Pepito , Victoria Ashley P.

Mini Mockbar In Civil Law

Question 1 In 1949, Juan contracted marriage with Eugenia. In 1979, he obtained an absolute divorce
from Eugenia in the Dominican Republic. In the same year, he contracted a second marriage and
began to live with Soledad until the time of his death in 1997. Is the second marriage valid? (10
points)

Answer : No. The second marriage is invalid.

The Civil Code provides that a divorce obtained abroad cannot took effect in the Philippines
without judicial declaration in the Philippine Courts.The parties must prove the fact of divorce and
the jurisdiction of the court who issued the divorce decree.
In the case at hand, Juan was not able to do the formalities in attaining a second marriage. He
should have it be recognized in the Philippine Courts and prove the valid jurisdiction of court who
issued such divorce decree.
Hence, the second marriage is not valid.

Question 2 Three days after Mimi married Jojo, the latter, a member of the AFP, left and went to
Zamboanga where he was assigned. Mimi filed before the court a petition to declare Jojo as
presumptively dead for the purpose of remarriage, alleging that after the lapse of 33 years without
any kind of communication from him, she firmly believes that he is already dead. Mimi testified
affirming that she exerted efforts to find Joel by inquiring from his parents, relatives, and neighbors,
who, unfortunately, were also not aware of his whereabouts. Should Jojo be declared presumptively
dead? (10 points)
Answer : Yes. Jojo should be declared presumptively dead.
One of the requisites provided in the Civil Code for an individual to be presumed death is that
he or she should be missing for four consecutive years or two consecutive years if such
disappearance occurred where the danger of death is present under the circumstances enumerated in
the Civil Code.
In the case at hand, there is danger of death in circumstances to the nature of Jojo’s work.
Hence , such mere absence of 33 years,he is presumptively dead.

Question 3 Rolly and Oscar entered into a pacto de retro sale of Oscar’s house and lot worth P10M.
The price agreed upon by the parties is only P100,000.00. Is the contract valid, voidable or void?
Explain well. (10 points)
Answer: The contract is valid.
A contract is considered as valid if all the requisites of a valid contract is present such as the
consent of the contracting parties , the object and the cause or consideration.
In the instant case, the inadequacy of the price being agreed by the parties is immaterial for
the contract to be considered as valid. The sale is a pacto de retro sale. The price is unusually lower
to allow Oscar to repurchase his house and lot within the agreed stipulated period of time.
Hence, such contract is valid.

Question 4 Edgar was the usufructuary of a parcel of land owned by Fred. With the consent of Edgar
and by chance, Greg found hidden treasure on this land. How would the hidden treasure be divided
between the parties? (10 points)
Answer: The treasure will be equally divided between Fred and the owner of the land.
The New Civil Code provides that in hidden treasures, it should be divided equally between
the land owner and the finder.
In the case at hand, Fred as the one who found the hidden treasure shall get the half of the total
treasure and the remaining half shall go to the owner of suce land. Edgar, as the usufructuary owner
owner shall not get any share.
Question 5 Wanda has a collection of exclusive Funko Pops which was stolen from her vault. She
reported the theft to the authorities since the value of the toys were in the millions. Sometime later
she noticed some of the Pops in the law office of Remy, which he bought from an online auction.
Can Wanda recover her toys? (10 points)
Answer : No. Wanda cannot recover her toys.
The law protects an innocent purchaser. The exemption to such protection is when it is
possible on the part of the purchaser to attest the authenticity of such sale.
In the instant case, it is unreasonable for Remy to presume that the toys might be a stolen items
from another individual due to the prevailing circumstances that it was posted online through an
auction. Hence , he has the right to assume that such toys are legal.
Hence, Remy is protected under the law as a purchaser in good faith by applying also the mirror
principle and Wanda cannot recover her toys.

Question 6 Define the following: (10 points)

A. Define Parental preference rule –this parental preference rule is used in child custody cases. The
law grants a better right to the biological parents of the child than the non-biological parents.It
protects fit biological parents who are willing and able to take care of the child by prioritizing their
right of custody.

B. Define Tender Age Presumption- This presumption is applied in cases of separation of the parents
and in the matters of child’s custody. The law provides that those children under seven years of age
should be granted to the mother unless there is a compelling reasons declared by the court that the
mother is unfit of having the custody of the child.

Question 7 Monica is a modern Filipina whose adventurous heart brought her a foreign husband.
Following their marriage in the Philippines, the couple resided in the husband‘s country. After a few
months of apparent bliss, reality knocked her hard – her prince charming was actually a brutal
partner. She was subjected to physical abuse and treatment that made her lose her dignity. She
eventually filed for and got a decree of divorce. She came back to the Philippines and found someone
who offered a much better family life than what she earlier had. She asked the trial court to recognize
her foreign divorce but the court said that under the Family Code, i.e., the second paragraph of
Article 26, a foreign divorce could only be recognized if secured by the foreign spouse. Monica
elevated the case to the Supreme Court claiming that it violates the constitutional guarantee of equal
protection. Does she have a point? (10 points)
Answer : Yes. The issue raised by Monica has a point and it will prosper.
The Constitution guarantees the equal protection clause in the constitution. Same rule shall
apply in cases under Family Code. A Filipino who is married to a foreign citizen should be given a
separate manner because it is not similarly situated to a Filipino married to another Filipino.There is
no substantial difference between a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce proceedings or if such
divorce decree is obtained upon the instance of the alien spouse.
In the case at hand, such decree should be recognized regardless if it is obtained by the Filipino
spouse. Denial of which tantamounts to undue favor to one and unjustly discriminates against the
other.

Question 8 Rachel married Ross who had an existing marriage with Susan. A few months after their
marriage, Rachel and Ross faced an information for bigamy. Rachel averred by way of defense that
her marriage to Ross was void due to the lack of a marriage license since they have not actually lived
together as husband and wife for five years for them to be exempt from the marriage license
requirement under Art 34. They, however, represented before the solemnizing officer that they had
complied with the five-year cohabitation requirement which eventually was reflected in their
marriage certificate. Rachel argued that for there to be a conviction for bigamy, the marriage between
them should be proven valid by the prosecution. She contended that the absence of a marriage license
effectively rendered their marriage null and void, justifying her acquittal from bigamy. Is the
contention of Rachel correct? (10 points)
Answer : No. The contention of Rachel is incorrect.
Jurisprudence requires that if the accused parties of the bigamy wants to raise the nullity of
marriage, they should do it as a matter of defense during the presentation of evidence.
In the instant case, Rachel consistently questioned the validity of her marriage to Ross on the
ground that the marriage is celebrated without marriage license. Such ground is invalid and can’t
prosper under the law. Hence, Rachel and Ross is guilty of bigamy.
Question 9 Jose Rodriguez filed a complaint against Sps. Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele-Grery
alleging that he is the owner of the parcel of land situated in Caloocan City covered by TCT No.
55979 and has been religiously paying the real property taxes therefor since November 29, 1974. He
and his wife had immigrated to the USA since 1968 and is now a resident of California, USA and he
only discovered that a new certificate of title to the subject property was issued by the register of
deeds in the name of Elliot, married to Kate Kavanagh, during his vacation in the Philippines. He
further alleged that it was due to a falsified Deed of Absolute Sale purportedly executed by him and
his wife, dated February 16, 1978, which was a result of the fraudulent, illegal and malicious acts
committed by Sps. Grey and the Register of Deeds in order to acquire the subject property. Sps.
Grey, on the other hand, maintained that they are innocent purchasers for value, having purchased the
subject property from one Jason Tyler, who possessed and presented a Special Power of Attorney,
but without Jose Rodriguez’s proof of identity, to sell/dispose of the same, and, in such capacity,
executed a Deed of Absolute Sale dated November 20, 1992 conveying the said property in their
favour. What is an innocent purchaser for value? In this case, are the Sps. Grey innocent purchasers
for value? (10 points)

Answer:

Question 10 Stefanie and her minor daughter Hassadeh field a claim for support against Mr. Vincent,
alleged illegitimate father of Hassadeh as appeared in the certificate of live birth. However, Mr.
Vincent denied such fact considering that such certificate of live birth did not contain any proof or
his signature showing that he signify to be Hassadeh’s putative father. Is DNA Test a valid probative
tool in this jurisdiction to determine filiation? (10 points)

Answer : Yes. DNA Test is a valid probative tool to determine filiation.

The law provides that the result of the DNA testing is admissible to prove filiation. DNA
testing and the results are acceptable as object evidence without violating of the individual’s
constitutional rights and protection.
Hence, DNA Testing is recognized under the law to determine filiation. Hassadeh is obliged
to give support to his minor daughter.