CIVIL LAW(1997)

Q. How would you compare

the Civil Law system in its
governance and trend with
that of the Common Law
system?

II
Q. In 1977, Mario and Clara, both Filipino citizens, were married in the Philippines. Three years later, they
went to the United States of America and established their residence in San Francisco, California. In 1987,
the couple applied for, and were granted, U.S. citizenship. In 1989, Mario, claiming to have been
abandoned by Clara, was able to secure a decree of divorce in Reno, Nevada, U.S.A.
In 1990, Mario returned to the Philippines and married Juana who knew well Marios past life.
(a) Is the marriage between Mario and Juana valid?

III
III Q. In the context that the term is used in
Civil Law, state the (a) concept, (b) requisites
and (c) consequences of a Prejudicial
Question

IV- Q. Luis and Rizza, both 26 years of age

and single, live exclusively with each other as
husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage. Luis is gainfully employed. Rizza is
not employed, stays at home, and takes
charge of the household chores.
After living together for a little over twenty
years, Luis was able to save from his salary
earnings during that period the amount of
P200,000.00 presently deposited in a bank. A
house and lot worth P500,000.00 was recently
purchased for the same amount by the couple.
Of the P500,000.00 used by the common-law
spouses to purchase the property,
P200,000.00 had come from the sale of palay
IV

harvested from the hacienda owned by Luis

and P300,000.00 from the rentals of a building
belonging to Rizza. In fine, the sum of
P500,000.00 had been part of the fruits
received during the period of cohabitation from
their separate properties. A car worth
P100,000.00, being used by the common-law
spouses, was donated just months ago to
Rizza by her parents.
Luis and Rizza now decide to terminate their
cohabitation, and they ask you to give them
your legal advice on the following:
(a) How, under the law, should the bank
deposit of P200,000.00, the house and lot

V Q. Under what conditions, respectively,

may drug addiction be a ground, if at all, (a)
for a declaration of nullity of marriage, (b) for
an annulment of the marriage contract, and
(c) for legal separation between the
spouses?

VI
VI- Q. Pedro is the registered owner of a parcel of land
situated in Malolos, Bulacan. In 1973, he mortgaged the
land to the Philippine National Bank (PNB) to secure a
loan of P100,000.00. For Pedros failure to pay the loan,
the PNB foreclosed on the mortgage in 1980, and the
land was sold at public auction to PNB for being the
highest bidder. PNB secured title thereto in 1987.

VII
VII Q. Marcelino, a treasure hunter as just a hobby,
has found a map which appears to indicate the
location of hidden treasure. He has an idea of the
land where the treasure might possibly be found.
Upon inquiry, Marcelino learns that the owner of
the land, Leopoldo, is a permanent resident of
Canada. Nobody, however, could give him
Leopoldos exact address. Ultimately, anyway, he
enters the land and conducts a search. He
succeeds.
Leopoldo, learning of Marcelinos find, seeks to
recover the treasure from Marcelino but the latter is
not willing to part with it. Failing to reach an
agreement, Leopoldo sues Marcelino for the
recovery of the property. Marcelino contests the

VIII- Q. On 1 January 1980, Minerva, the

owner of a building, granted Petronila a
usufruct over the property until 01 June 1998
when Manuel, a son of Petronila, would have
reached his 30th birthday. Manuel, however,
died on 01 June 1990 when he was only 26
years old.

VIII
Minerva notified Petronila that the usufruct
had been extinguished by the death of
Manuel and demanded that the latter vacate
the premises and deliver the same to the
former. Petronila refused to vacate the place
on the ground that the usufruct in her favor
would expire only on 01 June 1998 when
Manuel would have reached his 30th
birthday and that the death of Manuel before
his 30th birthday did not extinguish the
usufruct.
Whose contention should be accepted?

IX

IX - Q. (a) Distinguish between possession

and occupation as these terms are
commonly used in Book II and Book III of the
Civil Code.
(b) Are the effects of illegal and immoral
conditions on simple donations the same as
those effects that would follow when such
conditions are imposed on donations con
causa onerosa?

X- Q. Johnny, with no known living relatives,

executed a notarial will giving all his estate to
his sweetheart. One day, he had a serious
altercation with his sweetheart. A few days
later, he was introduced to a charming lady
who later became a dear friend. Soon after,
he executed a holographic will expressly
revoking the notarial will and so designating
his new friend as sole heir. One day when he
was clearing up his desk, Johnny mistakenly
burned, along with other papers, the only
copy of his holographic will. His business
associate, Eduardo, knew well the contents
of the will which was shown to him by Johnny
the day it was executed. A few days after the
X

burning incident, Johnny died. Both wills

were sought to be probated in two separate
petitions.
Will either or both petitions prosper?

XI
XI Q. T died intestate on 1 September
1997. He was survived by M (his mother), W
(his widow), A and B (his legitimate children),
C (his grandson, being the legitimate son of
B), D (his other grandson, being the son of E
who was a legitimate son of, and who
predeceased, T), and F (his grandson,
being the son of G, a legitimate son who
repudiated the inheritance from T). His
distributable net estate is P120,000.00.
How should this amount be shared in
intestacy among the surviving heirs?

XII- Q. X, the decedent, was survived by W

(his widow), A (his son), B (a granddaughter,
being the daughter of A) and C and D (the
two acknowledged illegitimate children of the
decedent). X died this year (1997) leaving a
net estate of P180,000.00. All were willing to
succeed, except A who repudiated the
inheritance from his father, and they seek
your legal advice on how much each can
expect to receive as their respective shares
in the distribution of the estate.
Give your answer.

XII

XIII -On 01 January 1980, Redentor and

Remedios entered into an agreement by virtue
of which the former was to register a parcel of
land in the name of Remedios under the explicit
covenant to reconvey the land to Remigio, son
of Redentor, upon the sons graduation from
college. In 1981, the land was registered in the
name of Remedios.
Redentor died a year later or in 1982. In March
1983, Remigio graduated from college. In
February 1992, Remigio accidentally found a
XIII

copy of the document so constituting Remedios

as the trustee of the land. In May 1994,
Remigio filed a case against Remedios for the
reconveyance of the land to him. Remedios, in
her answer, averred that the action had already
prescribed.
How should the matter be decided?

XIV- Q. In two separate documents signed

by him, Juan Valentino obligated himself
each to Maria and to Perla, thus To Maria, my true love, I obligate myself to
give you my one and only horse when I feel
like it,
- and To Perla, my true sweetheart, I obligate
XIV
myself to pay you the P500.00 I owe you
when I feel like it.
Months passed but Juan never bothered to
make good his promises. Maria and Perla
came to consult you on whether or not they
could recover on the basis of the foregoing
settings.
What would your legal advice be?

XV

XV - Q. State the basic difference (only in

their legal effects) (a) Between a contract to sell, on the one
hand, and a contract of sale, on the other;
(b) Between a conditional sale, on the one
hand, and an absolute sale, on the other

XVI

XVI -Q. AB sold to CD a motor vehicle for

and in consideration of P120,000.00, to be
paid in twelve monthly equal installments of
P10,000.00, each installment being due and
payable on the 15th day of each month
starting January 1997.
To secure the promissory note, CD (a)
executed a chattel mortgage on the subject
motor vehicle, and (b) furnished a surety
bond issued by Philamlife. CD failed to pay
more than two (2) installments
AB went after the surety but he was only
able to obtain three-fourths (3/4) of the total
amount still due and owing from CD. AB
seeks your advice on how he might, if at all,

XVII

Q. Stating briefly the thesis to support your

answer to each of the following cases, will
the death (a) of the lessee extinguish the lease
agreement?
(b) of a partner terminate the partnership?

XVIII

XVIII- Q. In order to secure a bank loan, XYZ Corporation

surrendered its deposit certificate, with a maturity date of 01
September 1997 to the bank. The corporation defaulted on
the due repayment of the loan, prompting the bank to encash
the deposit certificate. XYZ Corporation questioned the
above action taken by the bank as being a case of pactum
commisorium. The bank disagrees.

XIX
XIX -Q. (a) When would an employers
liability for damage, caused by an employee
in the performance of his assigned tasks, be
primary and when would it be subsidiary in
nature?
(b) Would the defense of due diligence in the
selection and supervision of the employee be
available to the employer in both instances?

XX

Q. On 10 September 1965, Melvin applied for a free

patent covering two lots - Lot A and Lot B - situated in
Santiago, Isabela. Upon certification by the Public Land
Inspector that Melvin had been in actual, continuous,
open, notorious, exclusive and adverse possession of
the lots since 1925, the Director of Land approved
Melvins application on 04 June 1967. On 26 December
1967, Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. P-2277
was issued in the name of Melvin.
On 7 September 1971, Percival filed a protest alleging
that Lot B which he had been occupying and cultivating
since 1947 was included in the Free Patent issued in
the name of Melvin. The Director of Lands ordered the
investigation of Percivals protest. The Special
Investigator who conducted the investigation found that
Percival had been in actual cultivation of Lot B since
1947.
On 28 November 1986, the Solicitor General filed in
behalf of the Republic of the Philippines a complaint for
cancellation of the free patent and the OCT issued in
the name of Melvin and the reversion of the land to
public domain on the ground of fraud and
misrepresentation in obtaining the free patent. On the
same date, Percival sued Martin for the reconveyance
of Lot B.
Melvin filed his answers interposing the sole defense in
both cases that the Certificate of Title issued in his