15-39614

1.

Under the Civil code mutuum is defined as a contract

wherein a person delivers to another a consumable thing or
property with the condition that the latter will pay the former
with a thing of the same value or quality. A common example of
mutuum is when an person (creditor) delivers money to another
(debtor) with a condition that the latter will pay the amount in a
stipulated due date. Here in mutuum, ownership of the property
is transferred.

On the other hand, commodatum is a contract wherein a

person delivers to another a non-consummable thing with a
condition that the latter will return the same thing to the former.
A common example of commodatum is when a person (borrower)
borrows a car from a friend and promises to return the same
thing. In the contract of commodatum, ownership over the thing
is not transferred.

___________________________________________________________
_

2.

Under the civil code, immovable property refers to those

properties incapable of being moved from one place to another or
equipment which are installed permanently by the owner to an
immovable property. Immovable property includes real properties
such as land, house and equipment used necessarily in the usual
trade or business such as factory equipment and machines.
 On the other hand, movable properties under the Civil code
are properties which are movable in nature and usually not
installed permanently such as laptops, money, cars and
smartphone.

___________________________________________________________

3.

Demetrio is correct.

Under the law, negotiorum gesto happens when a person

takes over and manages the land or property of another without
the consent of the latter. Upon the demand of the owner, the
builder or person who manages the structure must return the
land or property of the owner. The owner may choose to retain
the improvement upon reimbursement to the builder.

Here, Demetrio, takes management of the idle property of

the Ernesto. Ernesto may demand Demetrio to remove the
improvement or decide to retain the improvement upon payment
of reimbursement. Right of accession is not applicable

In this case, Ernesto can retain and own the improvements

made upon payment of reimbursement. Hence, Demetrio is
correct.

________________________________________________________________

4.

Yes, Marian’s baby can be a beneficiary of the insurance.

The Civil code provides that a baby delivered alive who is at

least 7months old already attains civil personality. Having
acquired personality, the baby can already be a beneficiary for
purposes of insurance benefits.

Here in this case, Marian was already due to give birth.

Hence, her pregnancy was beyond 7months already. It is
therefore presumed that the baby was born alive and already
acquired civil personality. Having acquired civil personality,
Marian’s baby therefore can be a beneficiary of the insurance.

Hence, the baby, having acquired civil personality may be a

beneficiary.

_________________________________________________________

5.

No, the Spouses Tan has no valid grounds to revoke the

donatiom.

Under the Civil Code, the donor may revoke donation due to
valid grounds such as failure of the donee to perform the
conditions in the donation. If the donation is unconditional in
nature however, the donee can freely use the property according
to his own discretion.

In this case, the donor cited that the land should be used
solely for hospital site only. Though there was a delay in the
construction of the hospital, the Local Government of Siquijor
complied with the condition that the land will be used only as
hospital site. Moreover, the foundation of the hospital was
already constructed.

Hence, the Spouses Tan has no valid grounds to revoke the

donation.
 ________________________________________________

6.

Yes, Lila is correct in invoking Article 195 of the Family

Code.

Under the Civil code, a child either legitimate or illegitimate

is entitled to support despite divorce of his or her parents. The
father therefore of the child is obliged to give support despite the
illegitimacy of his child.

Here, Christopher is entitled to give support to his son

Amado despite being his illegitimate child. The divorce between
Lila and Christopher is not a ground for the latter not to give
support. The Law safeguards the rights of the innocent child and
If not given support, it would be of great injustice to the child.

Hence, Lila is correct that Amado is obliged to give support.

_______________________________________________________

7.

If I were the judge, I will deny the Billy’s petition.

Under the law, a child below 7years of age should be under

the custody of the mother. The father however may question the
custody over the child raising valid grounds such as failure to
provide basic essential needs of the child and if the child is in
great danger or the mother performs serious immoral acts.

Here, Anita, was able to provide the basic necessities of the

child including a nanny. Being an entertainer in Empyrea does
not pose harm to the child and does not constitute immorality
based on the given facts. Hence, Billy’s contention that Anita is
unfit to take care of Marisol is untenable.

Therefore, If I were the judge, I will deny Billy’s petition and

give custody over Marisol to Anita.

____________________________________________________

8.

No, Gianna would not be legitimated.

Under the Civil code, a child is legitimated only if upon

being born, his parents are already married.

Here in this case, when Gianna was born, her parents were
not legally married as her mother Aimee has still in process of
securing declaration of nullity on her marriage. Hence, Gianna
would not be legitimated as her parents were not legally married
upon her birth.

Therefore, Gianna in this case would not be legitimated.

___________________________________________________________

9.

No, her action will not prosper.

Under the law, if there is uncertainty as to who predeceased

between an elderly person above 60years old and a minor, it is
presumed that the minor predeceased the elderly. However, the
surviving family member must provide evidence to support their
claims.

In this case, Cristy has no evidence to prove her claims and

it is presumed that the minors predeceased the elderly. Hence,
Cristy’s action will not prosper.

Therefore, Cristy’s action will not prosper in this case.

_________________________________________________________

10.

The first contract entered between Bella and Charlie is valid

and binding. It is valid and binding because the lease of the land
is proper and lawful.

The second contract made between Bella and Dino is not

valid because it was made without a fixed term.

The third contract between Bella and Elmo is not valid and
binding for the reason that the price of the property was 3 times
of what was listed in Aldo’s inventory. Therefore, it was contrary
to the intent of Aldo, the principal. Hence he sale is considered
invalid.