreme Court later
declared invalid.
The defenses available include:
a. That the defendant was not negligent or that he Vinzons-Chato filed a Motion to dismiss arguing that
exercised due diligence (Art. 2176); she cannot be held liable for damages for acts she
b. That although the defendant is negligent his performed while in the discharge of her duties as BIR
negligence is not the proximate cause of the injury Commissioner. Is she correct? Explain (2012 BAR)
(Art. 2179);
c. That the plaintiff's own negligence was the immediate A: Yes. As a general rule, a public officer is not liable for
and proximate cause of his injury (Art. 2179); acts performed in the discharge of his duties. The
d. That the person vicariously liable has observed all the exceptions are when he acted with malice, bad faith, or
diligence of a good father of a family to prevent gross negligence in the performance of his duty, or when
damage (Art. 2180); and his act is in violation of the constitutionally guaranteed
e. That the cause of action has prescribed after the lapse rights and liberties of a person under Art. 32.
s (Art. 2179).
f. The fact that the plaintiff had committed contributory The public officer is not automatically considered to have
negligence is a partial defense (Art. 2179). violated the rights or liberties of a person simply because
g. the rule the public officer issued was declared invalid by
NOTE: The term quasi-tort is not part of legal the Court. The complainant must still allege and prove the
developments in civil law. In Philippine legal tradition, particular injury or prejudice he has suffered from the
quasi-delict has been treated as the closest civil law violation of his constitutional right by the issuance of the
equivalent of the common law tort. In fact, in a number of invalidated rule.
Supreme Court decisions, the two terms have been
considered synonymous. In reality, however, the common The problem does not state any fact from which any
law tort is much broader in scope than the civil law quasi- malice, bad faith or gross negligence on the part of
delict. In recent developments in common law, the concept Vinzons-Chato may be inferred, or the particular injury or
of “quasi-torts” can be considered as the closest common prejudice the complainant may have suffered as a result of
law equivalent of the civil law concept of quasi-delict. This the violation of his constitutional rights. Hence, she cannot
is because it is argued that the growing recognition of be held liable. The facts presented are similar to the facts
quasi-torts as a source of obligation is hinged on the of the case of Vinzons-Chato v. Fortune, (G.R. No. 141309,
acceptance at common law of the civil law principles of December 23, 2008).
quasi-delict.
Q: Tony bought a Ford Expedition from a car dealer in
CLASSIFICATION OF TORTS (2002, 2004, 2006, 2012 Muntinlupa City. As payment, Tony issued a check
BAR) drawn against his current account with Premium
Bank. Since he has a good reputation, the car dealer
Q: A van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while allowed him to immediately drive home the vehicle
negotiating a downhill slope of a city road, suddenly merely on his assurance that his check is sufficiently
gained speed, obviously beyond the authorized limit funded. When the car dealer deposited the check, it
in the area, and bumped a car in front of it, causing was dishonored on the ground of "Account Closed."
severe damage to the care and serious injuries to its After an investigation, it was found that an employee of
passengers. Orlando was not in the car at the time of the bank misplaced Tony's account ledger. Thus, the
the incident. The car owner and the injured passengers bank erroneously assumed that his account no
sued Orlando and Diego for damages caused by Diego’s longer exists. Later it turned out that Tony's account
negligence. In their defense, Diego claims that the has more than sufficient funds to cover the check. The
downhill slope caused the van to gain speed and dealer however, immediately filed an action for
that, as he stepped on the brakes to check the recovery of possession of the vehicle against Tony
acceleration, the brakes locked, causing the van to for which he was terribly humiliated and
go even faster and eventually to hit the car in front of embarrassed. Does Tony have a cause of action against
it. Orlando and Diego contend that the sudden Premium Bank? Explain. (2006 BAR)
malfunction of the van’s brake system is a
fortuitous even and that, therefore, they are exempt A: Yes, Tony may file an action against Premium Bank
from any liability. Is this contention tenable? Explain. for damages under Art. 2176. Even if there exists a
(2002 BAR) contractual relationship between Tony and Premium
A: No. Mechanical defects of a motor vehicle do not Bank, an action for quasi-delict may nonetheless prosper.
constitute fortuitous event, since the presence of such The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the act
defects would have been readily detected by diligent that breaks the contract may also be a tort. There is a
maintenance check. The failure to maintain the vehicle in fiduciary relationship between the bank and the depositor,
safe running condition constitutes negligence. imposing utmost diligence in managing the accounts of
the depositor. The dishonor of the check adversely affected
101
 CIVIL LAW
the credit standing of Tony, hence, he is entitled to
damages (Singson v. BPI, G.R.No.L-24932, June 27, 1968; Was there a valid waiver of right to sue the school?
American Express International, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. 72383, Why? (2014 BAR)
November 9, 1988; Consolidated Bank and Trust v. CA, G.R.
No. L-70766 November 9, 1998). A: No, there was no valid waiver of the right to sue the
school. A waiver to be valid must have three requisites: 1)
Q: OJ was employed as professional driver of MM existence of the right; 2) legal capacity of the person
Transit bus owned by Mr. BT. In the course of his waiving the right and 3) the waiver must not be contrary
work, OJ hit a pedestrian who was seriously injured to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy
and later died in the hospital as a result of the or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by
accident. The victim’s heirs sued the driver and the law. In the case presented, the waiver may be considered
owner of the bus for damages. Is there a presumption in contrary to public policy as it exonerates the school from
this case that Mr. BT, the owner, had been negligent? If liability for future negligence. The waiver in effect allows
so, is the presumption absolute or not? Explain. (2004 the school to not exercise even ordinary diligence.
BAR)
Q: Arturo sold his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Million.
A: Yes, there is a presumption of negligence on the part of Benjamin took the vehicle but did not register the sale
the employer. However, such presumption is rebuttable. with the Land Transportation Office. He allowed his
The liability of the employer shall cease when they son Carlos, a minor who did not have a driver's license,
prove that they observed the diligence of a good father of to drive the car to buy pan de sal in a bakery. On the
a family to prevent damage (Art. 2180). When the way, Carlos driving in a reckless manner, sideswiped
employee causes damage due to his own negligence Dennis, then riding a bicycle. As a result, he suffered
while performing his own duties, there arises the juris serious physical injuries. Dennis filed a criminal
tantum presumption that the employer is negligent, complaint against Carlos for reckless imprudence
rebuttable only by proof of observance of the diligence of a resulting in serious physical injuries.
good father of a family (Metro Manila Transit v. CA, G.R.
No. 104408, June 21, 1993; Delsan Transport Lines v. C&A 1. Can Dennis file an independent civil action against
Construction, G.R. No. 156034, October 1, 2003). Likewise, if Carlos and his father Benjamin for damages based
the driver is charged and convicted in a criminal case for on quasi-delict? Explain.
criminal negligence, BT is subsidiarily liable for the 2. Assuming Dennis' action is tenable, can Benjamin
damages arising from the criminal act. raise the defense that he is not liable because
the vehicle is not registered in his name? Explain.
THE TORTFEASOR (1991, 1992, 1996, 1997, 1998, (2006 BAR)
2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2014, 2015
BAR) A:

Q: Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-Car Co. at 1. Yes, Dennis can file an independent civil action against
the Mactan International Airport. No sooner had he Carlos and his father for damages based on quasi-
driven the car outside the airport when, due to his delict there being an act or omission causing damage
negligence, he bumped an FX taxi owned and driven by to another without contractual obligation. Under Sec.
Victor, causing damage to the latter in the amount of 1 of Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure,
P100, 000.00. Victor filed an action for damages what is deemed instituted with the criminal action is
against both Silvestre and Avis, based on quasi-delict. only the action to recover civil liability arising from the
Avis filed a motion to dismiss the complaint against it act or omission punished by law. An action based on
on the ground of failure to state a cause of action. quasi-delict is no longer deemed instituted and may be
Resolve the motion. (2000 BAR) filed separately (Sec. 3, Rule 111, Rules of Criminal
Procedure).
A: The motion to dismiss should be granted, AVIS is not the 2. No, Benjamin cannot raise the defense that the
employer of Silvestre; hence, there is no right of action vehicle is not registered in his name. His liability,
against AVIS under Art. 2180. Not being the employer, AVIS vicarious in character, is based on Art. 2180 because
has no duty to supervise Silvestre. Neither has AVIS the he is the father of a minor who caused damage due to
duty to observe due diligence in the selection of its negligence. While the suit will prosper against the
customers. Besides, it was given in the problem that the registered owner, it is the actual owner of the private
cause of the accident was the negligence of Silvestre. vehicle who is ultimately liable (See Duavit v. CA, G.R.
No. L-29759, May 18, 1989). The purpose of car
Q: Mabuhay Elementary School organized a field trip registration is to reduce difficulty in identifying the
for its Grade VI students in Fort Santiago, Manila Zoo, party liable in case of accidents (Villanueva v.
and Star City. To be able to join, the parents of the Domingo, G.R.No.144274, September14, 2004)
students had to sign a piece of paper that reads as
follows: Q: As a result of a collision between the taxicab
owned by A and another taxicab owned by B, X, a
"I allow my child (name of student), Grade – Section, to passenger of the first taxicab, was seriously injured. X
join the school’s field trip on February 14, 2014. later filed a criminal action against both drivers.
I will not file any claim against the school,
administrator or teacher in case something happens to 1. May both taxicab owners raise the defense of due
my child during the trip." diligence in the selection and supervision of their
drivers to be absolved from liability for damages to
Joey, a 7-year-old student of Mabuhay Elementary X? Reason.
School was bitten by a snake while the group was 2. Is it necessary for X to reserve his right to institute a
touring Manila Zoo. The parents of Joey sued the civil action for damages against both taxicab owners
school for damages. The school, as a defense, before he can file a civil action for damages against
presented the waiver signed by Joey’s parents. them? Why? (1992, 1997, 2003 BAR)

