Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Instruction: Digest the cases given to you last time to be submitted in April. Answer the
following questions and problems by citing the provisions of law involve as well as cite cases
applicable by writing the digest of the case/cases.
5. Judicial decisions applying or interpreting laws or the Constitution shall form part of the
legal system of the Philippines. Are judicial decisions independent sources of laws?
a. Yes. The principal function of courts is not only resolving legal controversies but also
of interpreting and construing vague provisions of law relative to a particular
dispute.
a. Yes. Judicial decision applying and interpreting the law shall form part of the legal
system of the Philippines.
b. Yes. Judicial decisions, although in themselves not laws, assume the same authority
as the statute itself and, until authoritatively abandoned, necessarily become, to the
extent that they are applicable.
c. Yes. The application and interpretation placed by the legislative upon a law is part of
the law as of the date of the enactment of the said law.
6. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered
into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. Which of the
following is not correct?
a. The trend going on in other countries or states where persons of the same sex can
be married is followed here in the Philippines.
b. Marriage is an inviolable social institution, it is the foundation of the family and
shall be protected by the State.
c. A man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife are disputably
presumed to have entered into a lawful contract of marriage.
d. The state recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution.
7. One requisite Article 2 lays down for a valid marriage is that the contracting parties must
have the legal capacity to enter into marriage. What thing or things should each contracting
party have to be able to marry? Which one is not correct?
a. Art. 5 and Art. 35(1) which state the minimum marriageable age, 18 years old for
both man and woman.
b. Art. 13 and Art. 41 which require that the contracting parties are not married.
c. Art. 39 where a party has to have a final judicial decree declaring his previous
marriage null and void from the beginning to be able to remarry.
d. Art. 53 in relation to Art. 52, where a party, whose previous marriage was either
annulled or declared a nullity, has to comply with Art. 52 to have the legal capacity
to remarry.
8. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning for reasons of public
policy except one.
9. Under Art. 7(2), a priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious sect can
solemnize marriage provided that:
a. He is duly authorized by his church or religious sect.
b. He is registered with the civil registrar general.
c. He is acting within the limits of the written authority granted him by his church or
religious sect.
d. Provided that both of the contracting parties belongs to the solemnizing officer’s
church or religious sect.
10. Jose and Juana are husband and wife. Troy is the son of Juana while Susie is the daughter of
Jose. Troy and Susie were separated from birth. Their paths crossed for the first time when
both are in college, and the unimaginable happened, they got married. Afterwards, Josenito
was born from Troy and Susie.
a) Josenito is legitimate
b) Josenito is illegitimate
c) Josenito is legitimated
d) None of the above
12. The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of its surface and of everything under it.
a. He can construct thereon any works
b. He can make any plantations and excavations
c. He can refuse any servitudes thereto
d. he cannot complain of the reasonable requirements of aerial navigation.
13. Hidden treasure belongs to the owner of the land, building, or other property on which it is
found. As such:
a. Any person who is in possession of the property shall own the treasure.
b. if the finder is a is a squatter, to him belongs ½ of the treasure.
c. If the things found be of interest to science or the arts, the State may acquire the
same.
d. If the discovery is made on the property of the State, ½ of which belongs to the
finder
14. The ownership of a property gives the right by accession to everything which is produced
thereby, or which is incorporated or attached thereto. The doctrine of accession rests on the
following principles except one:
a. That to the owner of a thing belongs the extension or increase of such thing.
b. That this extension of the right of ownership is realized, as a general rule, under
the juridical principle that the accessory follows the principal.
c. That the incorporation of the accessory with the principal is effected only when
two things are so united that they cannot be separated without injuring or
destroying the juridical nature of one of them.
d. That the owner of the accessory extends his ownership to the principal.
15. Whenever the current of a river, creek or torrent segregates from an estate on its bank a
known portion of land and transfer it to another estate, the owner of the land to which the
segregated portion belonged retains the ownership of it, provided that he reclaims the same in
two years.
a. No right to remove the same can be recognized in anyone if the land transferred is a
compact mass.
b. The portion of land must be such that it can be identified as coming from a
definite tenement.
c. Although the deposit of the land or soil, which cannot be identified, cannot be
considered alluvion, yet the ownership must be vested in the owner of the land to
which they have been transferred by the current, following the general rule of
accession.
d. If the area of the land is reduced through gradual erosion due to to changes in
the course of the adjoining stream, the owner is not protected.
16. One who in good faith employs the material of another in whole or in part in order to make
a thing of different kind, shall appropriate the thing thus transformed as his own, indemnifying
the owner of the material for its value. Which is correct?
a. In this kind of accession, it is not possible to separate the material that has been used
and the form, creation or work which has been employed upon or given to it.
b. The transformation must be made personally by the one who makes use of the
materials.
c. If made in bad faith, owner of the materials cannot appropriate the work but he can
demand indemnity.
d. The industry or work is considered as the principal if the new material becomes
valuable.
17. Each co-owner may use the thing owned in common, provided he does so in accordance
with the purpose for which it is intended and in such a way as not to injure the interest of the
co-ownership or prevent the other co-owners from using it according to their rights. The
following are the limitations except one:
a. thing must be used for which it is intended
b. without prejudice to the interest of the co-ownership
c.cannot prevent other co-owners from making use thereof according to their own
rights
d. agreement may not be changed either express or implied.
a.It is the statutory right to dispose of property by acts effective mortis causa.
b. It is the right to make a will provided certain conditions are complied with
c. It is where the testator is not prohibited by law to make a will
d. Provided the testator is at least 18 years of age; and (3) testator is of sound
mind.
