BAR QUESTIONS

I.
On March 30, 2000, Mariano died intestate and was survived by his wife, Leonora, and children, Danilo and
Carlito. One of the properties he left was a piece of land in Alabang where he built his residential house.
After his burial, Leonora and Mariano’s children extrajudicially settled his estate. Thereafter, Leonora and
Danilo advised Carlito of their intention to partition the property. Carlito opposed invoking Article 159 of the
Family Code. Carlito alleged that since his minor child Lucas still resides in the premises, the family home
continues until that minor beneficiary becomes of age.
Is the contention of Carlito tenable? (4%)

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

III.
Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together as common law spouses and agreed to raise a son of Bert's
living brother as their child without legally adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took care of their home and
the boy. In their 20 years of cohabitation they were able to acquire real estate assets registered in their
names as co-owners. Unfortunately, Bert died of cardiac arrest, leaving no will. Bert was survived by his
biological siblings, Joe, and the boy.
a) Can Article 147 on co-ownership apply to Bert and Joe, whereby all properties they acquired will be
presumed to have been acquired by their joint industry and shall be owned by them in equal shares? (2%)
b) What are the successional rights of the boy Bert Joe and raised as their son? (2%)
c) If Bert and Joe had decided in the early years of their cohabitation to jointly adopt the boy, would they
have been legally allowed to do so? Explain with legal basis. (3%)

IV.
After finding out that his girlfriend Sandy was four (4) months pregnant, Sancho married Sandy. Both were
single and had never been in any serious relationship in the past. Prior to the marriage, they agreed in a
marriage settlement that the regime of conjugal partnership of gains shall govern their property relations
during marriage. Shortly after the marriage, their daughter, Shalimar, was born. Before they met and got
married, Sancho purchased a parcel of land on installment, under a Contract of Sale, with the full purchase
price payable in equal annual amortizations over a period of ten (10) years, with no down payment, and
secured by a mortgage on the land. The full purchase price was PhP1 million, with interest at the rate of 6%
per annum. After paying the fourth (4th) annual installment, Sancho and Sandy got married, and Sancho
completed the payments in the subsequent years from his salary as an accountant. The previous payments
were also paid out of his salary. During their marriage, Sandy also won PhP1 million in the lottery and used it
to purchase jewelry. When things didn't work out for the couple, they filed an action for declaration of nullity
of their marriage based on the psychological incapacity of both of them. When the petition was granted, the
parcel of land and the jewelry bought by Sandy were found to be the only properties of the couple.

A. What system of property relationship will be liquidated following declaration of nullity of their
marriage?
B. In the liquidation, who should get the parcel of land? The jewelry?

V.
Sofia and Semuel, both unmarried, lived together for many years in the Philippines and begot three children.
While Sofia stayed in the Philippines with the children, Semuel went abroad to work and became a
naturalized German citizen. He met someone in Germany whom he wanted to marry. Semuel thereafter
came home and filed a petition with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for partition ofthe common properties
acquired during his union with Sofia in the Philippines. The properties acquired during the union consisted of
a house and lot in Cavite worth PhP2 million, and some personal properties, including cash in bank
amounting to PhP1 million. All these properties were acquired using Samuel's salaries and wages since Sofia
was a stay-at-home mother. In retaliation, Sofia filed an action, on behalf of their minor children, for support.
How should the properties be partitioned?

VI.
Danny and Elsa were married in 2002. In 2012, Elsa left the conjugal home and her
two minor children with Danny to live with her paramour. In 2015. Danny sold
without EIsa’s consent a parcel of land registered in his name that he had purchased
prior to the marriage. Danny used the proceeds of the sale to pay for his children’s
tuition fees.
Is the sale valid, void or voidable? Explain your answer. (3%)