Scribd
Upload
143 views2 pages

Civil Law Bar Exam Answers Page 1

CIVIL LAW BAR EXAM ANSWERS: FAMILY CODE Published by adminC on May 3, 2013 | Leave a response Emancipation (1993) Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were sweethearts. At a party at the house of a mutual friend. Lea met Jake, also 18 years old, who showed interest in her. Lea seemed to entertain Jake because she danced with him many times. In a fit of jealousy, Julio shot Jake with his father’s 38 caliber revolver which, before going to the party he was able to get from the unlocked drawer inside his father’s bedroom. Jake died as a result of the lone gunshot wound he sustained. His parents sued Julio’s parents for damages arising from quasi-delict. At the time of the incident, Julio was 18 years old living with his parents. Julio’s parents moved to dismiss the complaint against them claiming that since Julio was already of majority age, they were no longer liable for his acts. 1) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Why? 2) What is the liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents? Explain your answer. SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as amended by Republic Act 6809, provides in the third paragraph that “nothing in this Code shall be construed to derogate from the duty or responsibility of parents and guardians for children and wards below twenty-one years of age mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of Article 2180 of the Civil Code”. 2) The liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 and 2180 Civil Code) and shall cover specifically the following: a) P50,000.00 for the death of the son; b) such amount as would correspond to lost earning capacity; and c) moral damages. Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights (2000) On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married to each other without a marriage settlement. In 1985, they acquired a parcel of land in Quezon City. On June 1, 1990, when Angelina was away in Baguio, Rene sold the said lot to Marcelo. Is the sale void or voidable? SUGGESTED ANSWER: The sale is void. Since the sale was executed in 1990, the Family Code is the law applicable. Under Article 124 of the FC, the sale of a conjugal property by a spouse without the consent of the other is void. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family Code may apply retroactively but only if such application will not impair vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, the law that governed their property relations was the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of Felipe v. Aldon, 100 SCRA 628 and reiterated in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga, G.R. No. 118784, 2 September 1999, the sale executed by the husband without the consent of the wife is voidable. The husband has already acquired a vested right on the voidable nature of dispositions made without the consent of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of the Family Code which makes the sale void does not apply. Family Home; Dwelling House (1994) In 1991, Victor established judicially out of conjugal property, a family home in Manila worth P200.000.00 and extrajudicially a second family home in Tagaytay worth P50.000.00. Victor leased the family home in Manila to a foreigner. Victor and his family transferred to another house of his in Pasig.

Uploaded by

NFNL
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
143 views2 pages

Civil Law Bar Exam Answers Page 1

CIVIL LAW BAR EXAM ANSWERS: FAMILY CODE Published by adminC on May 3, 2013 | Leave a response Emancipation (1993) Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were sweethearts. At a party at the house of a mutual friend. Lea met Jake, also 18 years old, who showed interest in her. Lea seemed to entertain Jake because she danced with him many times. In a fit of jealousy, Julio shot Jake with his father’s 38 caliber revolver which, before going to the party he was able to get from the unlocked drawer inside his father’s bedroom. Jake died as a result of the lone gunshot wound he sustained. His parents sued Julio’s parents for damages arising from quasi-delict. At the time of the incident, Julio was 18 years old living with his parents. Julio’s parents moved to dismiss the complaint against them claiming that since Julio was already of majority age, they were no longer liable for his acts. 1) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Why? 2) What is the liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents? Explain your answer. SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as amended by Republic Act 6809, provides in the third paragraph that “nothing in this Code shall be construed to derogate from the duty or responsibility of parents and guardians for children and wards below twenty-one years of age mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of Article 2180 of the Civil Code”. 2) The liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 and 2180 Civil Code) and shall cover specifically the following: a) P50,000.00 for the death of the son; b) such amount as would correspond to lost earning capacity; and c) moral damages. Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights (2000) On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married to each other without a marriage settlement. In 1985, they acquired a parcel of land in Quezon City. On June 1, 1990, when Angelina was away in Baguio, Rene sold the said lot to Marcelo. Is the sale void or voidable? SUGGESTED ANSWER: The sale is void. Since the sale was executed in 1990, the Family Code is the law applicable. Under Article 124 of the FC, the sale of a conjugal property by a spouse without the consent of the other is void. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family Code may apply retroactively but only if such application will not impair vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, the law that governed their property relations was the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of Felipe v. Aldon, 100 SCRA 628 and reiterated in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga, G.R. No. 118784, 2 September 1999, the sale executed by the husband without the consent of the wife is voidable. The husband has already acquired a vested right on the voidable nature of dispositions made without the consent of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of the Family Code which makes the sale void does not apply. Family Home; Dwelling House (1994) In 1991, Victor established judicially out of conjugal property, a family home in Manila worth P200.000.00 and extrajudicially a second family home in Tagaytay worth P50.000.00. Victor leased the family home in Manila to a foreigner. Victor and his family transferred to another house of his in Pasig.

Uploaded by

NFNL
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

CIVIL LAW BAR EXAM ANSWERS: FAMILY CODE

Published by adminC on May 3, 2013 | Leave a response

Emancipation (1993)

Julio and Lea, both 18 years old, were sweethearts. At a party at the house of a mutual friend.
Lea met Jake, also 18 years old, who showed interest in her. Lea seemed to entertain Jake
because she danced with him many times. In a fit of jealousy, Julio shot Jake with his father’s 38
caliber revolver which, before going to the party he was able to get from the unlocked drawer
inside his father’s bedroom. Jake died as a result of the lone gunshot wound he sustained. His
parents sued Julio’s parents for damages arising from quasi-delict. At the time of the incident,
Julio was 18 years old living with his parents. Julio’s parents moved to dismiss the complaint
against them claiming that since Julio was already of majority age, they were no longer liable for
his acts.

1) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Why?

2) What is the liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents? Explain your answer.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

1) No, the Motion to Dismiss should not be granted. Article 236 of the Family Code as amended
by Republic Act 6809, provides in the third paragraph that “nothing in this Code shall be
construed to derogate from the duty or responsibility of parents and guardians for children and
wards below twenty-one years of age mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of Article
2180 of the Civil Code”.

2) The liability of Julio’s parents to Jake’s parents arises from quasi-delict (Arts. 2176 and 2180
Civil Code) and shall cover specifically the following:

a) P50,000.00 for the death of the son;

b) such amount as would correspond to lost earning capacity; and

c) moral damages.

Family Code; Retroactive Application; Vested Rights (2000)

On April 15, 1980, Rene and Angelina were married to each other without a marriage settlement.
In 1985, they acquired a parcel of land in Quezon City. On June 1, 1990, when Angelina was
away in Baguio, Rene sold the said lot to Marcelo. Is the sale void or voidable?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The sale is void. Since the sale was executed in 1990, the Family Code is the law applicable.
Under Article 124 of the FC, the sale of a conjugal property by a spouse without the consent of
the other is void.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The sale is voidable. The provisions of the Family Code may apply retroactively but only if
such application will not impair vested rights. When Rene and Angelina got married in 1980, the
law that governed their property relations was the New Civil Code. Under the NCC, as
interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heirs of Felipe v. Aldon, 100 SCRA 628 and
reiterated in Heirs of Ayuste v. Malabonga, G.R. No. 118784, 2 September
1999, the sale executed by the husband
without the consent of the wife is voidable. The husband has already acquired a vested right on
the voidable nature of dispositions made without the consent of the wife. Hence, Article 124 of
the Family Code which makes the sale void does not apply.

Family Home; Dwelling House (1994)

In 1991, Victor established judicially out of conjugal property, a family home in Manila worth
P200.000.00 and extrajudicially a second family home in Tagaytay worth P50.000.00. Victor
leased the family home in Manila to a foreigner. Victor and his family transferred to another
house of his in Pasig.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy