ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

r
a
B

I. Sandra and Piolo were married on August 16, 2005. Five years from the marriage
ceremony, Sandra started to feel an obsession to have sex with other men. Piolo confronted
Sandra about this when he caught Sandra having extramarital affair with other men.
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
psychiatrist who clinically identified this lustful obsession as a kind of mental disorder with
its root cause being the refusal of Piolo to have sex during the honeymoon. The psychiatrist
diagnosed that such mental disorder is grave and permanent, psychologically
incapacitating Sandra to perform the essential marital obligations. Piolo filed a case to
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
Sandra together with her psychological evaluation. If you were the judge, will you grant the
declaration of nullity of marriage pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code based on the
given facts? Explain fully?

b
o
R

s
e
l

an
Ch

s
e
l
b
o

r
a
B

Ch

an

r
a
B

SUGGESTED ANSWER: If I were the judge, I will not grant the decree of nullity of marriage
due to psychological incapacity. In the case of Republic vs CA and Molina, the Supreme
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
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
bring about the disability of the party to assume the essential obligations of marriage. The
incapacity must be proven to be existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage,
although the manifestations may appear after the marriage. Such incapacity must also be
shown to be medically or clinically permanent or incurable. In the case at bar, the
psychiatrist diagnosed that the root cause of Sandras incapacity was due to Piolos refusal
to have sex with her during the honeymoon, hence there was no juridical antecedence.
(Republic vs CA and Molina, G.R. 108763, February 13, 1997; Santos vs CA, G.R. 112019,
Jan. 4, 1995).

s
e
l

an
Ch

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
a
B

b
o
R

r
n
a
a
II. Lando and Marilyn are legally married. When Lando
disappeared for four years without B
h
any knowledge of his whereabouts, MarilynC
was able to validly procure a judicials
ein
declaration of presumptive death of Lando and thereafter was able to validly marry Noel
l
accordance with the law. Later, Lando reappeared and executed an affidavit
bin Cebuof
reappearance which he immediately showed to Marilyn and Noel in their residence
o
R and told
City. Aware of Lando's reappearance, Noel sought Rosario, his former girlfriend,
her of the situation, rekindled their love affair and proposed marriage. n
Noel and Rosario,
a from the Local
both 30 years old and both Protestants, obtained a marriage and license
h
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
Code, the subsequent marriage contracted by the present spouse after the absence of her
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
reappearance of the absent spouse in the civil registry of the residence of the spouses to
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
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
and Marilyn, hence, Noels marriage to Rosario was bigamous, hence, null and void. Articles
41 and 42, Family Code)

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
a
B

r
a
an
B
h
s
III.C
Allan and Abigail, both Filipinos, both 25 years old, met in Argentina on April 9, 2010
emarried in Argentina on May 9, 2010 before a
and fell in love with each other. They got
l
bArgentine Marital Laws. There was also no valid
notary public in accordance with the
o
marriage license issued prior to the
marriage. The marriage is valid in Argentina. Allan and
R and started a family. Arnulfo, father of Abigail, after
Abigail went back to the Philippines
r
n
learning of their marriage contends that such marriage having been solemnized
by a notary
a
a
public who is not among those authorized to solemnize marriages
in
the
Philippines,
B marriage void. Rule onis
h
void. The absence
of
the
marriage
license
also
rendered
the
s
C
e
Arnulfos contention. Explain well.
l
b
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Arnulfos 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
in accordance with the laws in
rforce
a
a Philippines,
in the country where they were solemnized,
and valid there as such, shall also be
valid in
h
this country, except those prohibited
under Articles 35(1,4,5 and 6), 36, 37 B
and 38. The
s
C
marriage of Allan and Abigail are not covered by the exceptions, hence, ite
is valid under the
l
law of the Philippines.
b
o
VI. Cesar was legally married to Delia and they have two children, Edgar and Francia.
R
During the subsistence of the marriage of Cesar and Delia, the latter cohabited with Gerry,
r
n
who himself was married to Hazel. Out of the cohabitation
of Delia and Gerry, Ian was born
a
a
on March 4, 2009. On December 1, 2012, Gerry diedh
in a vehicular accident. Delia, on behalf B
of Ian, filed a suit for partition against Hazel andC
her children alleging that Ian is entitled tos
e
share in the estate of Gerry. Gerrys name as father appears in Ians baptismal certificate
l
and school report cards. There were also pictures and videos showing Gerry together
b with
Ian. Hazel contends that the suit is barred by the death of Gerry.
o
R
n
1. May Ian prove his filiation with Gerry and be entitled to share in Gerrys estate?
a
h
Explain fully.
C
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 ones legitimacy or illegitimacy cannot be
compromised. It should be what the law says and not what the parent says it is. At the time
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.
(Articles 160 and 170, Family Code; Concepcion vs Almonte, G.R. 123450, Aug. 31, 2005).

r
a
B

s
e
lsame had the first marriage of Cesar & Delia been terminated by
2. Will your answer be the
b
the death of Cesar one year prior to the birth of Ian? Explain fully.
o
R
SUGGESTED
ANSWER: No, my answer will be different.
Ian is considered the illegitimate
r
n
child of Gerry
and
Delia
as
there
was
physical
impossibility
for Cesar to be the father
aof Ian. However,
a that he died one year prior to the birth
B
considering
Ian still cannot prove
h
s
hisC
filiation to Gerry since he was using the secondary pieces of evidence included under
eputative father was already dead. Baptismal
Article 172 of the Family Code and the
l
b and videos may prove open and continuous
certificate, school report cards, pictures
o
possession of the status of an illegitimate
but the action to prove the childs filiation
R of thechild
must be brought during the lifetime
alleged parent. (Articles 172 and 175, Family
r
Code; Liyao vs Liyao, G.R. 138961,
a
an March 7, 2002)
BWith the consent of Edgar
h of a parcel of land owned by Fred.
V. Edgar was the usufructuary
s
C
e would the hidden treasure be
and by chance, Greg found hidden treasure on this land. How
l
divided between the parties?
b
o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The hidden treasure shall
be divided between Greg, the finder and
Rtreasure
Fred, the owner of the land where the hidden
was found. Each of them willr
get
n
a
share of the hidden treasure. Greg a
is not a trespasser as he was allowed
by the
B was
h
usufructuary of the land who was the
legal possessor at the time the hidden treasure
s
C since he was not the owner of thee land where the
found. Edgar does not get any share
l
treasure was found. (Article 438 Civil Code).
b
o# 1234 registered in the
VI. On a 500 sq.m. lot worth P1M located in Makati City with TCT
R
name of Spouses Reyes, Spouses Santos built their house worth P900,000.00. Spouses
ntheir land but they kept quiet as ar
Reyes became aware of the construction when they visited
a
they did not want any trouble until such time h
that the construction was completely B
finished. State the rights and obligations of Spouses
Reyes as landowners and Spousess
C
e
Santos as builders based on the facts given.
l
b
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Spouses Santos are builders in bad faith because theyo
built their
R of Spouses
house on land owned by Spouses Reyes as evidenced by the TCT in the name
n
Reyes. Spouses Reyes are landowners in bad faith as they were aware of the construction
a Both parties
being done by Spouses Santos but they did not object to the construction.
h
being in bad faith, they shall be considered to be both in good faith and Article 448 of the
C
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
expenses they incurred in the construction if Spouses Reyes opted to appropriate their
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.

s
e
l

r
a
B

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
was profuse in thanking her sister when they talked while shopping for baby clothes at
Rustans. Rosemarie gave birth after 7 months of pregnancy but the baby died 21 hours
after delivery.

b
o
R

r
n
a
a
May Rosalie
get back the ring she donated? Why B
or why not?
h
s
C
eprovides that the donation of a movable may be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The Civil Code
l
bthe value of the personal property donated exceeds
made orally or in writing. However, if
P5000.00, the donation and theo
acceptance shall be made in writing. Otherwise, the
R case at bar, the ring donated by Rosalie was worth
donation shall be void. In the
n
P25,000.00 but the donation and the acceptance were not made inr
writing, hence, such
a
a
donation was void. Rosalie may get back the ring. (Article 748 Civil
Code).
B
h
s
C
e
2. The Deed of Donation dated May 3, 1965 stated:
l
b & successors; this lot is now in the
I, DONOR, XXX devise a lot to DONEE, her heirs, assigns,
o
possession of DONEE since 1962 in the concept
ownership shall be vested on
Rofme,an owner;
DONEE upon my demise; if DONEE predeceases
the said lot shall not by reverted
r to
n
a
a heirs.
DONOR but shall be inherited by DONEEs
B
h
s
Is this a donation mortis causa orC
inter vivos . Explain fully.
e
l
b that if the donee
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The donation is inter vivos. The donor stipulated
o
predeceases her, the property will not be reverted to the donor but shall be inherited by
R
the heirs of the donee signaling the irrevocability of the passage of title to the donees
r
n
estate, waiving donors right to reclaim title. This transfer
of title was perfected the
a
a
moment the donor learned of the donees acceptance
h which, being reflected on the same B
deed, took place on the day of its execution which
was on May 3, 1965. Donor also admitteds
C
e
that the lot was already in the possession of the donee in the concept of an owner l
since
1962 although the deed of donation was dated May 3, 1965. Donees acceptance
b alsoby
underscores its essence as a gift inter vivos as only donations inter vivos need acceptance
o
R
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
h
in Saudi Arabia. He had saved P100,000.00 in his savings account in Manila. On his flight
C
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 commonlaw 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
a
B

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Ernestos mother and twin illegitimate sons shall inherit from him.
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).

s
e
IX. Caloy and Celia arellegally married with Arnold, Ben, Cherry, Delia and Ernie as
b and Greg are Cherrys legitimate children. Ernie has Hector,
legitimate children. Francia
o
Irene and Jonathan as legitimate children. Ben died intestate leaving an estate of
R
P240,000.00n
with the following as surviving heirs: r
Arnold, Francia, Greg, Delia, Hector,
Irene, Jonathan,
Caloy
and
Celia.
Divide
the
estate
of
a Ben among his relatives explaining
a
B
your answer.
h
s
C
e
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Only Caloy andl
Celia shall inherit the estate of Ben, getting equal
b
shares of P120,000.00 each. The parents
are the nearest relatives of the decedent and
under the principle of proximity,o
they exclude all other farther relatives of the decedent.
R
(Article 962 Civil Code).
r
n
a
a
X. Rosalinda executed a will on December 1, 2011 instituting her
husband Samuel as sole
BP20M.
h
and universal heir
(the
spouses
being
childless)
to
her
estate
of
A provision in her
s
C
e
will reads:
l
b
I institute my husband Samuel to my entire estate
oof P20M but he shall not marry
anymore. I further order that he shall not haveR
children with any woman, otherwise, the
free portion shall instead pass to my legal heirs.
r
a
an
Two years after the death of his wife,h
Samuel remarried. Rosalindas legitimate B
s sister
Call his inheritance of P20M for having eviolated
Teresa contends that Samuel loses
the
l your
condition imposed by his deceased wife. Rule on Teresas contention explaining
b
answer fully.
o
R
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Teresas contention is untenable. There was no condition included
r
n
in the will. The Civil Code provides that an absolute a
condition not to contract a first or
a
subsequent marriage shall be considered as not written
such condition has been B
hspouse,unless
imposed on the widow or widower by the deceased
or by the latters ascendants ors
C
e
descendants. However, in order to make the testamentary provision conditional,lsuch
condition must fairly appear from the language used in the will. The condition shall
bnot be
presumed. In the case at bar, there was no express condition imposed on the
surviving
o
R
spouse not to marry again. (Article 874, Civil Code; Morente vs dela Santa, 9 Phil.387).
n
XI. Percival executed a will in 2010 disinheriting his legitimate son Reya
for the latters
h
unjust refusal to support him during his lifetime. Percival died in 2011
and during the
C
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
validly inherited by Rey had he not been lawfully disinherited by his father. As to the free
portion, there is no right of representation. (Article 856 Civil Code).

s
e
l

r
a
B

XII. Anton had two (2) legitimate children, Basilio and Carlos. Carlos had two (2) legitimate
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?

b
o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Yes. The Civil Code provides that heirs who repudiate their share
R
may not ben
represented but a person may represent
him whose inheritance he has
r
renounced.
In
the
case
at
bar,
Erica
repudiated
her
share
from
inheritance of her father
a histhepredeceased
a the law expressly allows her toBrepresent
Carlos;
however,
father Carlos
h
s
from
Cthe inheritance of his grandfather Anton.
e (Articles 976 and 977 of the Civil Code).
l
b P1.5M which was stolen from her house during
XIII. Dina owned a valuable painting worth
o
a robbery which was duly reported
to the police authorities. A year later, during a party in
R hanging in Donnas living room. Upon inquiry, Donna
Donnas house, Dina saw the painting
r The painting was
n
said she bought the painting in a gallery auction at the Luz Gallery.
a
a
positively identified as the one stolen from Dinas house. Dina demanded
the return of her
Bthe said painting,
h
property but Donna
refused
to
do
so.
Who
has
a
better
right
to
Dina or
s
C
e
Donna? Explain well your answer.
l
b
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
which the owner has been unlawfully deprived,
has acquired it in good faith at a public
sale,
rSince
a
an reimbursing
the owner cannot obtain its return without
the price paid therefor.
B of the
h
Donna acquired the movable property
from a public sale, she must be reimbursed
s
Csale. (Article 559 Civil Code)
amount that she paid in the public
e
l
b by Sonny, Tommy
XIV. Romy is the owner of a house and lot enclosed by the estates owned
o
and Vahl. Romy has no access to the public highway, hence he demanded a right of way
R
through the property of Tommy which is the shortest way to the public highway. Tommy
r
n
refused and contended that the right of way should bea
constituted on the property of Vahl.
a
It was proven that constituting the easement of right
hof way on Vahls property is not the B
shortest way to the public highway although it isC
least prejudicial to the servient estate. s
e
l
1. What are the requisites for the establishment of a compulsory easement of right of
bway?
o
R
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Civil Code provides for the requisites for the establishment
of
n
the legal easement of right of way as follows: (1). The property is surrounded by other
abe established at a
estates; (2). There is no adequate outlet to a public highway; (3). It must
h
point least prejudicial to the servient estate; (4). Payment of the proper indemnity; (5). The
C
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

isolation should not be due to the claimants 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
well.

r
a
B

SUGGESTED ANSWER: The legal easement of right of way should be constituted on the
property of Vahl. The law provides that the easement of right of way shall be established at
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
the case at bar, Tommys property may be the shortest way to the public highway.
However, it is through Vahls property which is least prejudicial to the servient estate,
hence, the easement of right of way must be constituted on his real property. (Article 649
Civil Code).

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
a
an
B
h
s
XV.
as heir to a parcel of land in Cavite City. Rollie
CRollie instituted his friend Romy obliged
e to preserve and transmit the said parcel of
provided in his will that Romy shall be l
b death. Rollie died in 2000. Rody died in 2001.
land to Romys brother Rody upon Romys
Romy died in 2003. Upon Romyso
death, the claimants to the property are the children of
Romy and Rey, the only son of R
Rody. If you were the judge, to whom will you adjudicate the
r
n
property? Explain well.
a
a
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
l
related by one degree to each other. A valid fideicommissary
substitution require that the
b
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
and transmit the property to the second
R
heir; both the first and the second heirs must
be alive or at least conceived at the moment
r of
a
an substitution
of death of the testator; the fideicommissary
must not burden the legitime
B
h
the compulsory heirs and must not
be conditional. Not being a valid fideicommissary
s
C his own children shall inherit theeparcel of land he
substitution, upon the death of Romy,
inherited from Rollie. (Article 863 Civil Code; Ramirez vs Ramirez, 111l
SCRA 704)
b
XVI. Anton, single, without any ascendant or descendant, buto
R with legitimate brothers
Arnold and Abel, executed a notarial will on January 2, 2010, complying with the
r
n
formalities of law. He instituted as sole heir to his estate
of P10M his girlfriend Annabel. On
a
a
December 2, 2010, Anton and Annabel parted ways.
h Anton instituted as sole heir in his B
holographic will his best friend Archie. Antons
3 other friends Abet, Arceli and Abigails
C
e
knew the contents of the holographic will which they read and re-read the day itlwas
executed by Anton. On March 9, 2012, while cleaning his drawer, Anton, without intention
b1, 2013,
o
to revoke, inadvertently burned the only copy of his holographic will. On June
R
Anton died. Who will inherit Antons estate? Explain well.
n
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Annabel shall inherit Antons estate of P10M.aBased on the given
facts, the holographic will impliedly revoked the notarial will. Unfortunately,
Ch the only copy
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 testators 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,
hence we can revive the notarial will. (de Molo vs Molo, 90 Phil 37).

r
a
B

XVII. Albert has three sons, Bernie, Carlos and Dennis. Albert made a will instituting as
heirs Bernie, Carlos and Alberts best friend, Efren, without designation of shares. If Alberts
estate is P12M when he died, how should the estate be distributed to the heirs? Explain
well

s
e
l

b
o
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Preterition is present in this case as one compulsory heir in the
R
direct line was
completely omitted in the inheritance, r
hence, we annul the institution of the
n
heirs anda
distribute the testators estate by intestate
Alberts three sons shall
aheirsuccession.
B
receive
P4M
each.
Efren
who
is
not
a
compulsory
shall
receive
nothing. (Article 854
h
s
and
C855 Civil Code).
e
l
XVIII. Cecilia, executed a holographic b
will on Jan. 1, 2010 containing several dispositions. In
o
one disposition, Cecilia gave P100,000.00
to her sisters Digna & Emilia as legacies. On
R Emiliaseach
Feb. 14, 2011, Decilia crossed-out
name in her disposition. On May 9, 2013, Cecilia
died. What is the effect of the
ar in her will.
anabsence of Cecilias signature on theBalteration
hThe disposition which contained ansalteration shall be considered
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C
not written but the entire will shall not be considered void.
Only those dispositions which
leconsidered
did not comply with Articles 812, 813 and 814 shallbbe
null and void, not the
entire will.
o
R
XIX. Rosalie, the illegitimate daughter of Reynaldo
r
n and Rosemarie, died intestate, without
a
any ascendant or descendant. Her estatea
worth P2M is being claimed by Rosario, the
Bmother
h
legitimate daughter of her father Reynaldo
and Rodrigo, the legitimate son of her
s
C estate? Explain well?
Rosemarie. Who shall enherit Rosalies
e
l
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Neither Rosario nor Rodrigo shall inherit b
Rosalies estate. Under
o
the law, the illegitimate relative shall not inherit ab intestato from
R the legitimate relative
and vice versa. There is an iron barrier prohibiting them from inheriting from each
nof Rosalie who are prohibited ar
other.Rosario and Rodrigo are both legitimate half-siblings
a
by the iron-barrier-rule to inherit from the latter byh
intestate succession.
B
s
C
e
XX. Carlos borrowed P1.2M from Carmelo. He executed a mortgage contract over his parcel
l
of land as security for the loan. It was expressly agreed by the parties that upon failure
b of
Carlos to pay the debt with 12% interest within one (1) year, the mortgaged o
land would
R Carmelo
rightfully belong to Carmelo. Carlos failed to pay within the agreed period, hence,
n
contends he now becomes the owner of the land. Is Carmelo correct in his contention?
a
Why?
h
C
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).

r
a
B

XXI. Danny obtained a P500,000.00 loan from Diego payable on December 31, 2005, with
Dennis as guarantor. On due date, Danny failed to pay his debt. On January 5, 2006, Diego
demanded payment from Dennis. If you were Dennis, what defense would you interpose to
avoid liability? Explain fully what he must do to interpose this defense.

b
o
R

s
e
l

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
liable to the creditor considering that I am only subsidiarily liable. In order to make use of
the benefit of excussion, I shall set it up against the creditor upon the latters demand for
payment from me, and point out to the creditor available properties of the debtor within
the Philippines, sufficient to cover the amount of the debt. (Article 2060 Civil Code)

an
Ch

r
a
B

s
e
l
XXII. Carmelo and Danilo entered intob
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
Rothat
of Lease contained the stipulation
if during the 10-year-period, if the lessor should
rexclusive option to
n
decide to sell the leased premises, the lessee shall be given 30 days
a
a
purchase the same. In the event the leased premises is sold B
to someone other than the
h
lessee, the lessor C
is bound to stipulate in the Deed of Sale that
the
purchaser shall recognize
s Carmelo
e
this lease and be bound by all terms & conditions thereof.
decided to sell the
l
leased real property, hence, Danilo was notified of the
offer.
Danilo
replied
to the former
b
that he was exercising the option to buy. Two o
(2) weeks later, Carmelo sold the leased
property to Emil. After learning of the sale to
Emil, Danilo filed a complaint for specific
R
performance and rescission of the Contract
Sale between Carmelo and Emil. Can
r the
a
annot?ofExplain
Contract of Sale be rescinded? Why or why
fully. (5%)
B
h
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
by the lessor and the
b
lessee. The lessee has notified the lessor that he is exercising the right
of first refusal within
o granted to a party
the period granted in their contract of lease. Rescission is a remedy
R
when there is a substantial breach, not merely a casual breach, in the agreement.
r
n 21, 1996).
(Equatorial Realty Dev. Vs Mayfair Theater, G.R. 106063,
a
aNov.
B
h
XXIII. Araceli and Agaton entered into a contractC
of loan of P100,000.00 on January 1, 2012s
e
secured by a promissory note whereby Agaton obligated himself to pay on or before
l
December 31, 2013. On June 1, 2013, Agaton wrote to Araceli stating that Armando
bdidshall
o
take care of his debt to Araceli . Araceli did not reply to Agatons letter. Armando
not
R
pay Araceli. On January 5, 2014, Araceli sued Agaton for the payment of the loan. Agaton
contends that he is no longer liable as there was novation by substitutingn
the person of the
debtor by delegacion. Rule on Agatons contention explaining fully youraanswer.
Ch
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

SUGGESTED ANSWER: Agatons 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 Agatons 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
consent of the creditor. (Article 1293 Civil Code).

r
a
B

XXIV. On October 1, 2013, Joey wrote to Mario and communicated to the latter that he is
selling his house and lot for the total purchase price of P2M. Joey gave Mario the option to
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
his relatives to stay and use his (Marios) condo unit in Baguio City for the whole month of
December 2013. On October 15, 2013, Joey informed Mario that he was withdrawing his
offer to him and he was selling his house and lot to Oscar considering that Mario did not
give a consideration distinct from the price. Rule on Joeys contention.

