ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

a r
B
I. Sandra and Piolo were married on August 16, 2005. Five years from the marriage
s
ceremony, Sandra started to feel an obsession to have sex with other men. Piolo confronted
e
l
Sandra about this when he caught Sandra having extramarital affair with other men.

o b
Sandra promised to change but never fulfilled these promises. The obsession to have sexual
intimacies with several other men was uncontrollable. Sandra had herself checked-up by a
R
psychiatrist who clinically identified this lustful obsession as a kind of mental disorder with

an r
its root cause being the refusal of Piolo to have sex during the honeymoon. The psychiatrist

B a
diagnosed that such mental disorder is grave and permanent, psychologically

Ch s
incapacitating Sandra to perform the essential marital obligations. Piolo filed a case to

l e
declaration of nullity of marriage due to psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the
Family Code. He testified during the trial and presented the psychiatrist who examined

o b
Sandra together with her psychological evaluation. If you were the judge, will you grant the

R
declaration of nullity of marriage pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code based on the

an r
given facts? Explain fully?

Ba
Ch
SUGGESTED ANSWER: If I were the judge, I will not grant the decree of nullity of marriage

e s
due to psychological incapacity. In the case of Republic vs CA and Molina, the Supreme

b l
Court gave the guidelines in the interpretation and application of Article 36 of the Family
Code. The guidelines incorporate the three basic requirements earlier mandated by the

R o
Court in Santos vs Court of Appeals: “psychological incapacity must be characterized by (a)
gravity, (b) juridical antecedence and (c) incurability” Such illness must be grave enough to

an a r
bring about the disability of the party to assume the essential obligations of marriage. The

B
Ch
incapacity must be proven to be existing at “the time of the celebration” of the marriage,

s
although the manifestations may appear after the marriage. Such incapacity must also be
e
l
shown to be medically or clinically permanent or incurable. In the case at bar, the

o b
psychiatrist diagnosed that the root cause of Sandra’s incapacity was due to Piolo’s refusal
to have sex with her during the honeymoon, hence there was no juridical antecedence.
R
(Republic vs CA and Molina, G.R. 108763, February 13, 1997; Santos vs CA, G.R. 112019,
Jan. 4, 1995).
a n a r
h
II. Lando and Marilyn are legally married. When Lando disappeared for four years without B
any knowledge of his whereabouts, MarilynC was able to validly procure a judicials
l
declaration of presumptive death of Lando and thereafter was able to validly marry Noel ein
accordance with the law. Later, Lando reappeared and executed an affidavit
o bin Cebuof
R and told
reappearance which he immediately showed to Marilyn and Noel in their residence

her of the situation, rekindled their love affair and proposed marriage. n
City. Aware of Lando's reappearance, Noel sought Rosario, his former girlfriend,
a from the Local
Noel and Rosario,
h
both 30 years old and both Protestants, obtained a marriage and license
C

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Civil Registrar of Cebu City and the marriage was solemnized by their Protestant minister
on June 15, 2014. Is the marriage of Noel and Rosario valid, voidable or void? Explain well.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The marriage of Noel and Rosario is void. The marriage of Noel and
Marilyn is still subsisting despite the reappearance of Lando. Under Article 42 of the Family

r
Code, the subsequent marriage contracted by the present spouse after the absence of her

B a
spouse fro a period of either 4 or 2 years and after the issuance by the court of a decree of
presumptive death shall be automatically terminated by the recording of the affidavit of
s
reappearance of the absent spouse in the civil registry of the residence of the spouses to
e
b l
the subsequent marriage, with due notice to the said spouses of the subsequent marriage.
In the case at bar, Lando did not register his affidavit of reappearance with the civil registry

R o
of the place where Noel and Marilyn were residing but simply showed his affidavit to the
spouses. Said of the reappearing spouse did not terminate the subsequent marriage of Noel

an r
and Marilyn, hence, Noel’s marriage to Rosario was bigamous, hence, null and void. Articles
41 and 42, Family Code)
B a
III.C
h s
emarried in Argentina on May 9, 2010 before a
Allan and Abigail, both Filipinos, both 25 years old, met in Argentina on April 9, 2010
l
notary public in accordance with the
o bArgentine Marital Laws. There was also no valid
and fell in love with each other. They got

R and started a family. Arnulfo, father of Abigail, after

marriage license issued prior to the marriage. The marriage is valid in Argentina. Allan and

a n
Abigail went back to the Philippines
a r
learning of their marriage contends that such marriage having been solemnized by a notary
h
public who is not among those authorized to solemnize marriages B marriage void. Rule onis
in the Philippines,
void. The absence C of the marriage license also
e
rendered s the
Arnulfo’s contention. Explain well.
b l
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Arnulfo’s contention iso not tenable. The marriage of Allan and
Abigail is considered valid in the Philippines.R Under Article 26, paragraph 1 of the Family
Code, all marriages solemnized outside then rforce
a Philippines, a
in accordance with the laws in

h under Articles 35(1,4,5 and 6), 36, 37 B

in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in

C
this country, except those prohibited
marriage of Allan and Abigail are not covered by the exceptions, hence, ite s and 38. The

law of the Philippines.

b l is valid under the

R o
VI. Cesar was legally married to Delia and they have two children, Edgar and Francia.
n
During the subsistence of the marriage of Cesar and Delia, the latter cohabited with Gerry,
a a r
in a vehicular accident. Delia, on behalf B
who himself was married to Hazel. Out of the cohabitation of Delia and Gerry, Ian was born
on March 4, 2009. On December 1, 2012, Gerry diedh
of Ian, filed a suit for partition against Hazel andC her children alleging that Ian is entitled tos
l e
b with
share in the estate of Gerry. Gerry’s name as father appears in Ian’s baptismal certificate

o
and school report cards. There were also pictures and videos showing Gerry together
Ian. Hazel contends that the suit is barred by the death of Gerry.
R
a n
1. May Ian prove his filiation with Gerry and be entitled to share in Gerry’s estate?

Explain fully.
C h

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Ian is the legitimate child of the valid marriage between Cesar
and Delia. Children conceived and born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate.
Legitimacy is conferred by law and not by the parents of the child. In Concepcion vs
Almonte, the Supreme Court held that “the law and only the law determines who are
legitimate or illegitimate children for one’s legitimacy or illegitimacy cannot be

r
compromised. It should be what the law says and not what the parent says it is”. At the time

B a
Ian was born, there was a valid marriage between Cesar and Delia. Moreover, under the
Family Code, only the husband or the father, may impugn the legitimacy of the child.
s
(Articles 160 and 170, Family Code; Concepcion vs Almonte, G.R. 123450, Aug. 31, 2005).
e
b
2. Will your answer be thelsame had the first marriage of Cesar & Delia been terminated by
o
the death of Cesar one year prior to the birth of Ian? Explain fully.
R
SUGGESTED n ANSWER: No, my answer will be different.
a that he died one year prior to the birth r Ian is considered the illegitimate
aof Ian. However,
child of Gerry
h
and Delia as there was physical
Bimpossibility for Cesar to be the father

hisC
considering
s Ian still cannot prove
eputative father was already dead. Baptismal
filiation to Gerry since he was using the secondary pieces of evidence included under
Article 172 of the Family Code and the l
b and videos may prove open and continuous
o
certificate, school report cards, pictures