UST BAR OPERATIONS 102

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
had a concussion. Subsequently, Gina brought an
A: action for damages against John and Art. There is no
doubt that the collision is due to John's negligence. Can
1. It depends. If the civil action is based on a quasi-delict Art, who was in the vehicle at the time of the accident,
the taxicab owners may raise the defense of diligence be held solidarily liable with his driver, John? (1996,
of a good father of a family in the selection and 1998, 2002 BAR)
supervision of the driver; if the action against is
based on culpa contractual or civil liability arising A: Yes. Art may be held solidary liable with John, if it was
from a crime, they cannot raise the defense. proven that the former could have prevented the
2. It depends. If the separate civil action is to recover misfortune with the use of due diligence. In motor
damages arising from the criminal act, reservation is mishaps, the owner is solidary liable with his driver, if the
necessary. If the civil action against the taxicab owners former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of
is based on culpa contractual, or on quasi-delict, there is due diligence, prevented the misfortune (Art. 2184).
no need for reservation.
Q: Romano was bumped by a minivan owned by the
Q: Primo owns a pet iguana which he keeps in a man- Solomon School of Practical Arts (SSPA). The minivan
made pond enclosed by a fence situated in his was driven by Peter, a student assistant whose
residential lot. A typhoon knocked down the fence of the assignment was to clean the school passageways daily
pond and the iguana crawled out of the gate of Primo’s one hour before and one hour after regular classes,
residence. N, a neighbor who was passing by, started in exchange for free tuition. Peter was able to drive the
throwing stones at the iguana, drawing the iguana to school vehicle after persuading the regular driver,
move toward him. N panicked and ran but tripped on Paul, to turn over the wheel to him (Peter). Romano
something and suffered a broken leg. Is anyone liable for suffered serious physical injuries. The accident
N’s injuries? Explain. (2010 BAR) happened at night when only one headlight of the
vehicle was functioning and Peter only had a student
A: No one is liable. The possessor of an animal or whoever driver's permit. As a consequence, Peter was convicted
may make use of the same is responsible for the damage it in the criminal case. Thereafter, Romano sued for
may cause, although it may escape or be lost. This damages against Peter and SSPA.
responsibility shall cease only in case the damage should
come from force majeure or from the fault of the person who 1. Will the action for damages against Peter and
has suffered damage (Art. 2183). SSPA prosper?
2. Will your answer be the same if, Paul, the regular
Q: A driver of a bus owned by company Z ran over a boy driver, was impleaded as party defendant for
who died instantly. A criminal case for reckless allowing Peter to drive the minivan without a
imprudence resulting in homicide was filed against the regular driver's license?
driver. He was convicted and was ordered to pay P2 3. Is the exercise of due diligence in the selection
Million in actual and moral damages to the parents of and supervision of Peter and Paul a material
the boy who was an honor student and had a bright issue to be resolved in this case? (1991 BAR)
future. Without even trying to find out if the driver had
assets or means to pay the award of damages, the A:
parents of the boy filed a civil action against the bus
company to make it directly liable for the damages. 1. Yes. It will prosper (Art. 2180) because at the time he
drove the vehicle, he was not performing his assigned
1. Will their action prosper? tasks as provided for by Art. 2180. With respect to
2. If the parents of the boy do not wish to file a SSPA, it is not liable for the acts of Peter because the
separate civil action against the bus company, can latter was not an employee as held by Supreme
they still make the bus company liable if the driver Court in Filamer Christian Institute v. CA, (G.R. No.
cannot' pay the award for damages? If so, what is 75112, August 17, 1991) Peter belongs to a special
the nature of the employer's liability and how may category of students who render service to the
civil damages be satisfied? (2015 BAR) school in exchange for free tuition fees.
2. I would maintain the same answer because the incident
A: did not occur while the employee was in the
performance of his duty as such employee. The
1. Yes, the action will prosper. The liability of the incident occurred at night time, and in any case, there
employer in this case may be based on quasi-delict and was no indication in the problem that he was
is included within the coverage of independent civil performing his duties as a driver.
action. It is not necessary to enforce the civil liability 3. In the case of Peter, if he were to be considered as
based on culpa aquiliana that the driver or employee employee, the exercise of due diligence in the selection
be proven to be insolvent since the liability of the and supervision of peter would not be a material issue
employer for the quasi- delicts committed by their since the conviction of Peter would result in a
employees is direct and primary subject to the defense subsidiary liability where the defense would not be
of due diligence on their part (Art. 2176; Art. 2180). available by the employer.
2. Yes, the parents of the boy can enforce the subsidiary
liability of the employer in thecriminal case against the In the case of Paul, since the basis of subsidiary
driver. The conviction of the driver is a condition sine liability is the pater familias rule under Art. 2180, the
qua non for the subsidiary liability of the employer to defense of selection and supervision of the employee
attach. Proof must be shown that the driver is insolvent would be a valid defense.
(Art. 103, RPC).
Q: After working overtime up to midnight, Alberto,
Q: A Gallant driven by John and owned by Art, and a an executive of an insurance company drove a
Corolla driven by its owner, Gina, collided somewhere company vehicle to a favorite Videoke bar where he
along Adriatico Street. As a result of the accident, Gina had some drinks and sang some songs with friends to
103
 CIVIL LAW
"unwind". At 2:00 a.m., he drove home, but in doing so, from his parents. On even date, as his class was
he bumped a tricycle, resulting in the death of its scheduled to go on a field trip, his teacher requested
driver. May the insurance company be held liable for him to accommodate in his car, as he did, four (4) of
the negligent act of Alberto? Why? (2001 BAR) his classmates because the van rented by the school
was too crowded. On the way to a museum which the
A: The insurance company is not liable because when the students were scheduled to visit, Rozanno made a
accident occurred, Alberto was not acting within the wrong maneuver, causing a collision with a jeepney.
assigned tasks of his employment. It is true that under Art. One of his classmates died. He and the three (3) others
2180 (par. 5), employers are liable for damages caused by were badly injured.
their employees who were acting within the scope of
their assigned tasks. However, the mere fact that Alberto 1. Who is liable for the death of Rozanno’s classmate
was using a service vehicle of the employer at the time of and the injuries suffered by Rozanno and his 3
the injurious accident does not necessarily mean that he other classmates? Explain.
was operating the vehicle within the scope of his 2. How about the damage to the jeepney? Explain.
employment. In Castilex Industrial Corp. v. Vasquez Jr (G.R. 3. Under the same facts, except the date of
No. 132266, December 21, 1999). The Supreme Court occurrence of the incident, this time in mid-1994,
held that notwithstanding the fact hat the employee did what would be your answer? Explain. (2010 BAR)
some overtime work for the company, the former
was, nevertheless, engaged in his own affairs or carrying A:
out a personal purpose when he went to a restaurant at
2:00 a.m. after coming out from work. The time of the 1. At the time the incident occurred in May 1989,
accident (also 2:00 a. m.) was outside normal working hours. Rozanno was still a minor. Being a minor, Art. 218,
(FC) applies. Pursuant to Art. 218, the school, its
Q: Under the law on quasi-delict, aside from the administrators and teachers shall be liable for the acts
persons who caused injury to persons, who else are of minor Rozanno because of the special parental
liable under the following circumstances: authority and responsibility that they exercise over
him. The authority applies to all authorized activities,
1. When a 7-year old boy injures his playmate while whether inside or outside the premises of the school,
playing with his father's rifle. Explain. entity or institution. The field trip on which occasion
2. When a domestic helper, while haggling for a Rozanno drove the car, was an authorized activity,
lower price with a fish vendor in the course of and, thus, covered by the provision. Furthermore, the
buying foodstuffs for her employer's family, slaps parents of Rozanno are subsidiarily liable pursuant to
the fish vendor, causing her to fall and sustain Art. 219 (FC), and principally liable under Art. 221 (FC),
injuries. Explain. if they are negligent.
3. A carpenter in a construction company 2. With respect to the damages caused to the jeepney,
accidentally hits the right foot of his co-worker only Rozanno should be held liable because his
with a hammer. Explain. negligence or tortuous act was the sole, proximate and
4. A 15-year old high school student stabs his immediate cause thereof.
classmate who is his rival for a girl while they were 3. Since Rozanno was 16 years old in 1989, if the
going out of the classroom after their last class. incident happened sometime in the middle of 1994,
Explain. Rozanno have been 21 years old at the time. Hence, he
5. What defense, if any, is available to them? 2005 was already of legal age. The law reducing the age of
BAR) majority to 18 years took effect in December 1989.