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
a
an
B
h
s
SUGGESTED
ANSWER: This is an option contract which is valid and binding between the
C
ethe offer as there was a consideration distinct
contracting parties. Joey cannot withdraw
l
b the offeree a certain period to accept, the offer
from the price. When the offerer has allowed
may be withdrawn at any time o
before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal,
R upon a consideration, as something paid or promised.
except when the option is founded
n
The consideration distinct from the price in this case at bar is that if r
Mario will not be able
a
a
to buy Joeys house and lot, then Mario shall allow the latter and
his
relatives to stay and
BDecember
h
use his (Marios)C
condo unit in Baguio for the whole month
of
2013. This is a
s
consideration distinct from the price since it is allowede
that the consideration be in the
l Serra vs Court of Appeals, G.R.
form of money or any undertaking. (Article 1324 Civil
Code;
b
103338, Jan. 4, 1994)
o
R
XXV. Antonio was the acknowledged natural
rHazelto
n child of Gregorio. Antonio was married
a
Belinda who predeceased her husband.a
Antonio and Belinda had legitimate children
B Evelyn.
and Carmelo who was married to h
Donita. Carmelo and Donita have a daughter,
s
Carmelo died on Nov. 1, 2007 of C
lung cancer. On Feb. 14, 2008, Antonio died
e and in his will,
he devised a parcel of land to Evelyn. On Dec. 25, 2009, Evelyn died inl
a plane crash, single
b Donita intestate. On
and without issue and the parcel of land was inherited by her mother
o
June 1, 2010, Donita died without a will with the following as surviving relatives: Francia,
R
Donitas sister; Gregorio, father of Antonio and Hazel; sister of Carmelo. Who should validly
r
n
inherit this parcel of land?
a
a
B
h
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Hazel shall inherit. All the
requisites of reservatroncal are present.s
C
eby
Antonio was the origin; Evelyn was the propositus who acquired the property
l
gratuitous title and Donita was the reservor who acquired the property by operation
b of
o
law. Hazel is the relative of the propositus within the 3 degree belonging to the
line of the
origin. Antonio, although also a 3 degree relative of Evelyn, is excluded R
because of the
n
iron-barrier rule.
a
h
C
rd

rd

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
Benjie. Their marriage was judicially declared null and void on February 14, 2009 due to
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
all the essential and formal requisites provided for by the Family Code.

r
a
B

s
e
l and Carina valid, voidable or void? Explain well. (2.5%)
a. Is the marriage of Arnold
b
b. What is the property regime governing their marriage? Why? (2.5%)
Ro
r
n
ANSWER:a
a
B
h
s
a. C
The marriage of Arnold and Carina is void. The Family Code provides that the judgment
emarriage, the partition and distribution of the
of annulment or of absolute nullity of the
l
b of the childrens presumptive legitimes shall be
properties of the spouses , and the delivery
o
recorded in the proper civil registry
registries of property; otherwise, the same shall
Rof theandformer
not affect third persons. Either
spouses may marry again after complying
r be null and void.
n
with these requirements; otherwise, the subsequent marriage shall
a
a
(Articles 52 and 53 of the Family Code).
B
h
s
C
Although Arnold and Carina complied with the essential and
formal requisites of marriage,
le Code,
there was no compliance with Article 52 of the b
Family
hence, the subsequent
marriage is considered null and void.
o
R
b. Since the marriage of Arnold and Carinan
null and void, the property regime governing
rthere
a
a is 147
their marriage is co-ownership under Article
of the Family Code considering that
B
h
is no legal impediment to their marriage.
s
C
e
2. Anton was legally married to Bella and they have two children, l
Cherry and Danny .
bcohabited with Fred,
During the subsistence of the marriage of Anton and Bella, the latter
o
who himself was married to Gretchen. From the cohabitation of Bella and Fred, Hector was
R
born on March 4, 2009. On December 1, 2012, Fred died in a vehicular accident. Bella, on
r
n
behalf of Hector, intervened in the settlement of Freds
estate alleging that Hector is
a
a
entitled to inherit from Fred as his illegitimate son. h
To prove Hectors filiation to Fred, Bella B
presented Hectors baptismal certificate and school
report cards where Fred was indicateds
C
eon
as Hectors father. She also presented pictures showing Fred and Hector together
l
several occasions. On the other hand, Gretchen contends that Hectors action isb
already
barred by Freds death.
o
R
n
a. May Hector prove his filiation with Fred and be entitled to share in Freds estate (2.5%)
a
h
C
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
B

a. No, Hector may not be allowed to prove his filiation with Fred and share in the latters
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
marriage of his parents are legitimate. Hector was born during the valid marriage of Anton
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
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.

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
n
a
a
Bfrom the cohabitation of Bella and Fred
b. Myh
answer will be different. Hector was born
s
who
is considered the illegitimate child of Fred
Cwas legally married to Gretchen, hence,
eyearheprior
and Bella. Anton was already dead one
to Hectors birth, hence the former
l
b
cannot be his father. Unfortunately, Hector
still cannot inherit from Freds estate since he
was proving his filiation to Fred o
of evidence under the second paragraph of
R using pieces
Article 172 which include his baptismal
certificate, school report cards and pictures. Under
rillegitimate filiation
n illegitimate children may establish their
Article 175 of the Family Code,
a
a
in the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children
when the action is
Btheexcept
h
based on the second
paragraph
of
Article
172,
in
which
case
action
may be brought
s
C
e
during the lifetime of the alleged parent. Hectors action to
prove his illegitimate filiation to
lArticle 172 was already barred by
Fred using pieces of evidence under the 2 paragraph
of
b
Freds death.
o
R
3. On a 500 sq.m. lot worth P1M located in
Makati City with TCT # 1234 registeredr
in the
anbuilt
names of Spouses Reyes, Spouses Santos
their house worth P900,000.00.aSpouses
B quiet as
h
Reyes became aware of the construction
when they visited their land but they kept
s
C such time that the construction is completely
they did not want any trouble until
e finished.
State the rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes (2.5%) and Spouses l
Santos (2.5%) based
b
on the facts given.
o
R
ANSWER:
r
n
a
a
Spouses Reyes (landowners) and Spouses Santos (builders)
h were both in bad faith, hence B
the bad faith of one neutralizes the bad faithC
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
the
construction being done on their land by Sps. Santos but they did not object thereto.
Sps.
b
Santos were also in bad faith since they constructed their house on land titled ino
the names
R
of Spouses Reyes. The rights and obligations of the parties are governed by Article 448 of
the Civil Code.
an
The rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes as landowners in goodh
C faith are:
nd

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

r
a
B

The rights and obligations of Spouses Reyes as builders in good faith are:

s
e
l

1. The right to reimbursement of the necessary & useful expenses incurred in the
construction of their house;

b
o
R

2. The right of retention until fully paid of the necessary & useful expenses;

r
a
an
B
h
s
4. C
Edgar was the usufructuary of a parcel of land owned by Fred. With the consent of Edgar
eon this land. How would the hidden treasure be
and by chance, Greg found hidden treasure
l
divided between the parties? (5%) b
Ro
ANSWER:
r
n
a
a
The hidden treasure shall be equally divided between Fred, the
Bowner of the land where
h
hidden treasure was found and Greg, the finder. Edgar was s
merely the usufructuary of the
C
land and not the owner, hence, he does not get any share. e
(Article 438 NCC)
l
b
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
her employment records and other official
R
documents. On Feb. 2, 2008, upon petition
of Corazon, due to concealment of habitual
rby the
n
a
a a decree of annulment was granted
alcoholism existing at the time of their marriage,
h
Family Court of Manila. Subsequently,
Corazon filed with the same court B
a motion to
s
Cof Reyes and that she be granted support
resume using her maiden surname
by
Carlos.
e
l
b
a. If you were the judge, would you grant the motion of Corazon
to resume using her
maiden surname? (2.5%)
Ro
r
n
b. Should Corazon be granted support by her husband?a
(2.5%)
a
B
ANSWER:
s
Ch
e
l
a. Yes. Under Article 371 of the Civil Code, in case of annulment of marriage, and the
bwife is
the guilty party, she shall resume her maiden name and surname. If she is the
innocent
o
spouse, she may resume her maiden name and surname. In the case at bar,R
Corazon is the
n
innocent spouse, hence, she has the option to resume using her maiden name
a and surname.
Ch
3. The right to buy the land encroached upon considering that the value of the land is not
considerably more than the value of the house, hence, forced lease is not applicable.

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
NCC).

r
a
B

6. Anton and Belinda are husband and wife. They have an only son Carlos. Belinda has a
daughter, Donita, by a previous marriage which was declared void by the proper court.
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
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
married before Judge Franco of the RTC of Manila.

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
n
a
a
a. What
is the nature of the marriage of Donita &B
Elmer? Explain well. (2.5%)
h
s
C
e What is the nature of the marriage between
b. Suppose it was Carlos whom Donita married.
l
b
Carlos and Donita. Explain fully. (2.5%).
o
R
ANSWER:
r
n
a
a
a. The marriage of Donita and Elmer is valid. It is not incestuous
Bnor against public policy.
h
Donita and ElmerC
are step-sister and step-brother to eachs
other. Under the Family Code,
e to their marriage.
they are not related to each other and there is no prohibition
l
b
b. The marriage of Donita and Carlos is null and
void as it is incestuous and prohibited
o
under Article 37 of the Family Code. Donita and
RCarlos are half-blood sister and half-blood
brother to each other and their marriage isn
prohibited by law for being incestuous. r
a
Bahad preh
7. Peter and Raquel, both 16 years old,
were so in love with each other that they
s she was only
marital sex resulting to RaquelsC
pregnancy. Raquel gave birth to Oscar when
e
l they were both 18
17 years old. Peter and Raquel married each other on June 1, 2010 when
b
years old. May Oscar be legitimated due to the marriage of his parents,
Peter & Raquel?
o
(5%)
R
r
n
ANSWER:
a
a
B
h
a. Oscar may be legitimated under RA 9858. An
Act Providing For The Legitimation Ofs
C
e
Children Born To Parents Below Marrying Age (approved Dec. 20, 2009). Thisllaw
amended Articles 177 and 178 of the Family Code which now read:
b
o
Art.177. Children conceived & born outside of wedlock of parents who, R
at the time of
n
conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry
each other, or
were so disqualified only because either or both of them were below a
18 years of age, may
be legitimated.
Ch
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
marrying age of 18. Considering that Peter and Raquel got married to each other after
attaining the age of 18, Oscar may be legitimated to raise him to the level of a legitimate
child.

s
e
l

r
a
B

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
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
she has no breasts or menstrual development. She has practically become a male person.
She filed a petition before the RTC of Siniloan, Laguna that her name in her birth certificate
be changed from Jennifer to Jeff and her gender from female to male. If you were the
judge hearing this case, will you grant or deny her petition? (5%)

b
o
R

an
Ch

ANSWER:

s
e
l
b
o

r
a
B

an

r
a
B

Jennifers petition should be granted. In the case of Republic vs. Cagandahan, the Supreme
Court held that considering that Jennifer was born an intersex, the determining factor in
his/her gender classification would be what he/she, having reached the age of majority,
with good reason, thinks of his/her sex. More importantly in this case, Jennifer did not use
any drug nor underwent any sex re-assignment to change her gender from female to male.

Ch

s
e
l

b
o
R

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
a particular lot in metes and bounds. When the deeds were presented for registration, the
Register of Deeds of Pasay City could not issue separate certificates of title due to the
absence of a subdivision plan, hence, only 1 title was issued in the names of the three
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
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
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
still legally redeem the lot sold by Anton to Dencio? (5%)

an
Ch

ANSWER:

s
e
l

r
a
B

b
o
R

an
Ch

s
e
l

b
o
R

Under the law, there is co-ownership whenever the ownership of an undivided thing or
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.
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).

an
Ch

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

r
a
B

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
Ericas house. Dina saw the painting hanging in Ericas 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 Dinas house. Can Dina recover this
painting from Erica? (5%)
ANSWER:

s
e
l

r
a
B

Yes, Dina was unlawfully deprived of her personal property but she must reimburse Erica
of the P1M the latter paid in the gallery auction sale.

b
o
Under Article 559 of the New Civil Code, the possession of movable property acquired in
R
good faith isn
equivalent to a title. Nevertheless, one who
has lost any movable or has been
r
unlawfully
deprived
thereof,
may
recover
it
from
the
person
in possession of the same. If
a has been
a of the movable lost or of which theBowner
the possessor
unlawfully deprived, has
h
s
acquired
C it in good faith at a public sale,e the owner cannot obtain its return without
reimbursing the price paid therefor.
l
b
owho had been married for ten years was pregnant for
11. Elated that her sister Rosemarie
the first time, Rosalie donated R
a ring worth P25,000.00 to the unborn child. Rosemarie was
rfor baby clothes at
n when they talked while shopping
profuse in thanking her sister
a
a
Rustans. Rosemarie gave birth after 7 months of pregnancy B
but the baby died 21 hours
h
after delivery. May Rosalie get back the ring she donated? Why
or
s why not? (5%)
C
e
l
ANSWER:
b
osince there was no compliance with the
Yes, Rosalie may recover the ring that she donated
R
formalities required by law. Article 748 of n
the New Civil Code provides that the donation
r of
a movable property may be made orallya
or in writing. If the value of the personala
property
h
donated exceeds five thousand pesos,
the donation and the acceptance shallB
be made in
s
writing. Otherwise, the donationC
shall be void. In the case at bar, the donation
was a ring
e
worth P25,000.00 and there was no showing that said donation andlacceptance were in
writing, even a private instrument, hence, the donation is consideredbvoid.
o
R
12. Benigno who was terminally ill, signed the will with Bonnie, the 1 witness, at his
r
n
bedside. Benjie, the 2 witness, was in the far sideaof the room fully engrossed and
a
concentrated in the cross word puzzle he was doing.
Bobot, the 3 witness, was in the B
hscrabble
other side of the room near the window, playing
with the grandchildren ofs
C
ein
Benigno. Benigno died on January 2, 2013. It was contended that the will was not signed
l
the presence of the witnesses, hence void. Rule on this contention. (5%)
b
o
R
ANSWER:
n
a real test of signing
The will is valid. In Jaboneta vs Gustilo, the Supreme Court held that the
h
the will in the presence of the testator and the three credible witnesses does not
C
st

nd

rd

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
document because there was no physical obstruction.

r
a
B

13. Anton had two (2) legitimate children, Basilio and Carlos. Carlos had two (2) legitimate
daughters, Donna and Erica. Carlos died in 2011 and Erica repudiated her inheritance from
her father Carlos. In the year 2012, Anton died. Can Erica inherit from Anton? (5%)

b
o
R

ANSWER:

s
e
l

an
Ch

r
a
B

Yes, Erica can inherit from his grandfather Anton. Under Article 977 of the New Civil Code,
an heir who repudiates cannot be represented. However, under Article 976 of the same
Code, a person who repudiates may represent him whose inheritance he has renounced. In
the case at bar, Erica repudiated her inheritance from her father Carlos but she can validly
represent her predeceased father in the inheritance of her grandfather Anton.

s
e
l
b
o

14. Perlita executed a notarial will on Aug. 16, 2004, complying with all the formalities
required by law. On May 9, 2006 when she was already 92 years old, too weak because of
her terminal cancer even to rise from her bed, with intention to revoke, she asked her
housemaid Ponciana to get her will and burn it. Ponciana got the will from the drawer near
Perlitas bed, went to the kitchen, burned the will and showed the ashes of the burned will
to Perlita. Was there a valid revocation of the will by burning? Explain well. (5%)

Ch

an

s
e
l

r
a
B

b
o
R

ANSWER:

an
Ch

r
a
B

There was no revocation of Perlitas will by burning. The law allows the revocation by an
overt act to be done personally by the testator or by another person. However, if the overt
act was done by another person, such overt act must be done in the presence and under the
express direction of the testator. In the case at bar, the revocation of the will by burning
was done by Ponciana, Perlitas housemaid, under the latters express direction but the
burning was not done in her presence, hence, there was no valid revocation of the will by
burning. (Article 830 NCC).

s
e
l

b
o
R

an
Ch

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

s
e
l

b
o
R

a. What is the presumption under the law if the watch is later found in the possession of
Abigail? Explain well. (2.5%)

an
Ch

b. Is Abigails obligation to pay the P25,000.00 loan already extinguished? Why? (2.5%)
ANSWER:

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

r
a
B

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.

r
a
B

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

s
e
l

b
o
16. Rolly and Oscar entered into a pacto de retro sale of Oscars house and lot worth P10M.
Rupon by the parties is only P100,000.00. Is this contract valid, voidable or
The price agreed
r
n
void? Explain
a
a well. (5%)
B
h
s
ANSWER:
C
e
l
b of a valid contract are present: consent of the
The contract is valid. All the requisites
contracting parties, object certaino
which is the subject matter of the contract and cause of
R (Article 1318 NCC). The gross inadequacy of the price
the obligation which is established.
n
agreed upon by the parties is immaterial considering that this is a r
pacto de retro sale. In
a
a
this kind of sales, the price is unusually lower to allow the seller
to
B repurchase his own
h
property within an agreed period of time.
s
C
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
oshop manager told him that the price of
the said car was P300,000.00. Romy acceptedR
the offer but told Sonny to give him one (1)
week to raise the amount. There and then,
Romy gave an initial amount of P10,000.00
rto the
a
an
promising to come back on Sept. 7, 2012
to complete the payment. Romy returned
h
shop on Sept. 8, 2012 but Sonny told
him that the car has already been offeredB
sold to
s and
C that even with the money given byeRomy,
Tony for P500,000. Sonny contended
the offer is
l good for one (1)
good only until Sept. 7, 2012 considering that their agreement is only
b
week. He further contended that after Sept. 7, 2012, the offer can now
be withdrawn and
o
the car can be sold to another person and the P10,000.00 option
money forfeited in his
R
favor. Do you agree with Sonnys contention? Explain well. (5%)
r
n
a
a
ANSWER:
B
h
s
C
e
No, I do not agree with Sonnys contention. There was already a perfected contract of
sale
l
between Sonny and Romy over this specific car. All the requisites of a valid contract
b are
present: consent of the contracting parties, object certain which was the Hondao
Civic 2005
model car, and cause or consideration which was the P300,000.00. (ArticleR
1318 NCC). It
n
should not be construed as an option contract which is only an offer to buy
or not to buy a
certain object within a period of time, such offer may be withdrawn a
by the offerer at any
h
time before acceptance by communicating such withdrawal, except
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
a promissory note (PN) wherein the three bound themselves to pay the debt jointly and
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,
2014. On February 15, 2014, Dennis made a demand upon Caloy to pay the entire
indebtedness but the latter refused to pay contending that his share is not yet due and
demandable. Subsequently, because of Caloys refusal to pay the debt, Dennis brought an
action against him for the collection of the full amount of the obligation. Will the action of
Dennis prosper? Explain fully (5%)

b
o
R

s
e
l

r
a
B

r
a
an
B
h
s
This
note, the three debtors,
Cis a solidary obligation. As evidenced
e bytothepaypromissory
Arnold, Boyet and Caloy, bound themselves
their creditor Dennis, jointly and
l
b any of the solidary debtors to pay the entire
severally, hence, the creditor may compel
o
amount of the debt even if they are
not bound in the same manner and by the same periods
R the obligations of Arnold and Boyet are already due and
and conditions. In the case at bar,
r own obligation is
n
demandable, hence, Caloy can be compelled to pay P80,000.00. Caloys
a
a
only due and demandable on June 15, 2014 and he can be compelled
B to pay P40,000.00
h
when the period has
arrived.
(Article
1211
NCC).
s
C
e
lprawn business in Dumaguete City.
19. Arnold appointed Anton as his agent to manage his
b
Anton, who is based in Manila wants to appoint Arman
o as his substitute.
R
a. Can Anton validly appoint Arman as his substitute?
an Why or why not? (1%) Bar
b. As to Anton, what is the effect ofh
Explain
s
C his appointment of Arman as his substitute?
well. (1.5%)
e
l
b
c. Give the modes of extinguishing agency. (2.5%)
o
R
ANSWER:
r
n
a
a
a. Yes, Anton can validly appoint a substitute or a sub-agent.
h Under Article 1892, the agents B
may appoint a substitute if the principal has notC
prohibited him from doing so.
e
l
b. In view of his appointment of Arman as his substitute, Anton shall be responsible
bfor the
acts of his substitute Arman:
o
R
n
(1). When he was not given the power to appoint one;
a
h
(2). When he was given such power, but without designating the person,
C
ANSWER:

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

r
a
B

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

s
e
l

b
o
a. What formalities must be complied with by Bert, Bart and Bong in order to constitute a
R
legal and valid
partnership? (2.5%)
r
n
a
a
B on Bert and Bart as capitalist partners
b. Under
the law, what are the restrictions imposed
h
s
and
Con Bong as industrial partner? e
l
b
ANSWER:
Roin any form, except where immovable property or real
a. A partnership may be constituted
rbe necessary. Every
n in which case a public instrument shall
rights are contributed thereto,
a
a
contract of partnership having a capital of three thousand pesos
in money or
B or more,
h
property, shall appear in a public instrument, which must be
recorded
in
the
of the
sis void, wheneverOffice
C
e
Securities & Exchange Commission. A contract of partnership
immovable
lproperty is not made, signed by the
property is contributed thereto, if an inventory of said
b
parties, and attached to the public instrument. Bert,
oBart and Bong must comply with these
formalities prescribed by law, otherwise, their
contract of partnership shall be considered
R
void. (Articles 1771, 1772, 1773 NCC).
r
a
an
Boperation
h
b. Bert and Bart as capitalist partners
cannot engage for their own account in any
s
C in which the partnership is engaged,eunless there is a
which is of the same kind of business
l shall bring to
stipulation to the contrary. Any capitalist partner violating this prohibition
b
the common funds any profits accruing to him from his transactions,
and shall personally
o
bear all the losses. (Article 1808 NCC).
R
r
n
Bong, the industrial partner, cannot engage in anyabusiness for himself, unless the
a
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
e
have obtained in violation of this provision, with a right to damages in either case. (Article
l
1789 NCC).
b
o
R
n
a
h
C
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph