the final exam

Final examination in civil law, October 17, 2012 ;5:30pm

INSTRUCTION: The test consists of 50 questions. Choose what you think is the best answer among the five choices. Write the letter of your choice in the given answer sheet. Do not  make marks or write anything on the questionnaire.

1.       Where the reservatario was survived by eleven nephews and nieces of the praepositus in the line of origin, four of whole blood and seven of half blood-

 (A) all eleven were not entitled to the reversionary property

(b) they are entitled in equal shares

(c) the principles of intestacy are controlling

(d)  the nephews and nieces of whole blood were each entitled to a share double that of each of the nephews and nieces of half

(e) reserve troncal is not applicable.

2.       The reserva troncal is a special rule designed primarily to assure the return of the reservable property to the

 (a) third degree from the reservor

(b) third degree from the reservatarios

( c) third degree relatives

(d) third degree from reservista

(e) third degree from descendant

 belonging to the line from which the property originally came, and avoid its being dissipated into and by the relatives of the inheriting ascendant.

3.       The reservable property should pass, not to all the reservatarios as a class but only to those nearest in degree to the

(A)descendant (prepositus) excluding those reservatarios of more remote degree (B) reservista (c) reservor  (d) ascendant (prepositus) (e) descendant of the direct line

4.       Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall be entitled to (a) one-half  (b) 1/8 (c) 1/3  (d) ¼  (e) all of the inheritance .

5.       Should the only survivors be brothers and sisters of the full blood, they shall inherit in (a) equal shares (b)nothing (c) ¼ per stirpes  (d) ½ per capita (e) all the property.

6.       Should there be neither brothers nor sisters, nor children of brothers or sisters, the other collateral relatives shall succeed to the estate as (a) a whole (b)only on-half of the estate (c) ¼ of the estate (d) one-third  (e) only 1/3 of the estate.

7.       In the absence of brothers or sisters and of nephews or nieces, children of the former, whether of the whole blood or not, the surviving spouse, if not separated by a final decree of divorce shall succeed to (a)  the entire  (b) ½   (c) 1/3  (d) ¼  (e) 1/8  estate of the deceased

8.       Should there be neither brothers nor sisters, nor children of brothers or sisters, nor a surviving spouse, who shall inherit? (a) the other collateral relatives  (b) the state (c) the  uncles and aunts  (d) the maternal parents (e) grandparents  shall succeed to the estate of deceased.

9.       It is likewise clear that the reservable property is (a)  not a  part of the estate of the reservista (b) he may not dispose of it by will (c) he returns it to the reservatarios existing (d) all of the above (e)none of the above.

10.    Which of the following statements is NOT correct concerning the reservatarios? They-

(a)   inherit from the reservista

(b)  do not inherit from the reservista

(c)  inherit from the descendant prepositus

(d) are the heirs mortis causa 

(e) are  subject to the condition that they must survive the reservista 

11.    Which statement is correct? (a)  The reservatario is not the reservista's successor mortis causa (b) nor is the reservable property part of the reservista's estate (c) the reservatario receives the property as a conditional heir of the descendant (prepositus) (d) all of the above (e) none of the above 

12.    That which results from the designation of an heir, made in a will executed in the form prescribed by law is known as (a) testamentary succession (b) accretion  (c) respresentation (d) collation (e) substitution 

13.    The words of a will are to be taken in their  (a) ordinary  sense (b) grammatical sense (c) technical sense   (d) ordinary and grammatical sense  (e) depends on the clear intention of  the testator

14.    The invalidity of one of several dispositions contained in a will  (a) invalidate the other dispositions (b) does not result in the invalidity of the other dispositions (c) invalidates only some (D) depends on the will of the testator (e)  depends on the  result of  the probate

15.    The validity of a will as to its form depends upon the observance of the law  (a) where he resides (b) where the will is made (c)  in force at the time it is made (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

116.    Which of the following cannot make a will? (a) a Filipino residing in the U.S. (B) a boy who just turned 18 (c) a woman who is sick with diabetes (d) a dying old man (e) a demented grandmother

17.    “A” died without a will survived by (a) his widow “w” (b) his legitimate brothers, B and C and  (c)his nephews E and F who are the children of a deceased sister D. The net remainder of the estate is P24,000.

Which of the following statement is correct? (a) W gets 4,000 (b) W gets 8,000 (c) E gets 2,000 (d) C gets 2,000 (e) F gets 4,000

18.    Who can demand the partition of the decedent’s estate after his death? (a) any compulsory heir (b) a legatee (c) a devisee (d) a voluntary heir (d) a creditor  (e) all of the above

19.    Which of  the statement is NOT correct? (a)Every will must be subscribed at the end thereof by the testator himself  (b) or by the testator's name written by some other person in his presence (c)  and by his express direction (d)  and attested and subscribed by three or more credible witnesses in the presence of the testator and of one another (e) to include a holographic will.

20.    There can be no partition when  (a)prohibited   by the testator for more than 20 years (b) prohibited by the testator for 10 years (c) when the co-heirs agreed not to partition for 30 years (d) the law cannot prohibit partition (e) the heirs cannot agree 

21.    Can a thing or an entity which is neither a natural nor a juridical person inherit in a will? (a) yes they can generally (b) no they cannot as a general rule as  it is prohited by law (c) no, and this applies to a religious organization (d) yes the “poor” as a class  not being identified specifically cannot be heirs (e) no because a heir has to be living in order to inherit.

222.    Every will must be acknowledged before a  (a) judge (b) lawyer (c) notary public (d) at least  three witness  (e) a person authorized to administer oath by the testator and the witnesses.

23.    If the testator is blind, the will shall be read to him twice; once, by one of the subscribing witnesses, and again, by (a) the lawyer who prepared the document (b) by the notary public before whom the will is acknowledged (c) either of the two will do (d) a judge of the probate court (e) the Clerk of Court.

24.    Which is  CORRECT about a holographic will?  (A) A person may execute a holographic will which must be written, dated by the hand of the testator himself. It is subject to (b) it is subject to no other form, (b) must be made only in the Philippines (c) be witnessed by at least one person (d) acknowledged before a notary public (e) need not be probated if not contested.

25.    Which is NOT correct  about a holographic will? (a)In the probate of a holographic will, it shall be necessary that at least one witness who knows the handwriting and signature of the testator explicitly declare that the will and the signature are in the handwriting of the testator (b) If the will is contested, at least one of such witnesses shall be required (c) In case of any insertion, cancellation, erasure or alteration in a holographic will, the testator must authenticate the same by his full signature (d) When a Filipino is in a foreign country, he is authorized to make a will in any of the forms established by the law of the country in which he may be. Such will may be probated in the Philippines (e) ) If the will is contested, at least  three of such witnesses shall be required

==================================================================Problem 26: X died intestate survived by (1) A,B, C, D and E his legitimate children (2) F and G, legitimate children of C, a legitimate son of X who predeceased him (3) H and I legitimate children of D and (4) J  and K, legitimate children of E. D, however is incapacitated to inherit from X because of an act of unworthiness, while E repudiated his inheritance. The net value of the estate is P120,000.

Questions 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30 will be based on the above problem.

26.    A by his right of accretion gets (a) P24,000 (b) 12,000 (c) 12,000 in his own right (d) 36,000 (e) 6,000 only.

27.    By right of representation G gets (a) 12,000 (b) 24,000 (c) 6,000 (d) 4,000 (e) 36,000

28.    IN totality who should get P36,000 (a) A only (b) B only (c) A and B (D) F and I (E) I only

29.    Which of the following shares are rendered vacant? (a) C only (b) D only (c) E and C (d) C, D, and E (e) G

30.    Which of the following statement is NOT  correct (a) F and G can represent C (b) H and I can represent their father D (C) J and K cannot represent their father E (d) none of the above (e) all of the above.

==========================================================

Problem 31: X an employee of the Department of Foreign affairs died intestate in 1976 survived by his widow W, legitimate child A, and two illegitimate children B and C. The record shows that he failed to state in his GSIS application for membership the beneficiaries of his retirement benefits which amounted to P80,000. Questions 31, 32, 33 and 34 shall be based on the above problem.

31.    “W”  shall get  (a) P20,000  (B) 40,000 (C) 10,000 (D) 5,000 (E) 4,000

32.   C  shall be entitled to (a) ½  (b) ¼  (c) 1/8  (d) 1/3  (e) 1/6

33.   A shall be entitled to (a) 20,000 (b) 40,000 (c) 10,000 (d) 5,000 (e) 4,000

34.   The free portion in this problem is actually (a) ½ (b) ¼ (c) 1/3 (d) 1/8 (e) 1/6  of the remaining estate.

==================================================================

35.    The will of an alien who is abroad produces effect in the Philippines if (a) made with the formalities prescribed by the law of the place in which he resides, (b) or according to the formalities observed in his country,(c) or in conformity with those which this Code prescribes (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

36.    Which of the following is  correct? (a) Two or more persons cannot make a will jointly (b)  they can make a joint will but  in another instrument (c) two persons cannot make a will  for their reciprocal benefit (d) two persons can make a will for the benefit of a third person (e)  Two persons can make a will for their joint benefit.

37.    Which of the following CANNOT be a witness to a will? Any person of (a) sound mind (b)  of the age of eighteen years or more, (c)  not bind ( d) not deaf  (e) a  dumb person

38.    Who of the following is disqualified to witness a holographic will? (a) Any person not domiciled in the Philippines (b)Those who have been convicted of falsification of a document (c) convicted of perjury  (d) convicted of false testimony (e) none of the above.

39.    A will may be revoked outside the Philippine (a) by a person who does not have his domicile in this country, is valid when it is done according to the law of the place where the will was made, (b) or according to the law of the place in which the testator had his domicile at the time (c) and if the revocation takes place in this country, when it is in accordance with the provisions of the Code(d) all of the above (e) none of the above

40.    A will shall be valid (a) even though it should not contain an institution of an heir, (b) or such institution should not comprise the entire estate, (c) and even though the person so instituted should not accept the inheritance or should be incapacitated to succeed (d) all of the above (e) none of the above

41.    Which of the following is  NOT correct?  (a) Every disposition in favor of an unknown person shall be void (b) unless by some event or circumstance his identity becomes certain. (c) a disposition in favor of a definite class  is invalid  (d) a disposition to a group of persons shall be valid (e) a disposition to an unknown person may be validated.

42.    Which of the following is CORRECT?  The  preterition

 (A)or omission of a compulsory  heir

 (b)  of  an heir of the direct line

 (c) of a voluntary heir  of the direct line

(d) one or some of the compulsory heirs

(e) of a compulsory heir of the direct line 

whether living at the time of the execution of the will or born after the death of the testator, shall annul the institution of heir.  

=============================================================

PROBLEM : The testator, an illegitimate person,is survived by  (1) his parents by nature, F and M  and (2) his widow “W”. The net value of his estate is P80,000. Questions No. 43, 44, and 45 shall be based on the above problem:

43.    The legitimes of F and M shall be (a) 40,000 (b) P20,000 (c) ½ of the estate (d) 10,000 (e) not entitled at all

44.    The free disposal shall be (a) P40,000 (b) 20,000 (c) 10,000 (d) 30,000 (e) none

45.    The legitime of W is  (a) 40,000 (b) P20,000 (c) ½ of the estate (d) 10,000 (e) not entitled at all

=============================================================

46.    Which of  the following statements is NOT correct?

 (A)A voluntary heir who dies before the testator transmits nothing to his heirs.  (B) The legitime of legitimate children and descendants consists of one-half of the hereditary estate of the father and of the mother

(C) The legitime reserved for the legitimate parents shall be divided between them equally; if one of the parents should have died, the whole shall pass to the survivor

(D) If only one legitimate child or descendant of the deceased survives, the widow or widower shall be entitled to one-fourth of the hereditary estate. In case of a legal separation, the surviving spouse may inherit if it was the deceased who had given cause for the same.

(E) If the testator leaves no legitimate descendants, but leaves legitimate ascendants, the surviving spouse shall have a right to one-half of the hereditary estate which shall be taken from the free portion of the estate

47.    Which of the following is CORRECT?  (A) Illegitimate children who may survive with legitimate parents or ascendants of the deceased shall be entitled to one-fourth of the hereditary estate to be taken from the portion at the free disposal of the testator (B) If the only survivor is the widow or widower, she or he shall be entitled to one-half of the hereditary estate of the deceased spouse, and the testator may freely dispose of the other half (C) When the widow or widower survives with legitimate parents or ascendants and with illegitimate children, such surviving spouse shall be entitled to one-eighth of the hereditary estate of the deceased which must be taken from the free portion, and the illegitimate children shall be entitled to one-fourth of the estate which shall be taken also from the disposable portion. The testator may freely dispose of the remaining one-eighth of the estate (D) When the testator dies leaving illegitimate children and no other compulsory heirs, such illegitimate children shall have a right to one-fourth of the hereditary estate of the deceased.  (E) Disinheritance can be effected only through a will wherein the legal cause therefor shall be specified

48.    (a) Representation (b) Accretion (c) Succession (d) collation (e)Reserva troncal   is a right created by fiction of law, by virtue of which a person is raised to the place and the degree of the person represented, and acquires the rights which the latter would have if he were living or if he could have inherited.

49.    Which of the following statements is NOT correct? (a)Heirs who repudiate their share may not be represented (b)In the absence of legitimate descendants or ascendants, the illegitimate children shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased (c)An illegitimate child can inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother (d) If a widow or widower and legitimate children or descendants are left, the surviving spouse has in the succession the same share as that of each of the children (e) In order to be capacitated to inherit, the heir, devisee or legatee must be living at the moment the succession opens, except in case of representation, when it is proper.

50.    (a) Representation (b) Reversion (c) Collation (d) Succession (e) Accretion is a right by virtue of which, when two or more persons are called to the same inheritance, devise or legacy, the part assigned to the one who renounces or cannot receive his share, or who died before the testator, is added or incorporated to that of his co-heirs, co-devisees, or co-legatees.

Part 2: Essay type. Rule on the issue presented after reading the given facts.

1. Don Vicente Madrigal, a resident of 47 Balete Drive, Quezon City, died on June 6, 1972.  For the settlement of his estate, Special Proceedings No. Q-916962 was filed with the Court of First Instance, now Regional Trial Court, of Quezon City.

The probate court required the parties to show cause why the case should not be transferred to the Quezon City Regional Trial Court pursuant to the Administrative Order issued by the Supreme Court, limiting the territorial jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City.

Two of the seven heirs, i.e., the heirs of Pacita Madrigal Vazquez and Mrs. Vazquez, manifested their desire that the case be retained by the respondent probate court.  Petitioner did not give its conformity, in effect, objecting to the retention by the Pasay City probate court of the case for further proceedings.The Court of Appeals subsequently rendered the disputed decision, upholding due process in the instant case, and waiver of venue since the lapse from the time the case was heard at Pasay City to the present amounted to a waiver on the part of petitioner to raise the question of venue.  As regards Mrs. Vazquez’ claim of P5,833,333.33, the Court of Appeals denied the same since payment thereof would, in effect amount to a partial distribution of the estate of the deceased, Don Vicente Madrigal, during the pendency of the intestate proceedings, which may not be allowed prior to the delivery to any beneficiary of his/her distributive share of the estate and before the payment of estate taxes, pursuant to Sec. 107 of the National Internal Revenue Code.  Private respondents’ motion for accounting was likewise denied and directed to betaken up in the settlement proceedings before the respondent court. Petitioner maintains that the probate proceedings should properly have been retained by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, pursuant to Rule 73, Section 1 of the Revised Rules of Court Petitioner argues that their failure to object to the proceedings conducted at Pasay City Regional Trial Court, should not be taken as a waiver on their part as to venue because they believed that the proceedings were only temporary and that the case would subsequently be returned to Quezon City for further proceedings.Likewise, the heirs indicated their willingness to have the probate court at Pasay City continue with the proceedings.  Petitioner’s contention that only two heirs agreed to the retention by the probate court is misplaced.  Private respondent has pointed out: “It is incorrect for petitioner to declare that the other heirs of the late Don Vicente Madrigal never manifested their willingness to have the probate court continue with the proceedings. 

ISSUES:

a.Whether or not there was waiver of venue by inaction on the part of petitioner.

 b..Whether or not the venue, of the probate proceedings including that taken by the Court of Appeals was proper.

2. Rufina Dizon, who was married to Vicente Galang and by whom she had a son named Francisco, inherited from her parents the three parcels of land described in the complaint. On October 4, 1904, Rufina Dizon and her son Francisco inherited from her the said three parcels of land. Francisco Galang died on December 8, 1904, and his father Vicente Galang, by operation of law, inherited from him the said land. In accordance with article 811 of the Civil Code these three parcels of land are considered as reservable property although they do not appear as such in the registry of deeds. In 1913, Vicente Galang sold the first two parcels to Juan Medina and in 1909 the third to Teodoro Jurado, without informing them that they were reservable property.

The plaintiffs Pedro and Severino Dizon, brother and sister of the deceased Rufina Dizon, being related to her within the third degree, brought this action against Vicente Galang, Juan Medina and Teodoro Jurado. The complaint prays that the sales of this land by Vicente Galang to Juan Medina and Teodoro Jurado be ordered to return the said parcels of land; that Vicente Galang be compelled to record in the registry of deeds the reservable character of this land and to execute a mortgage to secure its value.

ISSUE:

Whether or not reservation by the widowed spouse constitutes reserve troncal.

3. In 1969, Eduvigis J. Cruz, a childless widow, donated a 235.5 sq.m residential lot in San Isidro, Taytay Rizal together with the two-door apartment erected thereon to her grandnieces private respondents herein, in a deed of donation entitled "Kasulatan Sa Kaloobpala". The property was accordingly transferred to the names of private respondents.

In 1974, Eduvigis Cruz judicially adopted Cresencia Ocreto, a minor, after which she extrajudicially tried to revoke the donation, but the donees resisted, alleging that—

(a) the property in question was co-owned by Eduvigis Cruz and her brother. the late Maximo Cruz, grandfather of the donees, hence the latter own 1/2 of the property by inheritance; and

(b) Eduvigis Cruz owns another property, an agricultural land of more than two hectares situated in Barrio Dolores, Taytay, Rizal, hence the donation did not impair the presumptive legitime of the adopted child.

Issue: Can Eduvigis Cruz revoke the donation?

4. Fernandez and Juan Melgar entered into a partnership involving parcels of lands and carabaos, to be administered by Mr. Fernandez. During Melgar’s lifetime, he executed a deed of gift of parcel of land together with the work animals therein, in favor of Cesar Mercader and his wife Isabel Noel. Before Melgar died, Mercader had a conversation with Fernandez and as a result of the conversation agreed in writing to continue the partnership between Fernandez and Melgar under the new name of Mercader-Fernandez. When Fernandez filed an action for the partition of the parcels of land, alleging that the property he seeks to have partitioned is owned by him in common with the defendants, the latter denied the allegations of Fernandez’ complaint, asserting that they have acquired title in fee simple to the entire property through a donation made by Juan Melgar and his wife.

ISSUE: Whether or not Fernandez has a right to one-half of the property in question

5.  Sometime in 1963, Guillermo Maglucot rented a portion of Lot No. 1639-D(subject lot). Subsequently, Leopoldo and Severo, both surnamed Maglucot, rentedportions of subject lot in 1964 and 1969, respectively, and each paying rentals therefor.Said respondents built houses on their corresponding leased lots. They paid the rentalamount of P100.00 per annum to Mrs. Ruperta Salma, who represented the heirs ofRoberto Maglucot, petitioners predecessor-in-interest. In December 1992, however,said respondents stopped paying rentals claiming ownership over the subject lot.Petitioners thus filed the complainta quo .Petitioners maintain that Lot No. 1639 was mutually partitioned and physicallysubdivided among the co-owners and that majority of them participated in the actualexecution of the subdivision. Further, the co-owners accepted their designated shares in1946 as averred by Tomas Maglucot in his petition for partition. Petitioners opine that in1952, Tomas Maglucot himself initiated a court proceeding for a formal subdivision ofLot No. 1639. In said petition, he averred that only Hermogenes Olis and the heirs ofPascual Olis were not agreeable to the partition. Petitioners further contend thatrespondents admitted in their tax declarations covering their respective houses that theyare "constructed on the land of Roberto Maglucot. Simply put, petitioners vigorouslyassert that respondents are estopped from claiming to be co-owners of the subject lot inview of the mutual agreement in 1946, judicial confirmation in 1952, and respondentsacquiescence because they themselves exclusively exercised ownership over Lot No.1639-A beginning 1952 up to the present.

Issue:

 Whether or not there has been a valid oral partition             

END OF THE EXAMINATION