A: Being of legal age, Arts. 218, 219, and 221(FC), are no

1. The parents of the 7-year old boy who caused injury to longer applicable. In such case, only Rozanno will be
his playmate are liable under Art. 219, FC, in relation to personally responsible for all the consequences of his
Art. 2180 of the Civil Code since they exercise parental act unless his school or his parents were themselves
authority over the person of the boy. (Tamargo v. also negligent and such negligence contributed to the
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85044, June 3, 1992; Elcano v. happening of the incident. In that event, the school or
Hill, G.R. No. L-24803, May 26, 1977) his parents are not liable under Art. 218, 218 or 221
2. Employer of the domestic helper who slapped a fish (FC), but will be liable under general provision on the
vendor. Under Art. 2180, par. 5, "employers shall be Civil Code on quasi-delict.
liable for the damages caused by their employees and
household helpers acting within the scope of their THE CONCEPTS AND DOCTRINES OF RES IPSA
assigned tasks, even though the former are not LOQUITUR, LAST CLEAR CHANCE, PROXIMATE CAUSE,
engaged in any business or industry." DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA, PRESUMPTION OF
3. The owner of the construction company. Art. 2180, NEGLIGENCE, VICARIOUS LIABILITY (1990, 2002, 2007,
par. 4 states that "the owners and managers of an 2016 BAR)
establishment or enterprise are likewise responsible
for damages caused by their employees in the service Q: Dr. Jack, a surgeon, holds clinic at the St. Vincent's
of the branches in which the latter are employed or on Hospital and pays rent to the hospital. The fees of Dr.
the occasion of their functions." Jack are paid directly to him by the patient or through
4. The school, teacher and administrator as they exercise the cashier of the hospital. The hospital publicly
special parental authority. (Art. 2180, par. 7 of the Civil displays in the lobby the names and specializations of
Code in relation to Art. 218 and Art. 219,FC) the doctors associated or accredited by it, including
5. The defense that might be available to them is the that of Dr. Jack. Marta engaged the services of Dr. Jack
observance of a good father of the family to prevent because of recurring stomach pain. It was diagnosed
the damage. (Last par., Art. 2180) that she is suffering from cancer and had to be
operated on. Before the operation, she was asked to
Q: On May 5, 1989, 16-year old Rozanno, who was sign a "consent for hospital care," which reads:
issued a student permit, drove to school a car, a gift

UST BAR OPERATIONS 104

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
"Permission is hereby given to the medical, 133047, August 17, 1990). The following are examples of
nursing and laboratory staff of the St. Vincent's constructive trust:
Hospital to perform such procedures and to
administer such medications and treatments as 1. Art. 1455 which provides: “If property is acquired
may be deemed necessary or advisable by the through mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it is, by
physicians of this hospital for and during the force of law considered a trustee of an implied trust
confinement." for the benefit of the person for whom the property
comes.
After the surgery, the attending nurses reported that 2. Art. 1451 which provides: “When land passes by
two (2) sponges were missing. Later, Marta died due to succession through any person and he causes the legal
complications brought about by the sponges that were title to be put in the name of another, a trust is
left in her stomach. The husband of Marta sued the established by implication of law for the benefit of the
hospital and Dr. Jack for damages arising from true owner.”
negligence in the medical procedure. The hospital 3. Art. 1454 which provides: “If an absolute conveyance
raised the defense that Dr. Jack is not its employee as it of property is made in order to secure the perfomance
did not hire Dr. Jack nor pay him any salary or of an obligation of the grantor toward the grantee, a
compensation. It has absolutely no control over the trust by virtue of law is established. If the fulfillment of
medical services and treatment being provided by Dr. the obligation is offered by the grantee when it
Jack. Dr. Jack even signed an agreement that he holds becomes due, he may demand the reconveyance of the
the hospital free and harmless from any liability property to him.”
arising from his medical practice in the hospital. 4. Art. 1455 which provides: “When any trustee, guardian
or any person holding a fiduciary relationship uses
Is St. Vincent's Hospital liable for the negligence of Dr. trust funds for the purchase of property and causes
Jack? Explain your answer. (2016 BAR) conveyance to be made to him or to third person, a
trust us established by operation of law in favor of the
A: Yes, St. Vincent’s Hospital is liable. In the case of person to whom the funds belong.”
Professional Services v. Agana (513 SCRA 478 [2007]), the
Supreme Court held that the hospital is liable to the The DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE states that where
Aganas, not under the principle of respondent superior for the plaintiff was guilty of prior or antecedent negligence,
lack of evidence of an employer-employee relationship but the defendant, who had the ultimate opportunity to
with Dr. Ampil but under the principle of ostensible agency avoid the impending harm failed to do so, it is the
for the negligence of Dr. Ampil an, pro hac vice, under the defendant who is liable for all the consequences of the
principle of corporate negligence for its failure to perform accident notwithstanding the prior negligence of the
its duties as a hospital. plaintiff. An example is where a person was riding a pony
on a bridge and improperly pulled the pony to the wrong
While it is true that there was insufficient evidence that St. side when he saw a car coming. The driver of the car did
Vincent’s Hospital exercised the power of control or not stop or change direction, and nearly hit the horse, and,
wielded such power over the means and the details of the the frightened animal jumped to its death. The driver of
specific process by which Dr. Jack applied his skills in the car is guilty of negligence because he had a fair
Maria’s treatment, there is ample evidence that St. opportunity to avoid the accident and failed to avail
Vincent’s Hospita held out to the patient, Marta, that Dr. himself of that opportunity. He is liable under the doctrine
Jack was its agent (principle of ostensible agency). The two of last clear chance (Picart v. Smith, G.R. No. L-12219,
factor that determine apparent authority are present: (1) March 15, 1918).
the hospital’s implied manifestation to the patient which
led the latter to conclude that the doctor was the hospital’s Q: Mr and Mrs R own a burned-out building, the
agent; and (2) the patient’s reliance upon the conduct of firewall of which collapsed and destroyed the shop
the hospital and the doctor, consisted with ordinary care occupied by the family of Mr and Mrs S, which
and prudence. resulted in injuries to said couple and the death of
their daughter. Mr and Mrs S had been warned by Mr
The corporate negligence ascribed to St. Vincent’s Hospital & Mrs R to vacate the shop in view of its proximity to
is different from the medical negligence attributed to Dr. the weakened wall but the former failed to do so. Mr.
Jack. The duties of the hospital are distinct from those of & Mrs. S filed against Mr and Mrs R an action for
the doctor-consultant practicing within its premises in recovery of damages the former suffered as a result of
relation to the patient; hence, the failure of St. Vincent’s the collapse of the firewall. In defense, Mr and Mrs R
Hospital to fulfill its duties as a hospital corporation gave rely on the doctrine of last clear chance alleging that
rise to a direct liability to Marta distinct from that of Dr. Mr and Mrs S had the last clear chance to avoid the
Jack. accident if only they heeded the former’s warning to
vacate the shop, and therefore Mr and Mrs R’s prior
Q: Explain the following concepts and doctrines and negligence should be disregarded. If you were the
give an example of each: concept of trust de son judge, how would you decide the case? State your
tort (constructive trust) and doctrine of discovered reasons. (1990 BAR)
peril (last clear chance) (2007 BAR).
A: I would decide in favor of Mr. & Mrs. S. The proprietor of
A: A CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST is a trust not created by any a building or structure is responsible for the damages
word or phrase, either expressly or impliedly, evincing a resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due
direct intention to creaet a trust, but is one that arises in to the lack of necessary repairs (Art. 2190). As regards the
order to satisfy the demands of justice. It does not come defense of “last clear chance,” the same is not tenable
about by agreement or intention but mainly operation of because according to the SC the doctrine of last clear
law and construed as a trust against one who, by fraus, chance is not applicable to instances covered by Art 2190
duress or abuse of confidence, obtains or holds the legal of the Civil Code (De Roy v. CA, G.R. L-80718, January 29,
right to property which he ought not, in equity and good 1988). The role of the common law "last clear chance"
conscience to hold (Heirs of Lorenzo Yap v. CA, G.R. No. doctrine in relation to Art. 2179 is merely to mitigate
105
 CIVIL LAW
damages within the context of contributory negligence the flight attendants, they were forced to take the
(Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. IAC, G.R. No. L-65295, March flight at the first class section apart from their friends
10, 1987). who were in the business class. Upon their return to
Manila, they demanded a written apology from Pinoy
Q: Explain the concept of vicarious liability in quasi- Airlines. When it went unheeded, the couple sued
delicts. (2002 BAR) Pinoy Airlines for breach of contract claiming
moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney's
A: The doctrine of VICARIOUS LIABILITY is that which fees. Will the action prosper? Give reasons. (2004, 2005
renders a person liable for the negligence of others for BAR)
whose acts or omission the law makes him responsible on
the theory that they are under his control and supervision. A: Yes, the action will prosper. Art. 2201 entitles the
person to recover damages which may be attributed to
LEGAL INJURY (2004, 2005 BAR) non-performance of an obligation. In Alitalia Airways v.
Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 77011, July 24, 1990), when an
Q: DT and MT were prominent members of the airline issues ticket to a passenger confirmed on a
frequent travelers’ club of FX Airlines. In Hongkong, the particular flight, a contract of carriage arises and the
couple were assigned seats in Business Class for which passenger expects that he would fly on that day. When the
they had bought tickets. On checking in, however, they airline deliberately overbooked, it took the risk of having to
were told they were upgraded by computer to First deprive some passengers of their seat in case all of them
Class for the flight to Manila because the Business would show up. For the indignity and inconvenience of
Section was overbooked. being refused the confirmed seat, said passenger is
entitled to moral damages. In the given problem, spouses
Both refused to transfer despite better seats, food, Almeda had a booked roundtrip business class ticket with
beverage and other services in First Class. They said Pinoy Airlines. When their tickets were upgraded to first
they had guests in Business Class they should attend to. class without their consent, Pinoy Airlines breached the
They felt humiliated, embarrassed and vexed, however, contract. As ruled in Zulueta v. Pan American (G.R. No. L-
when the stewardess allegedly threatened to offload 28589, January 8, 1973), in case of overbooking, airline is
them if they did not avail of the upgrade. Thus they in bad faith. Therefore, spouses Almeda are entitled to
gave in, but during the transfer of luggage DT suffered damages.
pain in his arm and wrist. After arrival in Manila, they
demanded an apology from FX’s management as well Book II – Damages
as indemnity payment. When none was forthcoming, Articles 2195 – 2235 (Civil Code)
they sued the airline for a million pesos in damages. Is
the airline liable for actual and moral damages? Why or GENERAL PROVISIONS (1994, 2009)
why not? Explain briefly. (2004 BAR)
Q: Johnny Maton's conviction for homicide was
A: FX Airlines committed breach of contract when it affirmed by the Court of Appeals and in addition
upgraded DT and MT, over their objections, to First Class although the prosecution had not appealed at all.
because they had contracted for Business Class passage. The appellate court increased the indemnity for
However, although there is a breach of contract, DT and MT death from P30, 000.00 to P50, 000.00. On his appeal
are entitled to actual damages only for such pecuniary to the Supreme Court, among the other things Johnny
losses suffered by them as a result of such breach. There Maton brought to the high court's attention, was the
seems to be no showing that they incurred such pecuniary increase of indemnity imposed by the Court of
loss. There is no showing that the pain in DT's arm and Appeals despite the clear fact that the People had not
wrist resulted directly from the carrier's acts complained appealed from the appellate court's judgment. Is Johnny
of. Hence, they are not entitled to actual damages. Maton correct? (1994 BAR)
Moreover, DT could have avoided the alleged injury by
requesting the airline staff to do the luggage transfer as a A: In Abejam v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court said
matter of duty on their part. There is also no basis to award that even if the issue of damages were not raised by the
moral damages for such breach of contract because the appellant in the Court of Appeals but the Court of Appeals
facts of the problem do not show bad faith or fraud on the in its findings increased the damages, the Supreme Court
part of the airline. (Cathay Pacific v. Vazquez, G.R. No. will not disturb the findings of the Court of Appeals.
150843, March 14, 2003). However, theymay recover moral
damages if the cause of action is based on Art. 21 for the Q: Rommel’s private car, while being driven by the
humiliation and embarrassment they felt when the regular family driver, Amado, hits a pedestrian
stewardess threatened to offload them if they did not avail causing the latter’s death. Rommel is not in the car
of the upgrade. when the incident happened.

Q: Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of the 1. Is Rommel liable for damages to the heirs of the
country and are frequent travellers abroad. In 1996, deceased? Explain.
they booked round-trip business class tickets for the 2. Would your answer be the same if Rommel was in
Manila-Hong Kong-Manila route of the Pinoy Airlines, the car at the time of the accident? Explain. (1994,
where they are holders of Gold Mabalos Class Frequent 2009 BAR)
Flier cards. On their return flight, Pinoy Airlines
upgraded their tickets to first class without their A:
consent and, in spite of their protestations to be
allowed to remain in the business class so that they 1. Yes, Rommel may be held liable for damages if he fails
could be with their friends, they were told that the to prove that he exercised the diligence of a good father
business class was already fully booked, and that they of a family (Art. 2180, par 5) in selecting and
were given priority in upgrading because they are supervising his family driver. The owner is presumed
elite members/holders of Gold Mabalos Class cards. liable unless he proves the defense of diligence. If the
Since they were embarrassed at the discussions with driver was performing his assigned task when the

UST BAR OPERATIONS 106

 QUAMTO (1987-2016)
accident happened, Rommel shall be solidarily liable the latter be ordered to pay him: (a) P30, 000.00 as
with the driver. indemnity for the death of the fetus, (b) P100, 000.00
as moral damages for the mental anguish and anxiety
In case the driver is convicted of reckless imprudence he suffered, (c) P50, 000.00 as exemplary damages,
and cannot pay the civil liability, Rommel is (d) P20, 000.00 as nominal damages, and (e) P25,
subsidiarily liable for the damage awarded against the 000.00 as attorney's fees.
driver and the defense of diligence is not available.
May actual damages be also recovered? If so, what
2. Yes, my answer would be the same. Rommel, who was facts should be alleged and proved? (1991 BAR)
in the car, shall be liable for damages if he could have
prevented the misfortune by the use of due diligence in A: Yes, provided that the pecuniary loss suffered should
supervising his driver but failed to exercise it (Art. be substantiated and duly proved.
2184). In such case, his liability is solidary with his
driver. Q: If a pregnant woman passenger of a bus were to
suffer an abortion following a vehicular accident
ACTUAL AND COMPENSATORY DAMAGES (1991, 2002, due to the gross negligence of the bus driver, may
2014, 2016 BAR) she and her husband claim damages from the bus
company for the death of their unborn child? Explain.
Q: Peter, a resident of Cebu City, sent through Reliable (2003, 2014 BAR)
Pera Padala (RPP) the amount of P20, 000.00 to his
daughter, Paula, for the payment of her tuition fee. A: No, the spouses cannot recover actual damages in the
Paula went to an RPP branch but was informed that form of indemnity for the loss of life of the unborn child.
there was no money remitted to her name. Peter This is because the unborn child is not yet considered a
inquired from RPP and was informed that there was a person and the law allows indemnity only for loss of life of
computer glitch and the money was credited to person. The mother, however may recover damages for the
another person. Peter and Paula sued RPP for actual bodily injury she suffered from the loss of the fetus which
damages, moral damages and exemplary damages. The is considered part of her internal organ. The parents may
trial court ruled that there was no proof of pecuniary also recover damages for injuries that are inflicted
loss to the plaintiffs but awarded moral damages of directly upon them, e.g., moral damages for mental
P20, 000.00 and exemplary damages of P5, 000.00. On anguish that attended the loss of the unborn child. Since
appeal, RPP questioned the award of moral and there is gross negligence, exemplary damages can also be
exemplary damages. Is the trial court correct in recovered (Geluz v. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20, 1961).
awarding moral and exemplary damages? Explain.
(2016 BAR) MORAL DAMAGES (1996, 2002 BAR)

A: No, the trial court is not correct in awarding moral and Q: Ortillo contracts Fabricato, Inc. to supply and install
exemplary damages. The damages in this case are prayed tile materials in a building he is donating to his
for based on the breach of contract committed by RPP in province. Ortillo pays 50% of the contract price as per
failing to deliver the sum of money to Paula. Under the agreement. It is also agreed that the balance would be
provisions of the Civil Code, in breach of contract, moral payable periodically after every 10% performance
damages may be recovered when the defendant acted in until completed. After performing about 93% of the
bad faith or was guilty of gross negligence (amounting to contract, for which it has been paid an additional 40%
bad faith) or in wanton disregard of his contractual as per agreement, Fabricato, Inc. did not complete the
obligation. In the same fashion, to warrant the award of project due to its sudden cessation of operations.
exemplary damages, the wrongful act must be Instead, Fabricato, Inc. demands payment of the last
accomplished by bad faith, and an award of damages 10% of the contract despite its non-completion of the
would be allowed only if the guilty party acted in a wanton, project. Ortillo refuses to pay, invoking the stipulation
fraudulent, reckless or malevolent manner. (Art. 2232, CC) that payment of the last amount 10% shall be upon
completion. Fabricato, Inc. brings suit for the entire
Bad faith does not simply connot bad judgment or 10%. Plus damages, Ortillo counters with claims for
negligence. It imports a dishonest purpose or some moral (a) moral damages for Fabricato, Inc.’s unfounded suit
obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong, a breach of which has damaged his reputation as a philanthropist
known duty through some motive or interest or ill will that and respect businessman in his community, and (b)
partakes of the nature of fraud. In this case, however, attorney’s fees.
RPP’s breach was due to a computer glitch which at most
can be considered as negligence on its part, but definitely 1. Does Ortillo have a legal basis for his claim for
does not constitute bad faith or fraud as would warrant the moral damages?
award of moral and exemplary damages. 2. How about his claim for attorney’s fees, having
hired a lawyer to defend him? (2002 BAR)
Q: On her third month of pregnancy, Rosemarie
married to Boy. For reasons known only to her, and A:
without informing Boy, went to the clinic of X, a known
abortionist, who for a fee, removed and expelled the 1. There is no legal basis to Ortillo’s claim for moral
fetus from her womb, Boy learned of the abortion six damages. It does not fall under the coverage of Art.
(6) months later. Availing of that portion of Section 12 2219.
of Article II of the 1987 Constitution which reads: 2. Ortillo is entitled to attorney’s fees because Fabricato’s
complaint is a case of malicious prosecution or a
The State xxx shall equally protect the life of the mother clearly unfounded civil action. (Art. 2208 [4] and [11]).
and the life of the unborn from conception, xxx which
he claims confers a civil personality on the unborn Q: Rodolfo, married to Sharon, had an illicit affair with
from the moment of conception. Boy filed a case for his secretary, Nanette, a 19-year old girl, and begot a
damages against the abortionist, praying therein that baby girl, Rona. Nanette sued Rodolfo for damages:
107
 CIVIL LAW
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.

If you were the judge, would you award all the claims
of Nanette? Explain.

A: If Rodolfo's marriage could not have been possibly

known to Nanette or there is no gross negligence on the
part of Nanette, Rodolfo could be held liable for moral
damages.

If there is gross negligence in a suit for quasi-delict,

exemplary could be awarded.

Q: Rosa was leasing an apartment in the city. Because

of the Rent Control Law, her landlord could not
increase the rental as much as he wanted to, nor
terminate her lease as long as she was paying her
rent. In order to force her to leave the premises, the
landlord stopped making repairs on the apartment,
and caused the water and electricity services to be
disconnected. The difficulty of living without
electricity and running water resulted in Rosa's
suffering a nervous breakdown. She sued the
landlord for actual and moral damages. Will the action
prosper? Explain. (1996 BAR)

A: Yes, based on quasi-delict under the human relations

provisions of the New Civil Code (Arts. 19, 20 and 21)
because the act committed by the lessor is contrary to
morals. Moral damages are recoverable under Art. 2219
(10) in relation to Art. 21. Although the action is based on
quasi-delict and not on contract, actual damages may be
recovered if the lessee is able to prove the losses and
expenses she suffered.

UST BAR OPERATIONS 108