R of thechild
possession of the status of an illegitimate but the action to prove the child’s filiation

an March 7, 2002) r
must be brought during the lifetime alleged parent. (Articles 172 and 175, Family
Code; Liyao vs Liyao, G.R. 138961,
a
BWith the consent of Edgar
C h of a parcel of land owned by Fred. s
V. Edgar was the usufructuary
l
and by chance, Greg found hidden treasure on this land. How e would the hidden treasure be
divided between the parties?
o b
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The hidden treasure shall Rtreasure
be divided between Greg, the finder and

share of the hidden treasure. Greg a

Fred, the owner of the land where the hiddenn was found. Each of them willr
a get ½

h is not a trespasser as he was allowed

B wasby the
usufructuary of the land who was the
s
C since he was not the owner of thee land where the
legal possessor at the time the hidden treasure
found. Edgar does not get any share
treasure was found. (Article 438 Civil Code).
b l
VI. On a 500 sq.m. lot worth P1M located in Makati City with TCT
R o# 1234 registered in the
ntheir land but they kept quiet as ar
name of Spouses Reyes, Spouses Santos built their house worth P900,000.00. Spouses
a
that the construction was completely B
Reyes became aware of the construction when they visited
they did not want any trouble until such time h
C Reyes as landowners and Spousess
finished. State the rights and obligations of Spouses
l e
b
Santos as builders based on the facts given.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Spouses Santos are builders in bad faith because theyo
R of Spouses
built their
house on land owned by Spouses Reyes as evidenced by the TCT in the name
n
a Both parties
Reyes. Spouses Reyes are landowners in bad faith as they were aware of the construction

C h
being done by Spouses Santos but they did not object to the construction.
being in bad faith, they shall be considered to be both in good faith and Article 448 of the

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Civil Code governs their rights and obligations. Spouses Reyes shall have the right to
appropriate the house built on their land provided they pay the necessary and useful
expenses incurred in the construction by Spouses Santos. They may also opt to sell the land
encroached upon since the value of the land is not considerably more than the value of the
house. Spouses Santos have the right to be reimbursed of the necessary and useful

r
expenses they incurred in the construction if Spouses Reyes opted to appropriate their

B a
house. Spouses Santos have the right of retention until fully paid of the necessary and
useful expenses. Spouses Santos may also buy the land encroached upon.

es
b l
VII. 1. Elated that her sister Rosemarie who had been married for ten years was pregnant
for the first time, Rosalie donated a ring worth P25,000.00 to the unborn child. Rosemarie

R o
was profuse in thanking her sister when they talked while shopping for baby clothes at
Rustan’s. Rosemarie gave birth after 7½ months of pregnancy but the baby died 21 hours
n
after delivery.
a a r
h get back the ring she donated? Why B
C
May Rosalie
s or why not?
eprovides that the donation of a movable may be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The Civil Code l
bthe value of the personal property donated exceeds
P5000.00, the donation and theo
made orally or in writing. However, if

R case at bar, the ring donated by Rosalie was worth

acceptance shall be made in writing. Otherwise, the

P25,000.00 but the donation and the acceptance were not made inr
n
donation shall be void. In the
a B a writing, hence, such

C h
donation was void. Rosalie may get back the ring. (Article 748 Civil
s
Code).

2. The Deed of Donation dated May 3, 1965 stated:

l e
o b & successors; this lot is now in the
“I, DONOR, XXX devise a lot to DONEE, her heirs, assigns,
possession of DONEE since 1962 in the concept Rofme,an owner; ownership shall be vested on
DONEE upon my demise; if DONEE predeceases n
a heirs.” a r to
the said lot shall not by reverted

h
DONOR but shall be inherited by DONEE’s
B
Is this a donation mortis causa orC e s
l
inter vivos . Explain fully.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The donation is inter vivos. The donor stipulated

o b that if the donee
R
predeceases her, the property will not be reverted to the donor but shall be inherited by
n
the heirs of the donee signaling the irrevocability of the passage of title to the donee’s
a a r
h which, being reflected on the same B
estate, waiving donor’s right to reclaim title. This transfer of title was perfected the

was on May 3, 1965. Donor also admitteds

moment the donor learned of the donee’s acceptance
deed, took place on the day of its execution which C
that the lot was already in the possession of the donee in the concept of an owner l e
b alsoby
since

o
1962 although the deed of donation was dated May 3, 1965. Donee’s acceptance

R
underscores its essence as a gift inter vivos as only donations inter vivos need acceptance
the recipient. (Villanueva vs Spouses Branoco, G.R. 172804, January 24, 2011).
n
a for several years
VIII. Ernesto, an OFW, was coming home to the Philippines after working
C h
in Saudi Arabia. He had saved P100,000.00 in his savings account in Manila. On his flight

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

home, Ernesto had a fatal heart attack. He left behind his widowed mother, his common-
law wife and their twin sons. Ernesto left no will, no debts and no other relatives and no
other properties except the money in his savings account. Who are the heirs entitled to
inherit from him and how much should each receive?

r
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Ernesto’s mother and twin illegitimate sons shall inherit from him.

B a
The mother shall get P50,000.00 while the sons shall receive P25,000.00 each. The
common-law-wife shall not inherit anything not being the legal heir of the decedent.
(Article 991 Civil Code).
e s
IX. Caloy and Celia arellegally married with Arnold, Ben, Cherry, Delia and Ernie as
o b and Greg are Cherry’s legitimate children. Ernie has Hector,
legitimate children. Francia

P240,000.00n
R
Irene and Jonathan as legitimate children. Ben died intestate leaving an estate of
with the following as surviving heirs: r Arnold, Francia, Greg, Delia, Hector,
a
Irene, Jonathan, Caloy and Celia. Divide the
B
estatea Ben among his relatives explaining
of

C h
your answer.
s
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Only Caloy andl e
b
Celia shall inherit the estate of Ben, getting equal

under the principle of proximity,o

shares of P120,000.00 each. The parents are the nearest relatives of the decedent and

R they exclude all other farther relatives of the decedent.

(Article 962 Civil Code).
a n a r
h
X. Rosalinda executed a will on December 1, 2011 instituting her BP20M.
husband Samuel as sole
and universal heir C (the spouses being childless) to her
e s
estate of A provision in her
will reads:
b l
“I institute my husband Samuel to my entire estate
anymore. I further order that he shall not haveR
oof P20M but he shall not marry
children with any woman, otherwise, the

an
free portion shall instead pass to my legal heirs.”
a r
Two years after the death of his wife,h Samuel remarried. Rosalinda’s legitimate B
s sister
Call his inheritance of P20M for having eviolated
Teresa contends that Samuel loses
b l your
condition imposed by his deceased wife. Rule on Teresa’s contention explaining
the

answer fully.
R o
n
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Teresa’s contention is untenable. There was no condition included
in the will. The Civil Code provides that an absolute a a r
such condition has been B
condition not to contract a first or
subsequent marriage shall be considered as not written
C hspouse,unless
or by the latter’s ascendants ors
imposed on the widow or widower by the deceased
descendants. However, in order to make the testamentary provision conditional,lsuch e
condition must fairly appear from the language used in the will. The condition shall
o bnot be
presumed. In the case at bar, there was no express condition imposed on the
R surviving

n
spouse not to marry again. (Article 874, Civil Code; Morente vs dela Santa, 9 Phil.387).

