9:00pm – 10:30pm

Give at least 3 examples of compelling reasons which justify the taking away from the mother’s
custody of her child under 7 years of age.

1. Neglect
2. Abandonment
3. Unemployment
4. Immorality
5. Alcoholism
6. Drug additcion
7. Maltreatment
8. Insanity
9. Highly communicable serious disease
10. Grave physical handicap
11. Serious and credible threat by the child to harm himself if separated from his mother

Points : 2 correct answers. Wrong answer: the mother is already in a common law
relationship

II

Ed and Beth have been married for 20 years without children. Desirous to have a baby, they
consulted Dr. Jun Canlas, a prominent medical specialist on human fertility. He advised Beth to
undergo artificial insemination. It was found that Ed’s sperm count was inadequate to induce
pregnancy. Hence, the couple looked for a willing donor. Andy, the brother of Ed, readily
consented to donate his sperm. After series of tests, Andy’s sperm was medically introduced
into Beth’s ovary. She became pregnant and 9 months later, gave birth to a baby boy named
Alvin.

a. Who is the father of Alvin? Explain

Answer : Ed is the father of Alvin if he gave his written consent to the artificial insemination of
his wife. Otherwise, the child is the illegitimate child of Andy. Under the Family Code, children
conceived as a result of artificial insemination of the wife with the sperm of the husband or that
of a donor or both are legitimate children of the husband and the wife, provided that both of
them authorized or ratified such insemination in a written instrument executed and signed by
both of them before the birth of the child.
 Points: Correct but may kulang. Better if merong “Written consent blab la”

b. What are the requirements, if any in order for Ed to establish his paternity over Alvin?

To establish Ed’s paternity over Alvin, two requirements must obtain:

a. Both spouses authorized or ratified the insemination in a written document executed and
signed by them before the birth of the child
b. Instrument is recorded in the civil registry together with the birth certificate of the child

Points : 0. Ito nakalagay sa suggested but I think pwede din to to establish paternity eh. Di
pa ako nag ciciv pero yun ang tanda ko. Pero siguro kaya ganto ang suggested answer ay,
nag rely sya sa issue mismo na “Pano ma establish paternity kahit insemination lang sya?
Hindi through sexual intercourse ni mom and dad”

III.

What are the marriages excepted from marriage license requirement

Points: All correct except : Muslims (better if “marriage between pagans or

Mohammedans who live in non- Christian provinces and who married in
accordance with their customs) ; Yung fifth answer mo, pwede sya nabasa ko sa
Rabuya dati pero wala alng ditto sa suggested answer na kinopyahan ko.

IV.

Make a tabular form of the grounds of void ab initio marriage, voidable marriage, and legal
separation (Give only 5 for each)

Points: All correct

V.

What are the requisites to comply when there is Judgement of annulment or of absolute nullity
of marriage

a. Judgment of annulment of declaration of nullity of marriage

b. Parititon and distribution of properties of spouses
c. Delivery of the children’s presumptive legitimes

VI.
 Ricky donated P 1 Million to the unborn child of his pregnant girlfriend, which she accepted.
After six (6) months of pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized as Angela. However, Angela
died 20 hours after birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million. Is Ricky entitled to recover?
Explain.

A: Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the P1,000,000.00. The NCC considers a fetus is considered
a person for purposes favorable to it provided it is born later in accordance with the provision of
the NCC. While the donation is favorable to the fetus, the donation did not take effect because
the fetus was not born in accordance with the NCC.

To be considered born, the fetus that had an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) months
should live for 24 hours from its complete delivery from the mother’s womb. Since Angela had
an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) months but did not live for 24 hours, she was not
considered born and, therefore, did not become a person (Art. 41). Not being a person, she has
no juridical capacity to be a donee, hence, the donation to her did not take effect. The donation
not being effective, the amount donated may be recovered. To retain it will be unjust
enrichment.

Points: Correct

V.

On Valentine's Day 1996, Ellas and Fely, both single and 25 years of age, went to the city hall
where they sought out a fixer to help them obtain a quickie marriage. For a fee, the fixer
produced an ante-dated marriage license for them, Issued by the Civil Registrar of a small
remote municipality. He then brought them to a licensed minister in a restaurant behind the city
hall, and the latter solemnized their marriage right there and then.

a. Is their marriage valid, void or voidable? Explain.

The marriage is valid. The irregularity in the issuance of a valid license does not adversely
affect the validity of the marriage. The marriage license is valid because it was in fact issued by
a Civil Registrar (Arts. 3 and 4, FC).
Points: Correct
b. Would your answer be the same if it should turn out that the marriage license was
spurious?Explain.

No, the answer would not be the same. The marriage would be void because of the absence of a
formal requisite. In such a case, there was actually no valid marriage license.
Points : Correct

VI.
 Maria, wife of Pedro, withdrew P 5 Million from their conjugal funds. With this money, she
constructed a building on a lot which she inherited from her father. Is the building conjugal or
paraphernal? Reasons.

A: It depends. If the value of the building is more than the value of the land, the building is
conjugal and the land becomes conjugal property under Art. 120 of the FC. This is a case of
reverse accession, where the building is considered as the principal and the land, the accessory.
If, on the other hand, the value of the land is more than the value of the building, then the
ordinary rule of accession applies where the land is the principal and the building, the
accessory. In such case, the land remains paraphernal property and the building becomes
paraphernal properly. (Note: The rule on reverse accession is applicable only to the regime of
conjugal partnership of gains in both the Family Code and the New Civil Code. The foregoing
answer assumes that CPG is the regime of the property relations of the spouses.)

Points: Correct

VII.

In December 2000, Michael and Anna, after obtaining a valid marriage license, went to the
Office of the Mayor of Urbano, Bulacan, to get married. The Mayor was not there, but the
Mayor’s secretary asked Michael and Anna and their witnesses to fill up and sign the required
marriage contract forms. The secretary then told them to wait, and went out to look for the
Mayor who was attending a wedding in a neighboring municipality. When the secretary caught
up with the Mayor at the wedding reception, she showed him the marriage contract forms and
told him that the couple and their witnesses were waiting in his office. The Mayor forthwith
signed all the copies of the marriage contract, gave them to the secretary who returned to the
Mayor’s office. She then gave copies of the marriage contract to the parties, and told Michael
and Anna that they were already married. Thereafter, the couple lived together as husband and
wife, and had three sons. What governs the properties acquired by the couple? Explain.

The marriage being void, the property relationship that governed their union is special co-
ownership under Article 147 of the Family Code. This is on the assumption that there was no
impediment for them to validly marry each other

Points : 0—no marriage

VIII.

In 1997, B and G started living together without the benefit of marriage. The relationship
produced one offspring, Venus. The couple acquired a residential lot in Parañaque. After four (4)
years or in 2001, G having completed her 4-year college degree as a fulltime student, she and B
contracted marriage without a license.

The marriage of B and G was, two years later, declared null and void due to the absence of a
marriage license. If you were the judge who declared the nullity of the marriage, to whom would
you award the lot? Explain briefly.
Since the marriage was null and void, no Absolute Community or Conjugal Partnership was
established between B and G. Their properties are governed by the “special co-ownership”
provision of Article 147 of the Family Code because both B and G were capacitated to marry
each other. The said Article provides that when a man and a woman who are capacitated to
marry each other, live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage, or under a void marriage: (1) their wages and salaries shall be owned by them in
equal shares; and (2) property acquired by both of them through their work or industry shall be
governed by the rules on co-ownership. In co-ownership, the parties are co-owners if they
contributed something of value in the acquisition of the property. Their share is in proportion
to their respective contributions. In an ordinary co-ownership the care and maintenance of the
family is not recognized as a valuable contribution for the acquisition of a property. In the
Article 147 “special coownership”, however, care and maintenance is recognized as a valuable
contribution which will entitle the contributor to half of the property acquired.

Points: Correct

IX.

In 1973, Mauricio, a Filipino pensioner of the U.S. Government, contracted a bigamous marriage
with Erlinda, despite the fact that his first wife, Carol, was still living. In 1975, Mauricio and
Erlinda jointly bought a parcel of rice land, with the title being placed jointly in their names.
Shortly thereafter, they purchased another property (a house and lot) which was placed in her
name alone as the buyer. In 1981, Mauricio died and Carol promptly filed an action against
Erlinda to recover both the Riceland and the house and lot, claiming them to be conjugal
property of the first marriage. Erlinda contends that she and the late Mauricio were co-owners of
the Riceland; and with respect to the house and lot, she claims she is the exclusive owner.
Assuming she fails to prove that she had actually used her own money in either purchase, how do
you decide the case?

Under Art. 148 of the Family Code, which applies to bigamous marriages, only the properties
through their actual joint contribution of money, property or industry shall be owned by them
in common in proportion to their respective contributions. Moreover, if one of the parties is
validly married to another, his share in the co-ownership shall accrue to the absolute
community/conjugal partnership existing in such valid marriage.

Thus, in this case, since Erlinda failed to prove that she used her own money to buy the
Riceland and house and lot, she cannot claim to be the co-owner of the Riceland nor the
exclusive owner of the house and lot. Such properties are Mauricio’s. And since his share
accrues to the conjugal partnership with Carol, Carol can validly claim such properties to the
exclusion of Erlinda (Art. 144, Civil Code)

X.
Discuss Molina Doctrine.

Points: All correct