PART I

1. Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and employees of the U.S. State

Department, got married in the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for annulment

of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first

year of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita filed an annulment case against

Emmanuel before a Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s sterility at the time of the

celebration of the marriage.

Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are both Filipinos. After their wedding in Kenya, they

come back and take up residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage be annulled on the

ground of Emmanuel’s sterility? Explain. (3%)

ANSWER:

No, the marriage cannot be annulled under the Philippine law. Sterility is not a ground for

annulment of marriage under Article 45 of the Family Code.

2. A petition for declaration of nullity of a void marriage can only be filed by either the

husband or the wife? Do you agree? Explain your answer. (5%)

ANSWER:

Yes, I agree. Under the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, a direct action for

declaration of nullity may only be filed by any of the spouses.

3. The petitioner filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage based allegedly on

the psychological incapacity of the respondent, but the psychologist was not able to personally

examine the respondent and the psychological report was based only on the narration of

petitioner. Should the annulment be granted? Explain. (5%)

ANSWER:

The annulment cannot be guaranteed solely on the basis of the psychological report. For

the report to prove the psychological incapacity of the respondent, it is required that the
psychologist should personally examine the respondent and the psychological report should be

based on the psychologist’s independent assessment of the facts as to whether or not the

respondent is psychologically incapacitated. Since, the psychologist did not personally examine

the respondent, and his report is based solely on the story of the petitioner who has an interest in

the outcome of the petition, the marriage cannot be annulled on the ground of respondent’s

psychological incapacity if the said report is the only evidence of respondent’s psychological

incapacity.

4. At age 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant. She insured her own life and

named her unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to give birth, she and

her boyfriend Pietro, the father of her unboarn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where

they were vacationing. The military gave chase and after one week, they were found in an

abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby

delivered were both found dead, with the baby's umbilical cord already cut. Pietro survived.

Can Marian's baby be the beneficiary of the insurance taken on the life of the mother?

(2%)

ANSWER:

Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the life insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC

provides that "birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for

all purposes that are favorable to it, provided that it be born later with the conditions specified in

Art. 41. Article 41 states that "for civil purposes, the fetus shall be considered born if it is alive at

the time it is completely delivered from the mother's womb. However, if the fetus had an intra-

uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four (24)

hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb. The act of naming the unborn child as

sole beneficiary in the insurance is favorable to the conceived child and therefore the fetus

acquires presumptive or provisional personality. However, said presumptive personality only

becomes conclusive if the child is born alive. The child need not survive for twenty-four (24)

hours as required under Art. 41 of the Code because "Marian was already due to give birth,"

indicating that the child was more than seven months old.

5. Write "TRUE" if the statement is true or "FALSE" if the statement is false. If the

statement is FALSE, state the reason. (2% each).

acquire a house in Australia because Australian Laws allow aliens to acquire property from the

age of 16.

ANSWER:

FALSE. Laws relating to family rights and duties or to the status, condition or legal

capacity of persons are binding upon the citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.

The age of majority under Philippine law is 18 years; hence, Roberta, being only 17 years old,

has no legal capacity to acquire and own land.

PART II

1. Mrs. L was married to a ship captain who worked for an international maritime vessel.

For her and her family's support, she would claim monthly allotments from her husband's
 company. One day, while en route from Hong Kong to Manila, the vessel manned by

Captain L encountered a severe typhoon at sea. The captain was able to send radio

messages of distress to the head office until all communications were lost. In the weeks

that followed, the search operations yielded debris of the lost ship but the bodies of the

crew and the passengers were not recovered. The insurance company thereafter paid out

the death benefits to all the heirs of the passengers and crew. Mrs. L filed a complaint

demanding that her monthly allotments continue for the next four years until her husband

may be legally presumed dead because of his absence. If you were the magistrate would

how you rule? (3%)

ANSWER:

I will resolve the appeal in favor of the Republic. In the case of Dedel v. Dedel, (G.R. No.

151867 January 29, 2004) the Supreme Court refused to declare the marriage of the parties void

on the ground of sexual infidelity of the wife Sharon. In case mentioned, the wife committed

infidelity with several men up to the extent of siring two illegitimate children with a foreigner.

The court, however, said that it was not shown that the sexual infidelity was a product of a

disordered personality and that it was rooted in the history of the party alleged to be

psychologically incapacitated. Also, the finding of psychological incapacity cannot be based on

the interviews conducted by the clinical psychologist on the husband or his witnesses and the

person alleged to be psychologically incapacitated must be personally examined to arrive at such

declaration.

2. X, a dressmaker, accepted clothing materials from Karla to make two dresses for her. On

the day X was supposed to deliver Karla's dresses, X called up Karla to say that she had

an urgent matter to attend to and will deliver them the next day. That night, however, a

robber broke into her shop and took everything including Karla's two dresses. X claims

she is not liable to deliver Karla's dresses or to pay for the clothing materials considering

she herself was a victim of the robbery which was a fortuitous event and over which she

had no control. Do you agree? Why? (3%)

ANSWER:

No, I do not agree with the contention of X. The law provides that except when it is

otherwise declared by stipulation or when the law provides or the nature of the obligation
requires the assumption of risk, no person shall be liable for those events which could not be

foreseen or which though foreseen were inevitable. (Article 1174, Civil Code) In the case

presented, X cannot invoke fortuitous event as a defense because she had already incurred in

delay at the time of the occurrence of the loss.

3. Mr. A, a businessman, put several real estate properties under the name of his eldest son

X because at that time, X was the only one of legal age among his four children. He told

his son he was to hold those assets for his siblings until they become adults themselves. X

then got married. After 5 years, Mr. A asked X to transfer the titles over three properties

to his three siblings, leaving two properties for himself. To A’s surprise, X said that he

can no longer be made to transfer the properties to his siblings because more than 5 years

have passed since the titles were registered in his name. Do you agree? Explain. (4%)

ANSWER:

No, the transfer of the properties in the name of X was without cause or consideration and it

was made for the purpose of holding these properties in trust for the siblings of X. If the transfer

was by virtue of a sale, the same is void for lack of cause or consideration. Hence, the action to

declare the sale void is imprescriptible.

4. A. Mr. and Mrs. Roman and Mr. and Mrs. Cruz filed an application for registration of a

parcel of land which after due proceedings was granted by the RTC acting registration as

land court. However, before the decree of registration could be issued, the spouses

Roman and the spouses Cruz sold the lot to Juan. In the notarized deed of sale, the sellers

expressly undertook to submit the deed of sale to the land registration court so that the

title to the property would be directly issued in Juan's name. Is such a stipulation valid?

(2%)

B. Distinguish a direct attack from a collateral attack on a title. (2%)

ANSWER:

a) Yes, because when one who is not the owner of the property sells or alienates it and later

the seller or grantor acquires title, such title passes by operation of law to the buyer or grantee.

b) A direct attack on a title is one where the action filed is precisely for the purpose of

pointing out the defects in the title with a prayer that it be declared void. A collateral attack is
one where the action is not instituted for the purpose of attacking the title but the nullity of the

title is raised as a defense in a different action.

5. a) What are the elements of the crime of bigamy? (5%)

ANSWER:

The elements of bigamy are:

1. That the offender has been legally married;

2. That said first marriage has not been legally dissolved, or in case his or her spouse is absent,

the absent spouse has not been judicially declared presumptively dead;

3. That he contracts a subsequent or second marriage; and

4. That the subsequent or second marriage would have been valid had it not been for the

existence of the first marriage.