Está en la página 1de 6

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

PROJECT PHOENIX 2016


MOCK BAR IN CIVIL LAW

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This Questionnaire contains six (6) pages including these Instructions pages. Check the
number of pages and the page numbers at the bottom right corner of each page of this Questionnaire
and make sure it has the correct number of pages and their proper numbers.

There are Ten (10) Questions to be answered within 2 hours.

2. Read each question very carefully and write your answers in your Bar Examinations
Notebook in the same order the questions are posed. Write your answers only in the front and not
the back page of every sheet in your Notebook. Note well the allocated percentage points for each
number, question, or sub-question.

In your answers, use the numbering system in the questionnaire.If the sheets provided in
your Examination Notebook are not sufficient for your answers, use the back pages of every sheet
of your Examination Notebook, starting at the back page of the first sheet and the back of the
succeeding sheets thereafter.

3. Answer the questions legibly, clearly and concisely. Start each number on a separate page.
An answer to a sub-question under the same number may be written continuously on the same page
and the immediately succeeding pages until completed.

Your answer should demonstrate your ability to analyze facts presented by the question, to
select the material from the immaterial facts and to discern the points upon which the question
turns. It should show your knowledge and understanding of the pertinent principles and theories of
law involved and their qualifications and limitations. It should demonstrate your ability to apply the
law to the given facts, and to reason logically in a lawyer-like manner to a sound conclusion from
the given premises.

A mere Yes or No answer without any corresponding explantion or discussion will not
be given any credit. Thus, always briefly but fully explain your answers although the question does
not expressly ask for an explanation. At the same time, remember that a complete explanation does
1
not require that you volunteer information or discuss legal doctrines that are not necessary or
pertinent to the solution to the problem. You do not need to re-write or repeat the question in your
Notebook.

4. Make sure you do not write your name or any extraneous note/s or distinctive marking/s on
your Notebook that can serve as an identfiying mark/s (such as names that are not in the given
questions, prayers, or private notes to the Examiner). Leaving or making any distinguishing or
identifying mark in the exam Notebook is considered cheating and can disqualify you for the Bar
examinations.

You can use the questionnaire for notes you may wish/need to write during the examination.

HAND IN YOUR BOOKLET WITH THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

2
DEFINITION

I. Define and explain the following concepts:

A. Constructive Trust.

B. Doctrine of Discovered Peril.

ESSAY QUESTIONS

II.

X bought on installment a multicab from MM group Inc. X made a down payment and the balance
was secured by a promissory note and a chattel mortgage over the multicab. Consequently, he failed
to pay, hence MM group filed a complaint for foreclosure of the chattel mortgage with replevin and
and to pay the unpaid balance. X surrendered the motor vehicle after he was served with summons.
He was declared in default, hence judgment was rendered ordering him to pay the unpaid balance.
Is the judgement correct?

III.

Spouses Primo and Monina Lim, childless, were entrusted with the custody of two (2) minor
children, the parents of whom were unknown. Eager of having children of their own, the spouses
made it appear that they were the childrens parents by naming them Michelle P. Lim and Michael
Jude Lim. Subsequently, Monina married Angel Olario after Primos death. She decided to adopt the
children by availing the amnesty given under R.A. 8552 to those individuals who simulated the
birth of a child. She filed separate petitions for the adoption of Michelle, then 25 years old and
Michael, 18. Both Michelle and Michael gave consent to the adoption. The trial court dismissed the
petition and ruled that Monina should have filed the petition jointly with her new husband. Monina,
in a Motion for Reconsideration argues that mere consent of her husband would suffice and that
joint adoption is not needed, for the adoptees are already emancipated.

Is the trial court correct in dismissing the petitions for adoption? Explain.

IV.

3
In 2005, Andres built a residential house on a lot whose only access to the national highway
was a pathway crossing Brando's property. Andres and others have been using this pathway
(pathway A) since 1980. In 2006, Brando fenced off his property, thereby blocking Andres' access to
the national highway. Andres demanded that part of the fence be removed to maintain his old access
route to the highway (pathway A), but Brando refused, claiming that there was another available
pathway (pathway B) for ingress and egress to the highway. Andres countered that pathway B has
defects, is circuitous, and is extremely inconvenient to use. To settle their dispute, Andres and
Brando hired Damian, a geodetic and civil engineer, to survey and examine the two pathways and
the surrounding areas, and to determine the shortest and the least prejudicial way through the
servient estates. After the survey, the engineer concluded that pathway B is the longer route and will
need improvements and repairs, but will not significantly affect the use of Brando's property. On the
other hand, pathway A that had long been in place, is the shorter route but would significantly affect
the use of Brando's property.

