2020 Bar — Civil Law

Believing that a parcel of land was public land, a farmer built a two-story concrete house on it. Five years later, a person showed up bearing an original certificate of title over the lot which had been registered for more than 10 years. The person asked the farmer to vacate the parcel of land. The farmer refused to vacate unless the titled owner pays the fair market value of the house built on the parcel of land. Does the farmer have legal ground to demand payment for the house before vacating the parcel of land? Explain briefly.

A corporation which owns a hospital was sued along with a physician for medical malpractice. The corporation moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it was only the physician, as the natural person, who could be the subject of any kind of suit. In other words, the corporation argued that it was not a legal person. Is the position of the corporation owning the hospital legally tenable? Explain briefly.

A 100-year-old tree inside a university was uprooted by strong winds caused by a super typhoon. This was despite the university's prior efforts to maintain the strength of the tree's roots. The tree was blown away until it hit a nearby fast-food restaurant where a Bar candidate was reviewing for the Bar Examinations. The Bar candidate, who was then the only person dining inside the fast-food restaurant, suffered physical injuries. The super typhoon was enabled by climate change. Can the university be held liable for the physical injuries suffered by the Bar candidate? Explain briefly.

A 12-year-old seventh grade student living in the company of their parents brought a gun owned by the father to school. With it, the student shot a classmate who had been a bully. The student missed, sparing the bully. The bully's parents, incensed by the event, sued the parents of the 12-year-old seventh grade student for damages. The defendant parents moved to dismiss the suit, claiming that they could never be held liable for damages since they did not shoot the bully themselves. Should the motion to dismiss be granted on this ground? Explain briefly.

A Japanese national was able to obtain a divorce decree concerning his marriage with his Filipino wife. The decree capacitated the Japanese national to remarry. Can the Filipino wife now avail of Article 26 of the Family Code and then remarry? Explain briefly.

A bride declined to appear on her wedding day. Instead, she sent a note to her prospective groom, saying that she needed to be honest to herself by admitting that the institution of marriage was not for her. The bride wrote that she came to this conclusion after contemplating on the tweets of the #LabGuru. She also wrote that to atone for her non-appearance, she would post a glowing recommendation of the prospective groom as a partner on her Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Tiktok accounts. The couple had previously dated for almost eight years. The whole time, the prospective groom had been loyal and caring. It was the bride who covered all the wedding expenses. Heartbroken and embarrassed, the prospective groom sued the prospective bride for moral damages, alleging that she had breached her promise to marry him. Will the suit prosper? Explain briefly.

A seller posted an online advertisement for a "4-volume set of Tolentino's Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil Code of the Philippines, 100 pesos only." A Bar candidate excitedly ordered it and paid through GCash. However, when the set was delivered, tears started to well in the Bar candidate's eyes. Much to the Bar candidate's bewilderment, the author was not Arturo Tolentino, the legal luminary as the candidate was made to expect, but Lorna Tolentino, the noted actor. The Bar candidate believes that the contract of sale should be rescinded and that damages are also proper. Is the Bar candidate's position legally sound? Explain briefly.

Two college sweethearts were married inside a Roman Catholic church in the Philippines with a Supreme Court Justice serving as solemnizing officer. A few years following the ceremony, one of the two filed an action for the declaration of nullity of marriage on the ground that the marriage was void ab initio because it was solemnized inside a Roman Catholic church by a Supreme Court Justice, and not by a Roman Catholic priest. Is the position legally tenable? Explain briefly.

A wife was able to validly obtain a judicial declaration of her husband's presumptive death after he had disappeared for 10 years. She then remarried in accordance with law. To her surprise, a few years after her remarriage, her first husband reappeared. Does the first husband's reappearance automatically, without need of any further act, terminate the second marriage? Explain briefly.

A couple executes a prenuptial agreement which principally provides that their marriage shall be valid for only five years but that it can be renewed through mutual consent negotiated at least six months before its expiration. Is this contract valid? Explain briefly.

Your significant other shows you a laptop screen on which a mandatory question for the installation of an app appears. The question reads: "Do you agree to the terms and conditions of use?" There are two buttons indicating alternative responses: one is labeled "Agree"; the other is labeled "Disagree." The terms and conditions of use are not shown on the screen. Neither is there a hyperlink that can be clicked that would reveal the terms and conditions of use of the app being installed. Curious why the terms and conditions of use are not available, you search the internet and come across media articles revealing that the terms and conditions of use allow the app provider to access a user's contact list, emails, and browsing history. These pieces of information are sold to advertisers who, in turn, tailor their emails to users so that they can engage in targeted advertising based on the users' profiles. Your significant other asks you this legal question: By clicking on "Agree", will there be a "meeting of the minds" between the user and the app provider enabling access to the user's contact list, emails, and browsing history? Explain briefly.

Four siblings co-own a two-hectare, commercially viable property located next to a major road. The siblings have equal shares but none of them have exerted any effort to partition the property. A large retail conglomerate then offered to purchase the entire property. Three of the siblings were willing to sell, but one refused, wanting to hold on to the land in memory of their departed parents. The three willing siblings proceeded to sell their respective shares in the property to the large retail conglomerate. After the sale, the conglomerate filed a case in court to partition the property. Should the court allow the partition? Explain briefly.