XI. Percival executed a will in 2010 disinheriting his legitimate son Reya
C h
unjust refusal to support him during his lifetime. Percival died in 2011
for the latter’s
and during the

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

probate of his will, Sammy, the legitimate son of Rey, intervened claiming the right to
represent his father from the inheritance of his grandfather. Can Sammy represent his
disinherited father?

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, but only with respect to the legitime which should have been

r
validly inherited by Rey had he not been lawfully disinherited by his father. As to the free

a
portion, there is no right of representation. (Article 856 Civil Code).
B
s
XII. Anton had two (2) legitimate children, Basilio and Carlos. Carlos had two (2) legitimate
e
bl
daughters, Donna and Erica. Carlos died in 2011 and Erica repudiated her inheritance from
her father. In the year 2012, Anton died. Can Erica inherit from Anton?

R o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The Civil Code provides that heirs who repudiate their share
may not ben represented but a person may represent r him whose inheritance he has
renounced.a the law expressly allows her toBrepresent
In the case at bar, Erica repudiated her a histhepredeceased
share from inheritance of her father
h
Cthe inheritance of his grandfather Anton.
Carlos; however,
s father Carlos
from
l e (Articles 976 and 977 of the Civil Code).
o b P1.5M which was stolen from her house during
XIII. Dina owned a valuable painting worth
a robbery which was duly reported
R hanging in Donna’s living room. Upon inquiry, Donna
to the police authorities. A year later, during a party in

a n
Donna’s house, Dina saw the painting
said she bought the painting in a gallery auction at the Luz Gallery.
a r The painting was
h Bthe said painting,
positively identified as the one stolen from Dina’s house. Dina demanded the return of her
property but Donna C refused to do so. Who has a better
e s
right to Dina or
Donna? Explain well your answer.
b l
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Dina has a better right too the painting which was unlawfully taken
from her house by robbers. The law providesR that if the possessor of a movable lost or of

an reimbursing
which the owner has been unlawfully deprived,
a rSince
has acquired it in good faith at a public
B of the
sale,

Donna acquired the movable property h

the owner cannot obtain its return without

Csale. (Article 559 Civil Code)

the price paid therefor.
s
from a public sale, she must be reimbursed
amount that she paid in the public
l e
XIV. Romy is the owner of a house and lot enclosed by the estates owned
o b by Sonny, Tommy
R
and Vahl. Romy has no access to the public highway, hence he demanded a right of way
n
through the property of Tommy which is the shortest way to the public highway. Tommy
refused and contended that the right of way should bea a r
hof way on Vahl’s property is not the B
constituted on the property of Vahl.

least prejudicial to the servient estate. s

It was proven that constituting the easement of right
shortest way to the public highway although it isC
l e
1. What are the requisites for the establishment of a compulsory easement of right of
o bway?
R
n
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Civil Code provides for the requisites for the establishment
abe established at a
the legal easement of right of way as follows: (1). The property is surrounded by other
of

C h
estates; (2). There is no adequate outlet to a public highway; (3). It must
point least prejudicial to the servient estate; (4). Payment of the proper indemnity; (5). The

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

isolation should not be due to the claimant’s own fault; (6). Demandable only by the owner
or one with a real right; (7) Absolutely necessary for use or cultivation. (Article 649 Civil
Code).

2. Over whose property should the legal easement of right of way be constituted? Explain

r
well.

B a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The legal easement of right of way should be constituted on the
s
property of Vahl. The law provides that the easement of right of way shall be established at
e
b l
the point least prejudicial to the servient estate, and insofar as consistent with this rule,
where the distance from the dominant estate to a public highway may be the shortest. In

R o
the case at bar, Tommy’s property may be the shortest way to the public highway.
However, it is through Vahl’s property which is least prejudicial to the servient estate,

an r
hence, the easement of right of way must be constituted on his real property. (Article 649
Civil Code).
B a
h
CRollie instituted his friend Romy obliged s
XV.
provided in his will that Romy shall be l e to preserve and transmit the said parcel of
as heir to a parcel of land in Cavite City. Rollie

b death. Rollie died in 2000. Rody died in 2001.

Romy died in 2003. Upon Romy’so
land to Romy’s brother Rody upon Romy’s

Romy and Rey, the only son of R

death, the claimants to the property are the children of

property? Explain well.

a n a r
Rody. If you were the judge, to whom will you adjudicate the

B in the case at bar

h There is no valid fideicommissary ssubstitution
SUGGESTED ANSWER: C e brothers, hence they are not
since the first heir, Romy and the second heir, Rody, are
b l
related by one degree to each other. A valid fideicommissary substitution require that the
first and second heirs must be related to eacho other by one degree only; there is an
obligation imposed on the first heir to preserve R and transmit the property to the second

an substitution
heir; both the first and the second heirs must
a r of
be alive or at least conceived at the moment
B
the compulsory heirs and must not h
of death of the testator; the fideicommissary must not burden the legitime
s
C his own children shall inherit theeparcel of land he
be conditional. Not being a valid fideicommissary

inherited from Rollie. (Article 863 Civil Code; Ramirez vs Ramirez, 111l
substitution, upon the death of Romy,
b SCRA 704)

XVI. Anton, single, without any ascendant or descendant, buto

R with legitimate brothers
n
Arnold and Abel, executed a notarial will on January 2, 2010, complying with the
a a r
h Anton instituted as sole heir in his B
formalities of law. He instituted as sole heir to his estate of P10M his girlfriend Annabel. On

3 other friends Abet, Arceli and Abigails

December 2, 2010, Anton and Annabel parted ways.
holographic will his best friend Archie. Anton’s C
knew the contents of the holographic will which they read and re-read the day itlwas e
o
executed by Anton. On March 9, 2012, while cleaning his drawer, Anton, without intentionb1, 2013,
to revoke, inadvertently burned the only copy of his holographic will. On June
R
Anton died. Who will inherit Anton’s estate? Explain well.
n
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Annabel shall inherit Anton’s estate of P10M.aBased on the given
Ch the only copy
facts, the holographic will impliedly revoked the notarial will. Unfortunately,

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

of said holographic will was burned inadvertently by the testator. Since the holographic
will cannot be presented before the probate court, it cannot be allowed by the probate
court even with the testimonies of the testator’s three friends who were able to read the
will and knew its contents. Under the doctrine of dependent relative revocation, if the
revoking will cannot be allowed by the probate court, it is as if there was no revoking will,

r
hence we can revive the notarial will. (de Molo vs Molo, 90 Phil 37).