In light of the engineer's findings and the circumstances of the case, resolve the parties' right
of way dispute.

V.

Manila Petroleum Co. owned and operated a petroleum operation facility off the coast of
Manila. The facility was located on a floating platform made of wood and metal, upon which was
permanently attached the heavy equipment for the petroleum operations and living quarters of the
crew. The floating platform likewise contained a garden area, where trees, plants and flowers were
planted. The platform was tethered to a ship, the MV 101, which was anchored to the seabed. Please
briefly give the reason for your answers.

A. Is the platform movable or immovable property?

B. Are the equipment and living quarters movable or immovable property?

VI.

Sergio is the registered owner of a 500-square meter land. His friend, Marcelo, who has long
been interested in the property, succeeded in persuading Sergio to sell it to him. On June 2, 2012,
they agreed on the purchase price of P600,000 and that Sergio would give Marcelo up to June30,
2012 within which to raise the amount. Marcelo, in a light tone usual between them, said that they
should seal their agreement through a case of Jack Daniels Black and P5,000 "pulutan" money
which he immediately handed to Sergio and which the latter accepted. The friends then sat down
and drank the first bottle from the case of bourbon. On June 15, 2013, Sergio learned of another
buyer, Roberto, who was offering P800,000 in ready cash for the land.
4
When Roberto confirmed that he could pay in cash as soon as Sergio could get the documentation
ready, Sergio decided to withdraw his offer to Marcelo, hoping to just explain matters to his friend.
Marcelo, however, objected when the withdrawal was communicated to him, taking the position
that they have a firm and binding agreement that Sergio cannot simply walk away from because he
has an option to buy that is duly supported by a duly accepted valuable consideration.

Can Sergio claim that whatever they might have agreed upon cannot be enforced
because any agreement relating to the sale of real property must be supported by evidence in
writing and they never reduced their agreement to writing?

VII.

Roberto was in Nikko Hotel when he bumped into a friend who was then on her way to a
wedding reception being held in said hotel. Roberto alleged that he was then invited by his friend to
join her at the wedding reception and carried the basket full of fruits which she was bringing to the
affair. At the reception, the wedding coordinator of the hotel noticed him and asked him, allegedly
in a loud voice, to leave as he was not in the guest list. He retorted that he had been invited to the
affair by his friend, who however denied doing so.

Deeply embarrassed by the incident, Roberto then sued the hotel for damages under Articles
19 and 21 of the Civil Code. Will Robertos action prosper? Explain.

VIII.

Roderick and Faye were high school sweethearts. When Roderick was 18 and Faye, 16
years old, they started to live together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. When
Faye reached 18 years of age, her parents forcibly took her back and arranged for her marriage to
Brad. Although Faye lived with Brad after the marriage, Roderick continued to regularly visit Faye
while Brad was away at work. During their marriage, Faye gave birth to a baby girl, Laica. When
Faye was 25 years old, Brad discovered her continued liason with Roderick and in one of their
heated arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost no time in marrying her true love Roderick,
without a marriage license, claiming that they have been continuously cohabiting for more than 5
years.

Was the marriage of Roderick and Faye valid?

IX.

5
Gigolo entered into an agreement with Majorette for her to carry in her womb his baby via in vitro-
fertilization. Gigolo undertook to underwrite Majorettes pre-natal expenses as well as those
attendant to her delivery. Gigolo would thereafter pay Majorette P2 million and, in return, she
would give custody of the baby to him.

After Majorette gives birth and delivers the baby to Gigolo following her receipt of P2 million,
she engages your services as her lawyer to regain custody of the baby.

X was an illegitimate child, from her mothers second liason. She had a half-brother from her
mothers first liason, a union of which the fact of thye marriage was questioned. X received a
marriage proposal from Y sometime in 1917. The couple lived together as husband and wife, with
two ampun-ampunans, who were not legally adopted. Upon the death of X, who died without a will,
Y adjudicated the entire estate to himself and petitioned for adoption of A, one of their ampun-
ampunanans. The petition was unfortunately overtaken by his death. Soon after, E, Xs niece
daugther of her half brother, petitioned for letters of administration of the entire estate. She alleged
that no marriage in fact existed in the civil registry. Her letter of administration was oppposed by
the heirs of Y, and the ampun-ampunanans. GG intervene in the proceedings, claiming she was the
only surviving descendant in the direct line of Y.

a) Could GG be acknowledged as Ys child whether in the compulsory voluntary sense?

b) Will adoption proceedings of the ampun ampunanans prosper?

c) Who are the legal heirs of the decedents Y and X?