27. To be of sound mind:
a. it is not necessary that the testator be in possession of all his reasoning faculties
or that his mind be wholly unbroken, unimpaired, or unshattered by disease,
injury or other cause.
b. It is not sufficient if the testator was able at the time of making the will, to know
the nature of the estate to be disposed of, the proper objects of his bounty, and
the character of the testamentary act.
c. The law does not presume that a person is of sound mind in the absence of the
contrary.
d. The burden of proof that the testator was not of sound mind at the time of
making his disposition is on the person who opposes the probate of the will; but
if the testator, one month, or les, before making his will was publicly known to
be insane, the person who maintains the validity of the will must not prove that
the testator made it during a lucid interval.
28. Who can make a will?
a. Those not expressly allowed by law.
b. Juridical persons and convicts under civil interdiction
c. Those 18 years of age,of sound of mind who knows the nature of the estate to be
distributed, the proper objects of his bounty and the character of the testamentary
act.
d. Those who can also be witnesses to wills.
29. Who may be witnesses in a will? (Art. 820)
a. Those of sound mind. Those who are at least 18 years of age; Those who are
not blind, not deaf or dumb; Those who are able to read and write.
b. Those who are not domiciled in the Philippines;
c. Those who have been convicted of falsification of document, perjury or false
testimony.
d. Those who are able to read even if they cannot write
30. There are three essential facts which must necessarily appear in the attestation
clause in order that it will constitute a real certification by the instrumental
witnesses that the formalities required by law in the execution of an ordinary will
have been complied with. These facts, all of which are essential in character, are as
follows except:
a. The number of pages used upon which the will is written;
b. The fact that the testator signed the will and every page thereof, or caused
some other person to write his name, under his express direction, in the
presence of the instrumental witnesses; and
c. The fact that the instrumental witnesses witnessed and signed the will and all
the pages thereof in the presence of the testator and of one another.
d. The fact that the attestation clause is a record or memorandum of fact
32. In two separate contracts for the sale of two lots in a subdivision to the same buyer,
who defaulted in both contracts but where the total payment could cover one lot,
the seller was ordered to execute one absolute deed of sale to cover one lot. what
was applied by the Hon. Supreme Court?
a. Contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties, and they are
bound not only to the fulfillment of what might have been stipulated but also to
its consequences.
b. A failure of due compliance by a party to a contract renders him liable for causes
attributable to him; upon the other hand, if the non-fulfillment is brought about
by circumstances beyond his control, then he may not be held responsible
therefore
c. Courts may not substitute their own judgment for that of the parties, and
neither may the Courts modify the agreement of said parties without thereby
violating, among other principles, the rule on consensuality of contracts.
d. Equity is broadly defined as being justice according to natural law and right.
Article 10 of the Civil Code expresses that “in case of doubt in the interpretation
and application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right
and justice to prevail. This is what was applied in the case.
a. The ruling appears to have ignored Article 449 of the Code which explicitly
states that he “who builds, plants, or sows in bad faith on the land of another,
loses what is built, planted or sown without right to indemnity
b. The ruling appears to have ignored Article 449 of the Code which explicitly
states that he “who builds, plants, or sows in bad faith on the land of another,
loses what is built, planted or sown without right to indemnity”
c. . Some of the statutory provisions that could be invoked by said buyer include
Article 1191 on resolution of contracts, articles 1545 and 1553-1556 on implied
warranties in sales, and articles 1916-1917 on agency, of the Civil Code.
d. The correct rule seems to be that where conflict situations are well defined and
capable of being resolved by the application of legal principles, the latter must
not be permitted to be overridden by, or unsettled in equity. It is in this context
that Article 10 of the Civil Code should be understood when it expresses that “in
case of doubt in the interpretation and application of laws, it is to be presumed
that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail.
34. One who purchases real property with knowledge of defect or lack of title of the
vendor or of facts that should have put him to inquiry is not in good faith; and not
being so, the vendee is not entitled to warranty against eviction nor to damages.
Which is not correct?
a. Mere knowledge by the vendee of the defect of title of the vendor (who need
not even have title at the time of perfection of the contract) does not render the
vendor’s implied warranties to become ineffectual. Even a waiver of eviction
does not totally exempt the vendor from liability and he would still have to
account for the value of the thing at the time of eviction.
b. It is only a waiver with knowledge of the risk of eviction and assumption of its
consequences (intencionada, as distinguished from consciente) that may
altogether exempt the vendee from liability
c. If it were not declared void, the buyer of the defective sale would have had
ample legal remedies against the seller.
d. Court has said that it may, in the exercise of equity jurisdiction, adjust the rights
of the parties in accordance with the circumstances obtaining upon the
rendition of the judgment when the standing of the parties have so changed by
the long pendency of their dispute that renders it iniquitous to adhere to the
rights and obligations of the parties accruing at the time of their generation.
35. It is utterly unfair to require a bank not allowed to operate by the Central Bank to
pay stipulated interest on money deposited with it. Judicial notice may be taken of
the fact that what enables a bank to pay such interest is its ability to generate funds
from its authorized operations. As a matter of equity, the situation can be
denominated as force majeure. Which does not support this ruling?
c. In the cited case, the obligation is one to pay the stipulated interest, and the
object (money) of the obligation being generic, loss as a mode of extinguishing
an obligation would be inapplicable under the principles genus nunquam perit
d. That unforeseen difficulties are not grounds for reneging upon a contract.