B a
XVII. Albert has three sons, Bernie, Carlos and Dennis. Albert made a will instituting as
s
heirs Bernie, Carlos and Albert’s best friend, Efren, without designation of shares. If Albert’s
e
well l
estate is P12M when he died, how should the estate be distributed to the heirs? Explain
b
R o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Preterition is present in this case as one compulsory heir in the

heirs anda
n
direct line was completely omitted in the inheritance, r hence, we annul the institution of the
aheirsuccession.
h B
distribute the testator’s estate by intestate Albert’s three sons shall

C855 Civil Code).

receive
and
P4M each. Efren who is not a
s
compulsory
e
shall receive nothing. (Article 854

XVIII. Cecilia, executed a holographic b

l
o will on Jan. 1, 2010 containing several dispositions. In

R Emilia’seach
one disposition, Cecilia gave P100,000.00 to her sisters Digna & Emilia as legacies. On

ar in her will.
anabsence of Cecilia’s signature on theBalteration
Feb. 14, 2011, Decilia crossed-out name in her disposition. On May 9, 2013, Cecilia
died. What is the effect of the

C hThe disposition which contained ansalteration shall be considered

leconsidered
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
not written but the entire will shall not be considered void. Only those dispositions which
did not comply with Articles 812, 813 and 814 shallbbe null and void, not the
entire will.
R o
any ascendant or descendant. Her estatea
n and Rosemarie, died intestate, without
XIX. Rosalie, the illegitimate daughter of Reynaldo
a r
h worth P2M is being claimed by Rosario, the
Bmother
C estate? Explain well?
legitimate daughter of her father Reynaldo
s
and Rodrigo, the legitimate son of her
e
l
Rosemarie. Who shall enherit Rosalie’s

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Neither Rosario nor Rodrigo shall inherit b

o Rosalie’s estate. Under
R the legitimate relative
the law, the illegitimate relative shall not inherit ab intestato from
nof Rosalie who are prohibited ar
and vice versa. There is an iron barrier prohibiting them from inheriting from each
a B
other.Rosario and Rodrigo are both legitimate half-siblings
by the iron-barrier-rule to inherit from the latter byh
s
intestate succession.
C e
XX. Carlos borrowed P1.2M from Carmelo. He executed a mortgage contract over his parcel l
b of
Carlos to pay the debt with 12% interest within one (1) year, the mortgaged o
of land as security for the loan. It was expressly agreed by the parties that upon failure

R Carmelo
land would

a n
rightfully belong to Carmelo. Carlos failed to pay within the agreed period, hence,
contends he now becomes the owner of the land. Is Carmelo correct in his contention?
Why?
C h

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. The mortgagee cannot automatically appropriate the

mortgaged property upon failure of the mortgagor to fulfill the principal obligation which is
the payment of the loan on the period agreed upon by them. This will constitute pactum
commissorium which is prohibited by law. The proper procedure is for the mortgagee to
foreclose the mortgage and sell the property in a public auction. (Article 2088 Civil Code).

a r
XXI. Danny obtained a P500,000.00 loan from Diego payable on December 31, 2005, with
B
Dennis as guarantor. On due date, Danny failed to pay his debt. On January 5, 2006, Diego
s
demanded payment from Dennis. If you were Dennis, what defense would you interpose to
e
l
avoid liability? Explain fully what he must do to interpose this defense.
b
R o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: As guarantor, I shall interpose the defense of excussion. The
properties of the principal debtor must be exhausted first before my properties shall be

an r
liable to the creditor considering that I am only subsidiarily liable. In order to make use of

B a
the benefit of excussion, I shall set it up against the creditor upon the latter’s demand for

Ch s
payment from me, and point out to the creditor available properties of the debtor within
e
the Philippines, sufficient to cover the amount of the debt. (Article 2060 Civil Code)
l
XXII. Carmelo and Danilo entered intob

Rothat
a Contract of Lease over a parcel land with a building
owned by Carmelo for use by Danilo as a movie theater for a term of 10 years. The Contract

a n
of Lease contained the stipulation
rexclusive option to
“if during the 10-year-period, if the lessor should
decide to sell the leased premises, the lessee shall be given 30 days
a
purchase the same. In the event the leased premises is sold B
lessee, the lessor C
h to someone other than the
s Carmelo
l
this lease and be bound by all terms & conditions thereof.” e
is bound to stipulate in the Deed of Sale that the purchaser shall recognize
decided to sell the
leased real property, hence, Danilo was notified of the
that he was exercising the option to buy. Two o
b offer. Danilo replied to the former
(2) weeks later, Carmelo sold the leased
property to Emil. After learning of the sale to R Emil, Danilo filed a complaint for specific
performance and rescission of the Contract
annot?ofExplain
Sale between Carmelo and Emil. Can
B a r the
h
Contract of Sale be rescinded? Why or why fully. (5%)
s
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes, theC Contract of Sale may be rescinded. Thiseis a right of first
refusal incorporated in the Contract of Lease and it must be respected l
b by the lessor and the
o granted to a party
lessee. The lessee has notified the lessor that he is exercising the right of first refusal within
R
the period granted in their contract of lease. Rescission is a remedy
n 21, 1996).
when there is a substantial breach, not merely a casual breach, in the agreement.
aNov. a r
B
(Equatorial Realty Dev. Vs Mayfair Theater, G.R. 106063,

XXIII. Araceli and Agaton entered into a contractC

h
of loan of P100,000.00 on January 1, 2012s
l e
bdidshall
secured by a promissory note whereby Agaton obligated himself to pay on or before

o
December 31, 2013. On June 1, 2013, Agaton wrote to Araceli stating that Armando

R
take care of his debt to Araceli . Araceli did not reply to Agaton’s letter. Armando not

contends that he is no longer liable as there was novation by substitutingn

pay Araceli. On January 5, 2014, Araceli sued Agaton for the payment of the loan. Agaton

debtor by delegacion. Rule on Agaton’s contention explaining fully youraanswer.

the person of the

Ch

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Agaton’s contention is not tenable. For delegacion to be proper,

there must be the consent of the creditor to the substitution of debtors. Araceli did not
reply to Agaton’s letter offering a new debtor Armando to substitute him as old debtor.
Novation which consist in substituting a new debtor in the place of the original one may be
made even without the knowledge or against the will of the latter, but not without the

r
consent of the creditor. (Article 1293 Civil Code).

B a
XXIV. On October 1, 2013, Joey wrote to Mario and communicated to the latter that he is
s
selling his house and lot for the total purchase price of P2M. Joey gave Mario the option to
e
b l
buy the said real property until October 31, 2013. Mario accepted the offer with the
agreement that if Mario will not be able to exercise the option, Mario shall allow Joey and

R o
his relatives to stay and use his (Mario’s) condo unit in Baguio City for the whole month of
December 2013. On October 15, 2013, Joey informed Mario that he was withdrawing his

an r
offer to him and he was selling his house and lot to Oscar considering that Mario did not

B a
give a consideration distinct from the price. Rule on Joey’s contention.

C h s
SUGGESTED
ethe offer as there was a consideration distinct
ANSWER: This is an option contract which is valid and binding between the
l
b the offeree a certain period to accept, the offer
contracting parties. Joey cannot withdraw

may be withdrawn at any time o

from the price. When the offerer has allowed

R upon a consideration, as something paid or promised.

before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal,

The consideration distinct from the price in this case at bar is that if r
n
except when the option is founded
a a Mario will not be able
BDecember
use his (Mario’s)C
h
to buy Joey’s house and lot, then Mario shall allow the latter and
s
his relatives to stay and

consideration distinct from the price since it is allowede

condo unit in Baguio for the whole month of 2013. This is a

form of money or any undertaking. (Article 1324 Civil b l Serra vs Court of Appeals, G.R.
that the consideration be in the
Code;
103338, Jan. 4, 1994)
R o
Belinda who predeceased her husband.a
XXV. Antonio was the acknowledged natural n child of Gregorio. Antonio was married a rHazelto
and Carmelo who was married to h B Evelyn.
Antonio and Belinda had legitimate children

Carmelo died on Nov. 1, 2007 of C s

Donita. Carmelo and Donita have a daughter,
e and in his will,
he devised a parcel of land to Evelyn. On Dec. 25, 2009, Evelyn died inl
lung cancer. On Feb. 14, 2008, Antonio died

o
and without issue and the parcel of land was inherited by her mother b Donita intestate. On
a plane crash, single

R
June 1, 2010, Donita died without a will with the following as surviving relatives: Francia,
n
Donita’s sister; Gregorio, father of Antonio and Hazel; sister of Carmelo. Who should validly
a a r
B
inherit this parcel of land?

C h
requisites of reservatroncal are present.s
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Hazel shall inherit. All the
l eby
b of
Antonio was the origin; Evelyn was the propositus who acquired the property

o
gratuitous title and Donita was the reservor who acquired the property by operation

origin. Antonio, although also a 3 degree relative of Evelyn, is excluded R

law. Hazel is the relative of the propositus within the 3 degree belonging to the
rd line of the

n because of the
rd

iron-barrier rule.
a
C h

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

I. Answer briefly but completely and with legal basis:

1. Arnold and Belinda were married on June 1, 2005. They have 2 children, Abigail and

r
Benjie. Their marriage was judicially declared null and void on February 14, 2009 due to

B a
the absence of a valid marriage license. There was no liquidation of their assets acquired
during their marriage. Arnold subsequently married Carina on June 1, 2012 complying with
s
all the essential and formal requisites provided for by the Family Code.
e
b l and Carina valid, voidable or void? Explain well. (2.5%)
a. Is the marriage of Arnold

Ro
b. What is the property regime governing their marriage? Why? (2.5%)

ANSWER:a
n a r
h B
a. C s
emarriage, the partition and distribution of the
The marriage of Arnold and Carina is void. The Family Code provides that the judgment
l
b of the children’s presumptive legitimes shall be
of annulment or of absolute nullity of the

o
properties of the spouses , and the delivery

Rof theandformer
recorded in the proper civil registry registries of property; otherwise, the same shall

a n
not affect third persons. Either
r be null and void.
spouses may marry again after complying
with these requirements; otherwise, the subsequent marriage shall
a
h
(Articles 52 and 53 of the Family Code). B
C s
Although Arnold and Carina complied with the essential and
there was no compliance with Article 52 of the b le Code,
Family
formal requisites of marriage,
hence, the subsequent
marriage is considered null and void.
R o
b. Since the marriage of Arnold and Carinan rthere
a is 147 a
null and void, the property regime governing
B
C h
their marriage is co-ownership under Article
is no legal impediment to their marriage.
of the Family Code considering that
s
2. Anton was legally married to Bella and they have two children, l
e
o
During the subsistence of the marriage of Anton and Bella, the latter bcohabited with Fred,
Cherry and Danny .

R
who himself was married to Gretchen. From the cohabitation of Bella and Fred, Hector was
n
born on March 4, 2009. On December 1, 2012, Fred died in a vehicular accident. Bella, on
a a r
To prove Hector’s filiation to Fred, Bella B
behalf of Hector, intervened in the settlement of Fred’s estate alleging that Hector is
entitled to inherit from Fred as his illegitimate son. h
C report cards where Fred was indicateds
presented Hector’s baptismal certificate and school
l eon
several occasions. On the other hand, Gretchen contends that Hector’s action isb
as Hector’s father. She also presented pictures showing Fred and Hector together

o
already
barred by Fred’s death.
R
a n
a. May Hector prove his filiation with Fred and be entitled to share in Fred’s estate (2.5%)

C h

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

b. Will your answer be the same had the first marriage of Anton and Bella had been
terminated by the death of Anton one year prior to the birth of Hector? Explain well. (2.5%)

ANSWER:

r
a. No, Hector may not be allowed to prove his filiation with Fred and share in the latter’s

B a
estate as he is considered the legitimate child of the valid marriage between Anton and
Bella. Under Article 164 of the Family Code, children conceived or born during the
s
marriage of his parents are legitimate. Hector was born during the valid marriage of Anton
e
b l
and Bella, hence, he is a legitimate child of that valid marriage. Moreover, the legitimacy of
the child may be impugned only by the husband and only on special cases, by the heirs of

R o
the husband, which is not applicable in the case at bar. It was not shown in the facts of this
case that Anton impugned the legitimacy of Hector within the period provided for by the
Family Code.
a n a r
b. Myh Bfrom the cohabitation of Bella and Fred
Cwas legally married to Gretchen, hence,
who s
answer will be different. Hector was born
eyearheprior
is considered the illegitimate child of Fred
and Bella. Anton was already dead one
b l to Hector’s birth, hence the former

was proving his filiation to Fred o

cannot be his father. Unfortunately, Hector still cannot inherit from Fred’s estate since he

R using pieces of evidence under the second paragraph of

a n illegitimate children may establish their

Article 172 which include his baptismal
Article 175 of the Family Code, rillegitimate filiation
certificate, school report cards and pictures. Under
a
h
in the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children Btheexcept when the action is
C
based on the second paragraph of Article 172, in which
e s
case action may be brought

Fred using pieces of evidence under the 2 paragraph

nd
b lArticle 172 was already barred by
during the lifetime of the alleged parent. Hector’s action to
of
prove his illegitimate filiation to

Fred’s death.
R o
3. On a 500 sq.m. lot worth P1M located in Makati City with TCT # 1234 registeredr
anbuilt their house worth P900,000.00.aSpouses
in the
B quiet as
names of Spouses Reyes, Spouses Santos
h
C such time that the construction is completely
Reyes became aware of the construction
s
when they visited their land but they kept

State the rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes (2.5%) and Spouses l
they did not want any trouble until e finished.
on the facts given.
o b Santos (2.5%) based

R
ANSWER:
a n a r
Spouses Reyes (landowners) and Spouses Santos (builders)
the bad faith of one neutralizes the bad faithC
h were both in bad faith, hence B
of the other and both of them shall bes
considered in good faith. Sps. Reyes were in bad faith since they were already aware l of e
b
the

Santos were also in bad faith since they constructed their house on land titled ino
construction being done on their land by Sps. Santos but they did not object thereto. Sps.

R the names

an
of Spouses Reyes. The rights and obligations of the parties are governed by Article 448 of
the Civil Code.

The rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes as landowners in goodh

C faith are:

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

1. The right to appropriate the house constructed by Sps. Santos after payment of the
necessary & useful expenses incurred by Sps. Santos in the construction;

2. The right to sell the land encroached upon since the value of the land is not considerably
more than the value of the house, hence, forced lease is not applicable

a r
The rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes as builders in good faith are:
B
s
1. The right to reimbursement of the necessary & useful expenses incurred in the
e
l
construction of their house;
b
o
2. The right of retention until fully paid of the necessary & useful expenses;
R
an r
3. The right to buy the land encroached upon considering that the value of the land is not

B a
considerably more than the value of the house, hence, forced lease is not applicable.

4. C
h s
eon this land. How would the hidden treasure be
Edgar was the usufructuary of a parcel of land owned by Fred. With the consent of Edgar
l
divided between the parties? (5%) b
and by chance, Greg found hidden treasure

Ro
ANSWER:
a n a r
h
The hidden treasure shall be equally divided between Fred, the
hidden treasure was found and Greg, the finder. Edgar was s
Bowner of the land where
C
land and not the owner, hence, he does not get any share. e
merely the usufructuary of the

b l (Article 438 NCC)

5. Corazon Reyes and Carlos Santos were marriedo on Dec. 1, 2007. Since that time, Corazon
has been using the name Corazon Santos in all R her employment records and other official
documents. On Feb. 2, 2008, upon petition n
a a decree of annulment was granted a rby the
of Corazon, due to concealment of habitual

h Corazon filed with the same court B

alcoholism existing at the time of their marriage,

Cof “Reyes” and that she be granted support

Family Court of Manila. Subsequently,
e s a motion to

l
resume using her maiden surname by Carlos.

b
Ro
a. If you were the judge, would you grant the motion of Corazon to resume using her
maiden surname? (2.5%)

b. Should Corazon be granted support by her husband?a

n a r
B
(2.5%)

ANSWER: Ch e s
l
bwife is
o
a. Yes. Under Article 371 of the Civil Code, in case of annulment of marriage, and the

spouse, she may resume her maiden name and surname. In the case at bar,R
the guilty party, she shall resume her maiden name and surname. If she is the innocent

n Corazon is the
a and surname.
innocent spouse, hence, she has the option to resume using her maiden name

Ch

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

b. No more. The final judgment in annulment of marriage shall provide for the liquidation,
partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses, the custody and support of the
common children, and the delivery of their presumptive legitimes, unless such matters had
been adjudicated in previous judicial proceedings. After such liquidation and partition of
the properties of the spouses, there is no more obligation to support each other. (Article 50

r
NCC).

B a
6. Anton and Belinda are husband and wife. They have an only son Carlos. Belinda has a
s
daughter, Donita, by a previous marriage which was declared void by the proper court.
e
b l
Anton, a widower at the time he married Belinda, has a son, Elmer, with his first wife.
Donita and Elmer who had never been introduced to each other by Anton and Belinda, met

R o
at a party and eventually fell in love with each other. Donita and Elmer, both 25 years of
age, eloped and complying with all the essential and formal requisites of marriage, got
n
married before Judge Franco of the RTC of Manila.
a a r
h is the nature of the marriage of Donita &B
C
a. What
s Elmer? Explain well. (2.5%)
e What is the nature of the marriage between
b l
b. Suppose it was Carlos whom Donita married.

o
Carlos and Donita. Explain fully. (2.5%).

R
ANSWER:
a n a r
h
a. The marriage of Donita and Elmer is valid. It is not incestuous
Donita and ElmerC are step-sister and step-brother to eachs
Bnor against public policy.
l e to their marriage.
they are not related to each other and there is no prohibition
other. Under the Family Code,

b. The marriage of Donita and Carlos is null and o b

void as it is incestuous and prohibited
under Article 37 of the Family Code. Donita and
brother to each other and their marriage isn
RCarlos are half-blood sister and half-blood
prohibited by law for being incestuous. r
a Bahad pre-
h s she was only
marital sex resulting to Raquel’sC
7. Peter and Raquel, both 16 years old, were so in love with each other that they
e
l they were both 18
pregnancy. Raquel gave birth to Oscar when
17 years old. Peter and Raquel married each other on June 1, 2010 when
o b
years old. May Oscar be legitimated due to the marriage of his parents, Peter & Raquel?
(5%)
R
a n a r
B
ANSWER:

C h
Act Providing For The Legitimation Ofs
a. Oscar may be legitimated under RA 9858. An
Children Born To Parents Below Marrying Age (approved Dec. 20, 2009). Thisllaw e
amended Articles 177 and 178 of the Family Code which now read:
o b
Art.177. Children conceived & born outside of wedlock of parents who, R
n at the time of

were so disqualified only because either or both of them were below a

conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other, or

Ch
18 years of age, may
be legitimated.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Art.178. Legitimation shall take place by a subsequent valid marriage between parents. The
annulment of a voidable marriage shall not affect the legitimation.

It must be noted that the only impediment existing at the time of conception of Oscar for
his parents to get married to each other was the fact that both of them were below the

r
marrying age of 18. Considering that Peter and Raquel got married to each other after

child.
B a
attaining the age of 18, Oscar may be legitimated to raise him to the level of a legitimate

es
b l
8. Jennifer was born in 1981 and was registered as “female” in her birth certificate. She was
later diagnosed to be afflicted with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), a rare condition

R o
where a person possesses both male and female characteristics. Tests revealed that her
ovarian structures had minimized, she has clitoral hyperthropy, she stopped growing and

an r
she has no breasts or menstrual development. She has practically become a male person.

B a
She filed a petition before the RTC of Siniloan, Laguna that her name in her birth certificate

Ch s
be changed from “Jennifer” to “Jeff” and her gender from “female” to “male”. If you were the
e
judge hearing this case, will you grant or deny her petition? (5%)
l
ANSWER:
o b
R
an r
Jennifer’s petition should be granted. In the case of Republic vs. Cagandahan, the Supreme
a
Court held that considering that Jennifer was born an intersex, the determining factor in
B
Ch
his/her gender classification would be what he/she, having reached the age of majority,

e s
with good reason, thinks of his/her sex. More importantly in this case, Jennifer did not use
l
any drug nor underwent any sex re-assignment to change her gender from female to male.
b
R o
9. Anton, Bernie and Caloy are brothers. They purchased from their parents specific
portions of a parcel of land as evidenced by 3 separate deeds of sale, each deed referring to

an a r
a particular lot in metes and bounds. When the deeds were presented for registration, the
B
Ch
Register of Deeds of Pasay City could not issue separate certificates of title due to the
s
absence of a subdivision plan, hence, only 1 title was issued in the names of the three
e
b l
brothers. Anton, Bernie, and Caloy each receive the fruits exclusively from the lot actually
purchased by each of them. Later, Anton sold his lot to Dencio, with verbal notice to his

R o
brothers. To enable Dencio to secure a new title in his name, the Deed of Sale was made to
refer to an undivided interest in the property of Anton, with the metes and bounds of the

an r
lot being stated. Bernie and Caloy reacted violently to the sale executed by Anton signifying
their exercise of the right of legal redemption as co-owners of the lot. Can Bernie and Caloy
Ba
Ch s
still legally redeem the lot sold by Anton to Dencio? (5%)

l e
b
ANSWER:

R o
Under the law, there is co-ownership whenever the ownership of an undivided thing or

an
right belongs to different persons. There is no more co-ownership between the brothers as
specific portions of the land were sold to them even if only one title was issued to them.

Ch
The right of legal redemption is no longer available since no more co-ownership exists
between the brothers. ( Spouses Si vs CA, GR 122047, October 12, 2000).

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

10. Dina owned a valuable painting worth P1.5M which was stolen from her house during a
robbery which was duly reported to the police authorities. A year later, during a party at
Erica’s house. Dina saw the painting hanging in Erica’s living room. Upon inquiry, Erica said
she bought the painting in a gallery auction sale at the Luz Gallery for P1M. The painting
was positively identified as the one stolen from Dina’s house. Can Dina recover this

r
painting from Erica? (5%)

ANSWER:
B a
es
l
Yes, Dina was unlawfully deprived of her personal property but she must reimburse Erica
b
of the P1M the latter paid in the gallery auction sale.

R o
Under Article 559 of the New Civil Code, the possession of movable property acquired in
good faith isnequivalent to a title. Nevertheless, one whor has lost any movable or has been
unlawfully a of the movable lost or of which theBowner
deprived thereof, may recover it from a has been
the person in possession of the same. If
h
the possessor
acquired s
C it in good faith at a public sale,e the owner cannot obtain its return without
unlawfully deprived, has

reimbursing the price paid therefor.

b l
owho had been married for ten years was pregnant for
the first time, Rosalie donated R
11. Elated that her sister Rosemarie

a n when they talked while shopping

profuse in thanking her sister
a rfor baby clothes at
a ring worth P25,000.00 to the unborn child. Rosemarie was

Rustan’s. Rosemarie gave birth after 7½ months of pregnancy B

C h but the baby died 21 hours
s why not? (5%)
after delivery. May Rosalie get back the ring she donated? Why
l e or

ANSWER: b
osince there was no compliance with the
Yes, Rosalie may recover the ring that she donated
formalities required by law. Article 748 of n
R
a movable property may be made orallya or in writing. If the value of the personala
the New Civil Code provides that the donationr of
h the donation and the acceptance shallB
property

writing. Otherwise, the donationC

donated exceeds five thousand pesos,
e s be made in

worth P25,000.00 and there was no showing that said donation andlacceptance were in
shall be void. In the case at bar, the donation was a ring

writing, even a private instrument, hence, the donation is consideredbvoid.

R o
n
12. Benigno who was terminally ill, signed the will with Bonnie, the 1 witness, at his
st

bedside. Benjie, the 2 witness, was in the far sideaof the room fully engrossed and a r
Bobot, the 3 witness, was in the B
nd

concentrated in the cross word puzzle he was doing.

C hscrabble with the grandchildren ofs
rd

other side of the room near the window, playing

l ein
b
Benigno. Benigno died on January 2, 2013. It was contended that the will was not signed

o
the presence of the witnesses, hence void. Rule on this contention. (5%)

R
ANSWER:
n
a real test of signing
C h
The will is valid. In Jaboneta vs Gustilo, the Supreme Court held that the
the will “in the presence” of the testator and the three credible witnesses does not

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

necessarily require actually seeing the signing but only the possibility of seeing the signing
without any physical obstruction to impair the vision. If the testator and the three
witnesses were together in one room and one witness merely turned his back while
another witness was already in the act of signing the will, such signing is still considered
made in his presence. What is important is the opportunity to have seen the signing of the

r
document because there was no physical obstruction.

B a
13. Anton had two (2) legitimate children, Basilio and Carlos. Carlos had two (2) legitimate
s
daughters, Donna and Erica. Carlos died in 2011 and Erica repudiated her inheritance from
e
l
her father Carlos. In the year 2012, Anton died. Can Erica inherit from Anton? (5%)
b
ANSWER:
R o
an r
Yes, Erica can inherit from his grandfather Anton. Under Article 977 of the New Civil Code,

B a
an heir who repudiates cannot be represented. However, under Article 976 of the same

Ch s
Code, a person who repudiates may represent him whose inheritance he has renounced. In
e
the case at bar, Erica repudiated her inheritance from her father Carlos but she can validly
l
b
represent her predeceased father in the inheritance of her grandfather Anton.

R o
14. Perlita executed a notarial will on Aug. 16, 2004, complying with all the formalities

an r
required by law. On May 9, 2006 when she was already 92 years old, too weak because of
a
her terminal cancer even to rise from her bed, with intention to revoke, she asked her
B
Ch
housemaid Ponciana to get her will and burn it. Ponciana got the will from the drawer near

e s
Perlita’s bed, went to the kitchen, burned the will and showed the ashes of the burned will
l
to Perlita. Was there a valid revocation of the will by burning? Explain well. (5%)
b
ANSWER:
R o
an a r
There was no revocation of Perlita’s will by burning. The law allows the revocation by an
B
Ch
overt act to be done personally by the testator or by another person. However, if the overt
s
act was done by another person, such overt act must be done in the presence and under the
e
b l
express direction of the testator. In the case at bar, the revocation of the will by burning
was done by Ponciana, Perlita’s housemaid, under the latter’s express direction but the

burning. (Article 830 NCC).

R o
burning was not done in her presence, hence, there was no valid revocation of the will by

an
15. Abigail borrowed P25,000.00 from Betsy & delivered her watch to the latter as pledge
Ba r
Ch s
to secure the payment of her debt.

l e
b
a. What is the presumption under the law if the watch is later found in the possession of

o
Abigail? Explain well. (2.5%)

R
an
b. Is Abigail’s obligation to pay the P25,000.00 loan already extinguished? Why? (2.5%)

Ch
ANSWER:

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

a. Under Article 1274 of the New Civil Code, it is presumed that the accessory obligation of
pledge has been remitted when the thing pledged, after its delivery to the creditor, is found
in the possession of the debtor, or of a third person who owns the thing. Considering that
the pledged watch is again in the possession of the debtor Abigail, after the latter delivered
said watch to her creditor, Betsy, the presumption is that Betsy has condoned the pledge.

a r
b. No. Under the law, the renunciation of the principal debt shall extinguish the accessory
B
obligations; but the waiver of the latter shall leave the former in force. (Article 1273 NCC).
s
In the case at bar, only the accessory obligation of pledge has been condoned by Betsy,
e
P25,000.00 to Betsy.
b l
hence, the principal obligation of loan, still subsists. Abigail must pay her debt of

o
Rupon by the parties is only P100,000.00. Is this contract valid, voidable or
16. Rolly and Oscar entered into a pacto de retro sale of Oscar’s house and lot worth P10M.
n
The price agreed
a well. (5%) a r
void? Explain
h B
C
ANSWER:
e s
l
b of a valid contract are present: consent of the
contracting parties, object certaino
The contract is valid. All the requisites

R (Article 1318 NCC). The gross inadequacy of the price

which is the subject matter of the contract and cause of

agreed upon by the parties is immaterial considering that this is a r

n
the obligation which is established.
a a pacto de retro sale. In
B repurchase his own
C h
this kind of sales, the price is unusually lower to allow the seller
s
to
property within an agreed period of time.
e
l Honda Civic 2005 model car
17. On Sept. 1, 2007, Romy was interested to buy abspecific
from a second hand car shop in Makati. Sonny, the
the said car was P300,000.00. Romy acceptedR
oshop manager told him that the price of
the offer but told Sonny to give him one (1)

an
week to raise the amount. There and then,
a
Romy gave an initial amount of P10,000.00rto the
hhim that the car has already been offeredB
promising to come back on Sept. 7, 2012 to complete the payment. Romy returned

C that even with the money given byeRomy,

shop on Sept. 8, 2012 but Sonny told
s and sold to
Tony for P500,000. Sonny contended
good only until Sept. 7, 2012 considering that their agreement is only
b l good for one (1)
the offer is

the car can be sold to another person and the P10,000.00 option
R o
week. He further contended that after Sept. 7, 2012, the offer can now be withdrawn and
money forfeited in his
n
favor. Do you agree with Sonny’s contention? Explain well. (5%)
a a r
h B
s
ANSWER:
C e
No, I do not agree with Sonny’s contention. There was already a perfected contract of l
b are
sale

present: consent of the contracting parties, object certain which was the Hondao
between Sonny and Romy over this specific car. All the requisites of a valid contract

model car, and cause or consideration which was the P300,000.00. (ArticleR
Civic 2005

n 1318 NCC). It

certain object within a period of time, such offer may be withdrawn a

should not be construed as an option contract which is only an offer to buy or not to buy a

time before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal, except h by the offerer at any
C when the option is

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

founded upon a consideration distinct from the price. Not being an option contract but a
perfected contract of sale between the parties, Sonny can no longer sell the car to another
person nor have the earnest money given by Romy forfeited in his favor.

18. Arnold, Boyet and Caloy borrowed P120,000.00 from Dennis. This debt is evidenced by

r
a promissory note (PN) wherein the three bound themselves to pay the debt jointly and

B a
severally. According to the PN, Arnold can be compelled to pay on June 15, 2012; Boyet can
be compelled to pay on January 15, 2013; while Caloy can be compelled to pay on June 15,
s
2014. On February 15, 2014, Dennis made a demand upon Caloy to pay the entire
e
b l
indebtedness but the latter refused to pay contending that his share is not yet due and
demandable. Subsequently, because of Caloy’s refusal to pay the debt, Dennis brought an

R o
action against him for the collection of the full amount of the obligation. Will the action of
Dennis prosper? Explain fully (5%)

ANSWER: an B a r
h
Cis a solidary obligation. As evidenced s
This
l e bytothepaypromissory note, the three debtors,

b any of the solidary debtors to pay the entire

Arnold, Boyet and Caloy, bound themselves their creditor Dennis, jointly and

o
severally, hence, the creditor may compel

R the obligations of Arnold and Boyet are already due and

amount of the debt even if they are not bound in the same manner and by the same periods

a n
and conditions. In the case at bar,
demandable, hence, Caloy can be compelled to pay P80,000.00. Caloy’s
a r own obligation is
h
only due and demandable on June 15, 2014 and he can be compelled B to pay P40,000.00
when the period hasC arrived. (Article 1211 NCC).
e s
19. Arnold appointed Anton as his agent to manage his b lprawn business in Dumaguete City.
Anton, who is based in Manila wants to appoint Arman
R o as his substitute.
an Why or why not? (1%) Bar
a. Can Anton validly appoint Arman as his substitute?

b. As to Anton, what is the effect ofh

e s
C his appointment of Arman as his substitute? Explain

l
well. (1.5%)

c. Give the modes of extinguishing agency. (2.5%)

o b
R
ANSWER:
a n a r
h Under Article 1892, the agents B
a. Yes, Anton can validly appoint a substitute or a sub-agent.
may appoint a substitute if the principal has notC prohibited him from doing so.
l e
o
b. In view of his appointment of Arman as his substitute, Anton shall be responsible bfor the
acts of his substitute Arman:
R
(1). When he was not given the power to appoint one;
a n
C h
(2). When he was given such power, but without designating the person,

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

and the person appointed was notoriously incompetent or insolvent.

c. Under Article 1919, Agency is extinguished by its revocation, by the withdrawal of the
agent, by the death, civil interdiction, insanity or insolvency of the principal or of the agent,
by the dissolution of the firm or corporation which entrusted or accepted the agency or by

r
the accomplishment of the object or the purpose of the agency.

B a
20. Bert, Bart and Bong agreed to form a partnership to be engaged in the sale of appliances
s
and furniture. Bert agreed to contribute P1M; Bart agreed to contribute a parcel of land
e
industry.
b l
with a building where the business shall be conducted and Bong agreed to contribute his

R o
a. What formalities must be complied with by Bert, Bart and Bong in order to constitute a

a n
legal and valid partnership? (2.5%)
a r
h B on Bert and Bart as capitalist partners
Con Bong as industrial partner? e
b. Under
and s
the law, what are the restrictions imposed

b l
Roin any form, except where immovable property or real
ANSWER:

a n in which case a public instrument shall

a. A partnership may be constituted
rights are contributed thereto,
a rbe necessary. Every
h
contract of partnership having a capital of three thousand pesos B or more, in money or
C
property, shall appear in a public instrument, which must be
e sis void, wheneverOffice
recorded in the of the

b
property is contributed thereto, if an inventory of said lproperty is not made, signed by the
Securities & Exchange Commission. A contract of partnership immovable

formalities prescribed by law, otherwise, theirR oBart and Bong must comply with these
parties, and attached to the public instrument. Bert,
contract of partnership shall be considered
void. (Articles 1771, 1772, 1773 NCC).
an a r
Boperation
h s
C in which the partnership is engaged,eunless there is a
b. Bert and Bart as capitalist partners cannot engage for their own account in any

l shall bring to
which is of the same kind of business

o
the common funds any profits accruing to him from his transactions, b
stipulation to the contrary. Any capitalist partner violating this prohibition
and shall personally
bear all the losses. (Article 1808 NCC).
R
n
Bong, the industrial partner, cannot engage in anyabusiness for himself, unless the a r
partnership expressly permits him to do so; and ifh he should do so, the capitalist partners B
may either exclude him from the firm or availC themselves of the benefits which he mays
l e
b
have obtained in violation of this provision, with a right to damages in either case. (Article

o
1789 NCC).

R
a n
C h

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph