Print_siliman Rem Qnaw

8/13/2019 Print_siliman Rem Qnaw

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/printsiliman-rem-qnaw 1/122

Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) by : [email protected] Page 1 of 66

ANSWERS TO BAR

EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

IN

REMEDIAL LAWARRANGED BY TOPIC

(1997 – 2006)

Edited and Arranged by:

version 1987-2003Si i!"# U#i$%&'iC* %+% *, L"- B" ./ 200

UPDATED BY:

DondeeThe RE-Take 2007

From he A!"#ER" T$ BAR E%A&'!AT'$!

(UE"T'$!" )* he UP +A# ,$&P+E% Phi.i//ine+a " hoo.s Asso ia ion 200

4.* 225 2007

Version 1997-2006 !dated "# Dondee







Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) by : [email protected] Page 4 of 66 8efault" emedies" Party 8eclared in 8efault (' + ).............................................................................. 19 8efault" emedies" Substantial Com liance (' )............................................................................... 20 8emurrer to vidence (' 1 )............................................................................................................ 20 8emurrer to vidence" Civil Case vs. Criminal Case (' )..................................................................... 20 8iscovery" :odes of 8iscovery (' )............................................................................................... 20 8iscovery" :odes" Sub oena 8uces %ecum (1997 )............................................................................... 21 8iscovery" Production and ns ection of 8ocuments (' ' ).................................................................... 21 8ismissal" :otion to 8ismiss" es Judicata (' )............................................................................... 21

vidence" Admissibility" P,otoco ies (' )....................................................................................... 22 &orum S,o ing" 8efinition (' + ).................................................................................................... 22 &orum S,o ing" ffects" 0ac> of Certification (' + )........................................................................... 22 3en. Princi les" ?uestions of 0a2 vs. ?uestions of &act (' = )............................................................... 22 Judgment" Annulment of Judgment" 3rounds (199! )............................................................................. 22 Judgment" nforcement" $year eriod (1997 )...................................................................................... 22 Judgment" nforcement" &oreign Judgment (' )............................................................................... 22 Judgment" ;ecution ending A eal (' ' )....................................................................................... 23 Judgment" nterlocutory *rder" Partial Summary Judgments (' = ).......................................................... 23 Judgment" Judgment on t,e Pleadings (1999 )...................................................................................... 23 Judgment" Judgment on t,e Pleadings (' )...................................................................................... 24 Judgment" :andamus vs. ?uo @arranto (' 1 )................................................................................... 24 Judgment" Soundness" Attac,ment (' ' ).......................................................................................... 24 Judgments" nforcement" ;amination of 8efendant (' ' ).................................................................... 24 Jurisdiction" 6abeas Cor us" Custody of :inors (' )......................................................................... 25 Jurisdiction" 0ac> of Jurisdiction" Pro er Action of t,e Court (' = )......................................................... 25 Parties" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (199! )............................................................................................... 25 Parties" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (1999 )............................................................................................... 25 Parties" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (1999 )............................................................................................... 26 Parties" %,ird Party Claim (' )....................................................................................................... 26 Parties" %,ird$Party Claim (' )...................................................................................................... 26 Petition for Certiorari (' )............................................................................................................ 26 Petition for elief - Action for Annulment (' ' ).................................................................................. 27 Petition for elief" n/unction (' ' )................................................................................................... 27 Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" By 0eave of Court (' )............................................................... 27 Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" By 0eave of Court" Prescri tive Period (' ).................................... 27 Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" :atter of ig,t (' )................................................................... 28 Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" %o Conform 2 vidence (' = )....................................................... 28 Pleadings" Ans2er" 8efense" S ecific 8enial (' = ).............................................................................. 28 Pleadings" Certification Against &orum S,o ing (' )........................................................................ 29 Pleadings" Counterclaim against t,e Counsel of t,e Plaintiff (' = ).......................................................... 29 Pleadings" :otions" Bill of Particulars (' )....................................................................................... 29 Pleadings" e ly" ffect of on$&iling of e ly (' )............................................................................ 29 Pre/udicial ?uestion" /ectment vs. S ecific Performance (' ).............................................................. 30 Pre$%rial" e<uirements (' 1 )......................................................................................................... 30 Provisional emedies (1999 )............................................................................................................ 30 Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (1999 )........................................................................................... 30 Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (1999 )........................................................................................... 30 Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (' 1 )........................................................................................... 30 Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (' )........................................................................................... 30

Provisional emedies" Attac,ment vs. 3arnis,ment (1999 )..................................................................... 31 Provisional emedies" n/unction (' 1 )............................................................................................. 31 Provisional emedies" n/unction (' )............................................................................................. 31 Provisional emedies" n/unctions" Ancillary emedy vs. :ain Action (' + ).............................................. 31 Provisional emedies" n/unctions" ssuance 2 out Bond (' + ).............................................................. 31 Provisional emedies" n/unctions" e<uisites (' + )............................................................................ 31 Provisional emedies" eceivers,i (' 1 )......................................................................................... 32 Provisional emedies" e levin (1999 )............................................................................................... 32 Provisional emedies" Su ort Pendente 0ite (1999 )............................................................................. 32 Provisional emedies" Su ort Pendente 0ite (' 1 )............................................................................. 32 Provisional emedies" % * (' 1 ).................................................................................................... 32 Provisional emedies" % * (' + ).................................................................................................... 33




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) by : [email protected] Page 5 of 66 Provisional emedies" % * vs. Status ?uo *rder (' + )........................................................................ 33 Provisional emedies" % *" CA Justice 8e t. (' + )............................................................................. 33 Provisional emedies" % *" 8uration (' + )....................................................................................... 33 eglementary Period" Su lemental Pleadings (' )........................................................................... 33 emedies" A eal to SC" A eals to CA (' ' ).................................................................................... 33 emedies" A eal" %C to CA (1999 )................................................................................................. 33 emedies" A eal" ule = vs. ule + (1999 )...................................................................................... 34 emedies" 5oid 8ecision" Pro er emedy (' = )................................................................................. 34

S ecial Civil Action" /ectment (1997 )................................................................................................ 35 S ecial Civil Action" /ectment (199! )................................................................................................ 35 S ecial Civil Action" &oreclosure (' )............................................................................................. 35 S ecial Civil Action" Petition for Certiorari (' ' )................................................................................. 35 S ecial Civil Action" ?uo @arranto (' 1 )........................................................................................... 36 S ecial Civil Actions" :andamus (' + )............................................................................................. 36 Summons ..................................................................................................................................... 36 Summons (1999 )........................................................................................................................... 37 Summons" Substituted Service (' = )................................................................................................ 37 Summons" 5alidity of Service" ffects (' + )....................................................................................... 37 5enue" m ro er 5enue" Com ulsory Counterclaim (199! )..................................................................... 38 5enue" Personal Actions (1997 )........................................................................................................ 38

CRIMINAL PROCEDUR E.................................................................................................................. 38

Ac<uittal" ffect (' ' )................................................................................................................... 38 Actions" BP''" Civil Action deemed included (' 1 ).............................................................................. 39 Actions" BP''" 8emurrer to vidence (' )....................................................................................... 39 Actions" Commencement of an Action" 8ouble Jeo ardy (' = )............................................................... 39 Actions" 8iscretionary Po2er of &iscal (1999 )...................................................................................... 39 Actions" n/unction (1999 )............................................................................................................... 39 Arrest" @arrantless Arrest" Preliminary nvestigation (' = ).................................................................... 40 Arrest" @arrantless Arrests - Searc,es (1997 )..................................................................................... 40 Arrest" @arrantless Arrests - Sei ures (' )...................................................................................... 40 Arrest" @arrantless Arrests" *b/ection (' )...................................................................................... 41 Bail (' ' )................................................................................................................................... 41 Bail" A eal (199! )........................................................................................................................ 41 Bail" A lication" 5enue (' ' )......................................................................................................... 41 Bail" &orms of Bail (1999 )................................................................................................................ 41 Bail" :atter of ig,t (1999 ).............................................................................................................. 41 Bail" :atter of ig,t vs. :atter of 8iscretion (1999 )............................................................................... 41 Bail" :atter of ig,t vs. :atter of 8iscretion (' + )............................................................................... 42 Bail" @itness Posting Bail (1999 )...................................................................................................... 42 Com laint vs. nformation (1999 )...................................................................................................... 42 8emurrer to vidence" Contract of Carriage (' = )............................................................................... 42 8emurrer to vidence" 2 o 0eave of Court (199! )................................................................................. 42 8emurrer to vidence" 2 o 0eave of Court (' 1 )................................................................................. 43 8emurrer to vidence" 2 o 0eave of Court (' = )................................................................................. 43 8ismissal" &ailure to Prosecute (' )............................................................................................... 43 8ismissal" Provisional 8ismissal (' )............................................................................................. 43 8ouble Jeo ardy (' ' ).................................................................................................................. 44 8ouble Jeo ardy" D grading" *riginal C,arges (' )........................................................................... 44 ;tradition (' = ).......................................................................................................................... 44 nformation (' 1 )......................................................................................................................... 45 nformation" Amendment (' 1 )....................................................................................................... 45 nformation" Amendment" 8ouble Jeo ardy" Bail (' ' )......................................................................... 45 nformation" Amendment" Su ervening vents (1997 )............................................................................ 45 nformation" Bail (' ).................................................................................................................. 45 nformation" :otion to ?uas, (' ).................................................................................................. 46 nformation" :otion to ?uas, (' ).................................................................................................. 46 nformation" :otion to ?uas," 3rounds (199! )..................................................................................... 46 Judgment" Promulgation of Judgment (1997 )...................................................................................... 46 Jurisdiction" Com le; Crimes (' )................................................................................................. 47




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) by : [email protected] Page 6 of 66 Jurisdiction" &inality of a Judgment (' ).......................................................................................... 47 Parties" Prosecution of *ffenses (' ).............................................................................................. 47 Plea of 3uilty" to a 0esser *ffense (' ' )........................................................................................... 47 Pre/udicial ?uestion (1999 ).............................................................................................................. 47 Pre/udicial ?uestion (' ).............................................................................................................. 47 Pre/udicial ?uestion" Sus ension of Criminal Action (1999 ).................................................................... 48 Pre$%rial Agreement (' = ).............................................................................................................. 48 Pre$%rial" Criminal Case vs. Civil Case (1997 )....................................................................................... 48

Provisional 8ismissal (' ' )............................................................................................................ 48 emedies" 5oid Judgment (' = )...................................................................................................... 48 Searc, @arrant" :otion to ?uas, (' )............................................................................................. 49 %rial" %rial in Absentia" Automatic evie2 of Conviction (199! )................................................................ 49 5enue (1997 )................................................................................................................................ 49

E3IDENCE ......................................................................................................................................... 50

Admissibility (199! )....................................................................................................................... 50 Admissibility (' ' )....................................................................................................................... 50 Admissibility (' = )....................................................................................................................... 50 Admissibility" Admission of 3uilt" e<uirements (' + )......................................................................... 51 Admissibility" 8ocument" ot raised in t,e Pleading (' = )..................................................................... 51 Admissibility" lectronic vidence (' )........................................................................................... 51

Admissibility" *b/ect or eal vidence (199= )...................................................................................... 51 Admissibility" *b/ections (1997 )....................................................................................................... 51 Admissibility" *ffer to :arry" Circumstantial vidence (199! ).................................................................. 52 Admissibility" *ffer to Pay ; enses (1997 )........................................................................................ 52 Admissibility" Private 8ocument (' ).............................................................................................. 52 Admissibility" Proof of &iliation" Action of Partition (' )...................................................................... 52 Admissibility" ules of vidence (1997 ).............................................................................................. 53 Best vidence ule (1997 )............................................................................................................... 53 Burden of Proof vs. Burden of vidence (' = ).................................................................................... 54 C,aracter vidence (' ' ).............................................................................................................. 54 Confession" Affidavit of ecantation (199! )......................................................................................... 54 &acts" 0egislative &acts vs. Ad/udicative &acts (' = )............................................................................ 54 6earsay vidence (' ' )................................................................................................................. 54 6earsay vidence vs. * inion vidence (' = ).................................................................................... 54 6earsay" ;ce tion" 8ead :an Statute (' 1 )...................................................................................... 54 6earsay" ;ce tion" 8ying 8eclaration (199! )...................................................................................... 55 6earsay" ;ce tion" es 3estae" * inion of *rdinary @itness (' )....................................................... 55 6earsay" ;ce tions (1999 )............................................................................................................. 55 6earsay" ;ce tions" 8ying 8eclaration (1999 ).................................................................................... 55 6earsay" na licable (' )............................................................................................................ 55 Judicial otice" vidence (' )....................................................................................................... 56 Judicial otice" vidence" &oreign 0a2 (1997 )..................................................................................... 56 :emorandum (199+ )...................................................................................................................... 57 *ffer of vidence (1997 )................................................................................................................. 57 *ffer of vidence" res inter alios acta (' )........................................................................................ 57 *ffer of vidence" %estimonial - 8ocumentary (199= )............................................................................ 57 * inion ule (199= )....................................................................................................................... 57 Parol vidence ule (' 1 ).............................................................................................................. 58 Pre onderance vs. Substantial vidence (' )................................................................................... 58 Privilege Communication (199! )....................................................................................................... 58 Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (19!9 )................................................................................. 58 Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' )................................................................................. 59 Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' = )................................................................................. 59 Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' + )................................................................................. 59 emedy" 0ost 8ocuments" Secondary vidence (199' ).......................................................................... 60 %estimony" nde endent elevant Statement (1999 ).............................................................................. 60 @itness" Com etency of t,e @itness vs. Credibility of t,e @itness (' = ).................................................. 60 @itness" ;amination of a C,ild @itness" via 0ive$0in> %5 (' )............................................................. 60 @itness" ;amination of @itnesses (1997 ).......................................................................................... 60




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) by : [email protected] Page 7 of 66 @itness" ;amination of @itnesses (' ' ).......................................................................................... 60 @itness" Dtili ed as State @itness" Procedure (' + )............................................................................ 60

SPECIAL PROCEEDING S ................................................................................................................ 61

Cancellation or Correction" ntries Civil egistry (' )........................................................................ 61 sc,eat Proceedings (' ' )............................................................................................................ 61 ;tra$/udicial Settlement of state (' )............................................................................................ 61 6abeas Cor us (199 ).................................................................................................................... 61

6abeas Cor us (199! ).................................................................................................................... 61 6abeas Cor us (' ).................................................................................................................... 62 ntestate Proceedings (' ' )............................................................................................................ 62 ntestate Proceedings" 8ebts of t,e state (' ' )................................................................................. 62 Judicial Settlement of state (' )................................................................................................... 62 Probate of 0ost @ills (1999 )............................................................................................................. 62 Probate of @ill (' )..................................................................................................................... 63 Probate of @ill (' )..................................................................................................................... 63 Probate of @ill (' + )..................................................................................................................... 63 Probate of @ill" :andatory ature (' ' )............................................................................................ 63 Settlement of state (' 1 ).............................................................................................................. 64 Settlement of state" Administrator (199! ).......................................................................................... 64 5enue" S ecial Proceedings (1997 )................................................................................................... 64

SUMMARY PROCEDUR E ................................................................................................................. 65

Pro,ibited Pleadings (' = )............................................................................................................. 65

MISCELLANEOUS ............................................................................................................................. 65

Administrative Proceedings (' ).................................................................................................... 65 Congress" 0a2 ; ro riating Pro erty (' + )...................................................................................... 65 A 19" :andatory Sus ension (' 1 )............................................................................................. 66




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 )

GENERAL PRINCIPLESBar by Prior Judgment vs. Conclusiveness of Judgment(1997)Distinguish Bar by prior judgmentfrom conc usi!eness of judgmentSUGGESTED ANSWER4Bar by prior"judgment is the doctrine of res

judicata# $hich bars a second action $hen there isidentity of parties# subject matter and cause ofaction. (Sec. 49[b o! !ormer "#le 39$ Sec% 47 [b o! ne&

"#le 39'.

%onc usi!eness of judgment prec udes there itigation of a particu ar issue in anotheraction bet$een the same parties on a differentcause of action. (Sec. 49 [c o! !ormer "#le 39$ sec. 47[c o! ne& "#le 39'.

Cause of action vs. Action (1997)

Distinguish %ause of action from actionSUGGESTED ANSWER4

& %&'() *+ &%,-* is an act or omission of one party in !io ation of the ega right or rights of theother (Maao Sugar Central vs. Barrios, 79 Phil. 606; Sec. 2 ofnew ule 2!, causing damage to another.

&n &%,-* is an ordinary suit in a court of /ustice by$hich one party prosecutes another for the

enforcement or protection of a right# or the pre!ention or redress of a $rong. (Sec ion 1 o! !ormer "#le2'.

Civil Actions vs. S ecial Proceedings (199!)Distinguish ci!i actions from specia proceedings.03SUGGESTED ANSWER4& %- - &%,-* is one by $hich a party sues anotherfor the enforcement or protection of a right#or the pre!ention or redress of a $rong.

$hi e a (P)%-&

P *%))D- is a remedy by $hich a party see s toestab ish a status# a right or a particu ar fact. (Sec.3[) . "#le 1%1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

Conciliation Proceedings" #atarungang Pambarangay vs.Pre$%rial Conference (1999)8hat is the difference# if any# bet$een theconci iation proceedings under the 9atarungangPambarangay a$ and the negotiations for an amicab esett ement during the pre"tria conference under the u es of%ourt: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he difference bet$een the conci iation proceedings underthe 9atarungang Pambarangay a$ and the negotiationsfor an amicab e sett ement during the pre"tria conferenceunder the u es of %ourt is that in the former# a$yers are

prohibited from appearing for the parties. Parties mustappear in person on y e=cept minors or incompetents $homay be assisted by their ne=t of in $ho are not a$yers .(,ormerl- Sec. 9%

1% 1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re'%

(See. 3[a % "#le



by : [email protected] Page > of66

+.D. o. 1508$ Sec. 415% /ocal o*ernmen)ode o! 1991% ". . 7160.' o such

prohibition e=ists in the pre"trianegotiations under the u es of %ourt.

&amily Courts Act (' 1)

a< ?o$ shou d the records of chi d and fami ycases in the +ami y %ourts or ,%designated by the (upreme %ourt tohand e +ami y %ourt cases be treated anddea t $ith: ;3 <

b< 'nder $hat conditions may the identity of parties

in chi d and fami y cases be di!u ged ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a<,he records of chi d and fami y cases in the+ami y %ode to hand e +ami y %ourt casessha be dea t $ith utmost confidentia ity.(Sec. 12% ,amil- )o#r s c o! 1997'

b< ,he identity of parties in chi d andfami y cases sha not be di!u gedun ess necessary and $ith authority of the

judge. ( d.'

nterlocutory *rder (' +)8hat is an inter ocutory order: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&n inter ocutory order refers to an orderissued bet$een the commencement and theend of the suit $hich is not a fina decision ofthe $ho e contro!ersy and ea!es somethingmore to be done on its merits("allar#o et al. v. Peo$le, ". . %o. &'20 0, )$ril 2&,200*; +nvest ents +nc. v. Court of )$$eals, ". .

%o. 600 6, -anuar 27, &9/7 cite# in enso Phils,v. 1)C, ". . %o. 7*000, e3. 27, &9/7!.

Judgment vs. * inion of t,e Court (' +)8hat is the difference bet$een a judgmentand an opinion of the court: ;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he judgment or fa o is the fina disposition of the%ourt $hich is ref ected in the dispositi!e portionof the decision. & decision is direct y prepared

by a judge and signed by him# containingc ear y and distinct y a statement of the facts

pro!ed and the a$ upon $hich the judgment is based (4to a v. )3raha Singson, )# . Matter %o. 5- 9& 7*/, Se$te 3er 26, &99'!.

&n opinion of the court is the informa e=pressionof the !ie$s of the court and cannot pre!aiagainst its fina order. ,he opinion of the court iscontained in the body of the decision thatser!es as a guide or en ightenment todetermine the ra io decidendi of the decision.,he opinion forms no part of the judgment e!en if

combined in one instrument# but may be referred tofor the purpose of construing the judgment(Contreras v. eli , ". . %o. 8 '77, -une 0,&9'7!.

Judicial Autonomy - m artiality (' )





-n rendering a decision# shou d a court ta einto consideration the possib e effect of its!erdict upon the po itica stabi ity and economic$e fare of the nation: 4SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because a court is re@uired to ta e intoconsideration on y the ega issues and the e!idenceadmitted in the case. ,he po itica stabi ity and

economic $e fare of the nation are e=traneous to thecase. ,hey can ha!e persuasi!e inf uence but they arenot the main factors that shou d be considered indeciding a case. & decision shou d be based on the

a$# ru es of procedure# justice and e@uity. ?o$e!er# ine=ceptiona cases the court may consider the

po itica stabi ity and economic $e fare of the nation$hen these are capab e of being ta en into judicianotice of and are re e!ant to the case.

#atarungang Pambarangay" *b/ective (1999)8hat is the object of the9atarungang Pambarangay a$: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he object of the 9atarungang Pambarangay a$ is toeffect an amicab e sett ement of disputes amongfami y and barangay members at the barangay e!e$ithout judicia recourse and conse@uent y he pre ie!e the courts of doc et congestion. (+reamble o! +.D.

o. 1508% e !ormer and e !irs a ar#ngang +ambaranga- /a&.'

0iberal Construction" ules of Court (199!)?o$ sha the u es of %ourt be construed: 02SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he u es of %ourt shou d be ibera y construed inorder to promote their objecti!e of securing a just#speedy and ine=pensi!e disposition of e!ery actionand proceeding. (Sec. 6% "#le 1 1997 "#les o! )i*il

+roced#re.'ADDITIONAL ANSWER4?o$e!er# strict obser!ance of the ru es is animperati!e necessity $hen they are consideredindispensab e to the pre!ention of need ess de aysand to the order y and speedy dispatch of /udicia

business . ()lvero vs. -u#ge #e la osa, 76 Phil. '2/!

emedial 0a2 in P,il. System of 3ov4t (' +)?o$ are remedia a$s imp emented in our systemof go!ernment: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

emedia a$s are imp emented in our systemof go!ernment through the pi ars of the judiciasystem# inc uding the prosecutory ser!ice# ourcourts of justice and @uasi judicia agencies.

emedial 0a2 vs. Substantive 0a2 (' +)Distinguish bet$een substanti!e a$ andremedia a$. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4('B(,& ,- ) &8 is that part of the a$ $hichcreates# defines and regu ates rights concerning ife#

iberty# or property# or the po$ers of agencies or

instrumenta ities for the administration of pub ic



by : [email protected] Page A of 66 affairs. ,his is distinguished from ) )D-& &8$hich prescribes the method of enforcing rightsor obtaining redress for their in!asion (Bustos v.

8ucero,". . %o. 8 206/, cto3er 20, &9'/!.

emedial 0a2" Conce t (' +)8hat is the concept of remedia a$: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he concept of emedia a$ ies at the !ery core of

procedura due process# $hich means a a$ $hichhears before it condemns# $hich proceeds uponin@uiry and renders judgment on y after tria # andcontemp ates an opportunity to be heard before

judgment is rendered ()l3ert v. :niversit Pu3lishing,". . %o. 8 &9&&/, -anuar 0, &96*!.

emedia a$ is that branch of a$ $hich prescribes the method of enforcing the rights orobtaining redress for their in!asion (Bustos v.

8ucero, ". . %o. 8 206/, cto3er 20, &9'/; irst 8e$anto Cera ics, +nc. v.

C), ". . %o. &&0*7&, March &0, &99'!.

ig,ts of t,e Accused" 5alidity" 6 5 %est (' )'nder epub ic &ct o. >353# one may be charged$ith and found gui ty of @ua ified rape if he ne$ on or

before the commission of the crime that he isaff icted $ith ?uman -mmuno"Deficiency irus;?- <C&c@uired -mmune Deficiency (yndrome;&-D(< or any other se=ua y transmissib e disease

and the !irus or disease is transmitted to the !ictim.'nder (ection 17;a< of epub ic &ct o. >5 4 thecourt may compe the accused to submit himse f to a

b ood test $here b ood samp es $ou d be e=tractedfrom his !eins to determine $hether he has ?- .;> <

a! )re the rights of the accuse# to 3e $resu e#innocent of the cri e charge#, to $rivac , an#

against self incri ination violate# 3 suchco $ulsor testing 4 $lain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he court may compe the accused to submithimse f to a b ood test to determine $hether he has ?-under (ec. 17;a< of .&. o# > 54. ?is rights to be

presumed innocent of the crime charged# to pri!acy and against se f"incrimination are not !io ated by such compu sory testing. -n an action in $hich the physica condition of a party is in contro!ersy# thecourt may order the accused to submit to a physicae=amination. (Sec. 1% "#le 28% 1997 "#les o! )i*il

+roced#re' (/oo !or ci a ion o! la es case% in 2004'

3! +f the result of such test shows that he is <+= $ositive, an# the $rosecution offers such result inevi#ence to $rove the >ualif ing circu stanceun#er the +nfor ation for >ualifie# ra$e, shoul# thecourt re?ect such result on the groun# that it is the

fruit of a $oisonous tree 4 $lain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

(ince the rights of the accused are not !io ated because the compu sory testing is authoriEed by the




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) a$#the resu t of the testing cannot be considered to be thefruit of a poisonous tree and can be offered ine!idence to pro!e the @ua ifying circumstance underthe information for @ua ified rape under .&. o.>353. ,he fruit# of the poisonous tree doctrine refersto that ru e of e!idence that e=c udes anye!idence $hich may ha!e been deri!ed orac@uired from a tainted or po uted source.

(uch e!idence is inadmissib e for ha!ingemanated from spurious origins. ,he doctrine#ho$e!er# does not app y to the resu ts obtained

pursuant to (ec. 1# u e 2># 1AA7 u es of %i!iProcedure# as it does not contemp ate a search $ithinthe moaning of the a$. (Peo$le v.

Montilla, ". . %o. &2 /72, -anuar 0,&99/!

URISDICTION

Jurisdiction (1997)8hat courts ha!e jurisdiction o!er the fo o$ing

cases fi ed in etro ani a:a< &n action for specific performance or# in

the a ternati!e# for damages in theamount of P1> # .

b< &n action for a $rit of injunction.c< &n action for rep e!in of a motorcyc e !a ued

at P15 # . .d< &n action for interp eader to determine $ho

bet$een the defendants is entit ed to recei!e theamount of P1A # . from the p aintiff.

e< & petition for the probate of a $i in!o !ing anestate !a ued at P2 # . .

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< &n action for specific performance or# in thea ternati!e# for damages in the amount of 1> # .fa s $ithin the jurisdiction of etropo itan ,ria%ourts in etro ani a. & though an action forspecific performance is not capab e of pecuniaryestimation# since the a ternati!e demand for damages iscapab e of pecuniary estimation# it is $ithin the

jurisdiction of the etropo itan ,ria %ourts in etroani a. (Sec. of BP &29 as a en#e# 3 ) %o. 769&@

CruA us. 5an, /7 Phil. 627 .

;b< &n action for injunction is not capab e of pecuniary estimation and hence fa s $ithinthe jurisdiction of the ,%s.

;c< &n action for rep e!in of a motorcyc e !a ued at15 # . fa s $ithin the jurisdiction ofthe

etropo itan ,ria %ourts in etro ani a (Sec. of

BP &29. as a en#e# 3 ) %o. 769&!.

;d< &n action for interp eader to determine $ho bet$een the defendants is entit ed to recei!e theamount of P1A # . fa s $ithin the jurisdiction ofthe etropo itan ,ria %ourts in etro ani a.

(Ma ati ev Cor$. v. 5an?uatco 27 SC ) '0&!



by : [email protected] Page 1 of66

;e< & petition for the probate of a $iin!o !ing an estate !a ued at2 . . fa s $ithin the /urisdictionof the etropo itan ,ria %ourts in etro

ani a (Sec. &9D' of BP &29, as a en#e#!.ADDITIONAL ANSWER4

;b< &n app ication for a $rit of pre iminary

injunction may be granted by a unicipa%ourt in an action of forcib e entry andun a$fu detainer. (Sec. of BP &29;

a vs. 5C of Ea 3oanga, &9& SC )6&0.

Jurisdiction vs. 5enue (' +)Distinguish jurisdiction from !enue: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4/' -(D-%,-* treats of the po$er of the %ourt todecide a case on the merits# $hi e ) ') refers tothe p ace $here the suit may be fi ed. -ncrimina actions# ho$e!er# !enue is

jurisdictiona . /urisdiction is a matter of

substanti!e a$F !enue# of procedura a$./urisdiction may be not be conferred by consentthrough $ai!er upon a court# but !enue may

be $ai!ed# e=cept in crimina cases (%ocu et al. v.5an,". . %o. &'*022, Se$te 3er 2 , 200*; Santos

+++ v. %orthwest )irlines, ". . %o. &0&* /, -une2 , &992!.

Jurisdiction" C%A 8ivision vs. C%A n Banc (' +)ar fi ed $ith the Bureau of -nterna

e!enue a comp aint for refund of ta=es paid# but it $as not acted upon. (o# he fi ed a simi arcomp aint $ith the %ourt of ,a= &ppea s raff ed toone of its Di!isions. ar Gs comp aint $asdismissed. ,hus# he fi ed $ith the %ourt of&ppea s a petition for certiorari under u e 65.Does the %ourt of &ppea s ha!e jurisdictiono!er ar Gs petition: ;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he procedure is go!erned by (ec. 11 of . &.A2>2. Decisions of a di!ision of the %ourt of ,a=&ppea s must be appea ed to the %ourt of ,a=&ppea s en banc. +urther# the %,& no$ has the sameran as the %ourt of &ppea s and is no ongerconsidered a @uasi"judicia agency. -t is i e$ise

pro!ided in the said a$ that the decisions of the%,& en bane are cogniEab e by the (upreme %ourtunder u e 45 of the 1AA7 u es of %i!i Procedure.

Jurisdiction" nca able of Pecuniary stimation (' )& brings an action in the ,% of ani a against Bfor the annu ment of an e=trajudicia forec osure sa e of

rea property $ith an assessed !a ue of P5 # .ocated in aguna. ,he comp aint a eged prematurity ofthe sa e for the reason that the mortgage $as not yetdue. B time y mo!ed to dismiss the case on theground that the action shou d ha!e been brought in the

,% of aguna. Decide $ith reason. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he motion shou d be granted. ,he ,% of ani a hasno jurisdiction because the action for theannu ment of the e=trajudicia forec osure is notcapab e of pecuniary estimation and is therefore




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) under the jurisdiction of the ,%s. ( ussell v. =estil,

0' SC ) 7 /,D&999 !.

?o$e!er# the action for annu ment is a personaaction and the !enue depends on the residence ofeither & or B. ?ence# it shou d be brought in the

,% of the p ace $here either of the parties resides.

Jurisdiction" nca able of Pecuniary stimation (' )& fi es an action in the unicipa ,ria %ourtagainst B# the natura son of &Hs father# for the

partition of a parce of and ocated in,aytay# iEa $ith an assessed !a ue ofP2 # . . B mo!es to dismiss the action on theground that the case shou d ha!e been brought inthe ,% because the action is one that is notcapab e of pecuniary estimation as it in!o !es

primari y a determination of hereditary rights andnot mere y the bare right to rea property.

eso !e the motion. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he motion shou d be granted. ,he action for partition depends on a determination of thehereditary rights of & and B# $hich is not capab e of

pecuniary estimation. ?ence# e!en though theassessed !a ue of the and is P2 # . # the

unicipa ,ria %ourt has no jurisdiction. ( ussell v.=estil, su$ra!

Jurisdiction" nca able of Pecuniary stimation (' )& fi ed $ith the ,% of ani a an action for specific

performance against B# a resident of IueEon %ity# tocompe the atter to e=ecute a deed of con!eyanceco!ering a parce of and situated in IueEon %ity

ha!ing an assessed !a ue of p1A# . . B recei!edthe summons and a copy of the %omp aint on 2/anuary 2 3. *n 1 /anuary 2 3# B fi ed a otion toDismiss the %omp aint on the ground of ac of

jurisdiction contending that the subject matter of the suit$as incapab e of pecuniary estimation. ,he court deniedthe motion. -n due time# B fi ed $ith the ,% a Petitionfor %ertiorari praying that the said *rder be setaside because the ,% had no jurisdiction o!er thecase. 6

*n 13 +ebruary 2 3# & fi ed $ith the ,% amotion to dec are B in defau t. ,he motion $asopposed by B on the ground that his Petition for%ertiorari $as sti pending.;a< 8as the denia of the otion to Dismissthe %omp aint correct:;b< eso !e the otion to Dec are the Defendant inDefau t.SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< ,he denia of the otion to Dismiss the%omp aint $as not correct. & though the assessed!a ue of the parce of and in!o !ed $as P1A# . #$ithin the jurisdiction of the ,% of ani a# theaction fi ed by & for (pecific Performance against B tocompe the atter to e=ecute a Deed of %on!eyance of

said parce of and $as not capab e of pecuniary

D lores v. Mallare Phili$$s,

("#le 3% sec.6'.



by : [email protected] Page 11 of 66estimation and# therefore# the action $as $ithin the

jurisdiction of ,%. ( ussel v. =estil, 0' SC )7 /

D&999 ; Co$ioso v. Co$ioso, ". . %o. &'92' ,cto3er 2/,2002; Ca3utihan v. 8an#center

Construction, / SC ) * D2002 !.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

-f the action affects tit e to or possessionof rea property then it is a rea actionand jurisdiction is determined by theassessed !a ue of the property. -t is $ithinthe jurisdiction therefore of the

etropo itan ,ria %ourt.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;b< ,he %ourt cou d dec are B in defau t because B did not obtain a $rit of pre iminaryinjunction or a temporary restraining orderfrom the ,% prohibiting the judge from

proceeding in the case during the pendency ofthe petition for certiorari.(Sec. 7 of ule 6*; iaA v. iaA, & SC ) 02

D2002 .ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

,he %ourt shou d not dec are B in defau tinasmuch as the jurisdiction of ,% $as putin issue in the Petition +or %ertiorari fi ed $iththe ,%. ,he ,% shou d defer further

proceedings pending the resu t of such petition. (4ternal "ar#ens Me orial Par Cor$oration v. Court of )$$eals, &6' SC ) '2&

D&9// !.

Jurisdiction" :%C (' ')P sued & and B in one comp aint in the ,%"

ani a# the cause of action against & being onan o!erdue promissory note for P3 # .and that against B being on an a eged ba anceof P3 # . on the purchase price of goodsso d on credit. Does the ,%" ani a ha!e

jurisdiction o!er the case: )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the ,%" ani a has no jurisdiction o!er thecase. & and B cou d not be joined as defendants inone comp aint because the right to re ief against bothdefendants do not arise out of the same transactionor series of transactions and there is no common@uestion of a$ or fact common to both.?ence# separate comp aints $i ha!e to be fi es and they$ou d fa under the jurisdiction of the

etropo itan ,ria %ourt.&'' SC ) 77 (&9/6! .

Jurisdiction" *ffice of t,e Solicitor 3eneral (' +)-n 1AA6# %ongress passed epub ic &ct o. >1>A#other$ise no$n as the oterGs egistration &ct of1AA6# pro!iding for computeriEation of e ections.Pursuant thereto# the %* ) )% appro!ed the

oterGs egistration and -dentification (ystem ; -(<Project. -t issued in!itations to pre"@ua ify and bid forthe project. &fter the pub ic bidding# +oto ina $asdec ared the $inning bidder $ith a bid of P6 bi ion and$as issued a otice of &$ard. But %* ) )%%hairman ener o objected to the a$ard on theground that under the &ppropriations &ct# the budget forthe %* ) )%Gs moderniEation is on y P1




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) bi ion. ?e announced to the pub ic that the

-( project has been set aside. ,$o%ommissioners sided $ith %hairman o# but themajority !oted to upho d the contract.

ean$hi e# +oto ina fi ed $ith the ,% a petitionfor mandamus compe the %* ) )% to imp ement thecontract. ,he *ffice of the (o icitor enera ;*( <#

representing %hairman o# opposed the petition onthe ground that mandamus does not ie to enforcecontractua ob igations. During the proceedings#the majority %ommissioners fi ed a manifestationthat %hairman o $as not authoriEed by the %* ) )%)n Banc to oppose the petition.

Ma the S" re$resent Chair an "o 3efore the 5C notwithstan#ing that his $osition is contrarto that of the a?orit (*F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# the *( may represent the %* ) )% %hair"man before the ,% not$ithstanding thathis position is contrary to that of a majority of

the %ommission members in the %* ) )% because the *( is an independent officeF itGshands are not shac ed to the cause of itsc ient agency. ,he primordia concern of the*( is to see to it that the best interest of thego!ernment is uphe d (C M484C v. Gu ano Pa#illa,

Se$te 3er &/, 2002!.

Jurisdiction" *mbudsman Case 8ecisions (' +)Does the %ourt of &ppea s ha!e jurisdictionto re!ie$ the Decisions in crimina andadministrati!e cases of the *mbudsman: ;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he (upreme %ourt has e=c usi!e appe ate

jurisdiction o!er decisions of the *mbudsman incrimina cases (Sec. 14% ". . 6770' . -n administrati!e anddiscip inary cases# appea s from the *mbudsmanmust be ta en to the %ourt of &ppea s under u e 43(8anting v. 3u#s an, ". . %o. &'&'26, Ma 6, 200*;

a3ian v. esierto, ". . %o. &297'2, Se$te 3er &6, &99/; Sec. &', ). 6770!.

Jurisdiction" Probate (' 1)/osefa fi ed in the unicipa %ircuit ,ria %ourt of& icia and abini# a petition for the probate of the$i of her husband# artin# $ho died in the

unicipa ity of & icia# the residence of the spouses.,he probab e !a ue of the estate $hich consistedmain y of a house and ot $as p aced at PA5# .and in the petition for the a o$ance of the $i #attorneyHs fees in the amount of P1 # . # itigatione=penses in the amount of P5# . and costs $ereinc uded. Pedro# the ne=t of in of artin# fi ed anopposition to the probate of the $i on the ground thatthe tota amount inc uded in the re ief of the

petition is more than P1 # . # the ma=imum jurisdictiona amount for municipa circuit triacourts. ,he court o!erru ed the opposition and

proceeded to hear the case.

by : [email protected] Page 12 of 668as the municipa circuit tria court correct in itsru ing: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# the unicipa %ircuit ,ria %ourt $as correct in

proceeding to hear the case. -t has e=c usi!e jurisdiction in a matters of probate# both testate andintestate# $here the !a ue of the estate does note=ceed P1 # . ;no$ P2 # . <. ,he !a ue in

this case of PA5# . is $ithin its jurisdiction. -ndetermining the jurisdictiona amount# e=c uded areattorneyHs fees# itigation e=penses and costsF these areconsidered on y for determining the fi ing fees.( .+. lg. 129% Sec. 33% as amended'

Jurisdiction" %C (' ')P sued & in the ,%" ani a to reco!er thefo o$ing sumsK ;1< P2 # . on an o!erdue

promissory note# ;2< P> # . on the purchase price of a computer# ;3< P15 # .for damages to his car and ;4< P1 # . forattorneyHs fees and itigation e=penses. %an &

mo!e to dismiss the case on the ground thatthe court has no jurisdiction o!er the subjectmatter: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because the ,%" ani a has jurisdiction o!er thesubject matter. P may sue & in one comp aintasserting as many causes of action as he may ha!eand since a the c aims are principa y for reco!ery ofmoney# the aggregate amount c aimed sha be the test of

jurisdiction. ["#le 2% sec. 5(d' . ,he aggregate amountc aimed is P45 # . # e=c usi!e of the amount ofP1 # . for attorneyHs fees and e=penses of

itigation. ?ence# the ,%" ani a has jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction" Subdivision 6omeo2ner (' +)8hat court has jurisdiction o!er an action forspecific performance fi ed by a subdi!isionhomeo$ner against a subdi!ision de!e oper:%hoose the correct ans$er. )=p ain.1. ,he ?ousing and and 'se egu atory Board2. ,he (ecurities and )=change %ommission3. ,he egiona ,ria %ourt4. ,he %ommercia %ourt or the egiona ,ria

%ourt designated by the (upreme %ourt to hearand decide Lcommercia cases.L

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&n action for specific performance by a subdi!isionhomeo$ner against a subdi!ision de!e oper is $ithin the

jurisdiction of the ?ousing and and 'seegu atory Board. (ec. 1 of P.D. 1344 pro!ides that the

? ' B has jurisdiction o!er cases in!o !ingspecific performance of contractua and statutoryob igations fi ed by buyers of subdi!ision ots andcondominium units against the o$ner# de!e oper#dea er# bro er or sa esman (Manila Ban ers 8ife

+nsurance Cor$. v. 4## %g Ho Iei, ". . %o. & 979&, ece 3er &2, 200 ; Ha ilala v. araon, ". . %o. &' 2 ,

cto3er &/, 200'; Sec. &, P. . & ' '!.







#atarungang Pambarangay" 0u on" ;tent of Aut,ority"(' 1)&n amicab e sett ement $as signed before a

upon ,agapamayapa on /anuary 3# 2 1. *n /u y6# 2 1# the pre!ai ing party as ed the uponto e=ecute the amicab e sett ement because ofthe non"comp iance by the other party of the termsof the agreement. ,he upon concerned

refused to e=ecute thesett ementCagreement.a< -s the upon correct in refusing to e=ecute

the sett ementCagreement: ;3 < b< 8hat shou d be the course of action of the

pre!ai ing party in such a case: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< Jes# the upon is correct in refusing to e=ecutethe sett ementCagreement because the e=ecutionsought is a ready beyond the period of si= monthsfrom the date of the sett ement $ithin $hichthe upon is authoriEed to e=ecute. (Sec. 417%

/ocal o*ernmen )ode o! 1991'

b< &fter the si="month period# the pre!ai ing partyshou d mo!e to e=ecute the sett ementCagreement in theappropriate city or municipa tria court. ;-d.<

CI3IL PROCEDURE

Actions" Cause of Action vs. Action (1999)Distinguish action from cause of action. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4&n &%,-* is one by $hich a party sues anotherfor the enforcement or protection of a right# or the

pre!ention or redress of a $rong. (Sec. 3( '% "#le '

& %&'() *+ &%,-* is the act or omission by$hich a party !io ates a right of another.

)n action ust 3e 3ase# on a causeof action. (Sec. 1% "#le 2 o! e 1997 "#les'

Actions" Cause of Action" Joinder - S litting (199!)i!e the effects of the fo o$ingK

1. (p itting a sing e cause of actionK and ;3 M

2. on"joinder of a necessary party.02SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. ,he effect of sp itting a sing e cause of actionis found in the ru e as fo o$sK -f t$o or moresuits are instituted on the basis of the same

cause of action# the fi ing of one or a judgment onthe merits in any one is a!ai ab e as a ground forthe dismissa of the others. (Sec. 4 o! "#le 2' 2. ,he effect of the non"joinder of a necessary

party may be stated as fo o$sK ,he court may order theinc usion of an omitted necessary party if

jurisdiction o!er his person may be obtained. ,hefai ure to comp y $ith the order for his inc usion$ithout justifiab e cause to a $ai!er of the c aimagainst such party. ,he court may proceed $ith theaction but the judgment rendered sha be $ithout

o! e 1997 "#les'

(Sec. 2% "#le2

(Sec. 5% "#le 2 o! e1997







by : [email protected] Page 14 of 66aphae fi ed a comp aint against N %orporation for

the payment of P1 # . for storage charges andother ad!ances for the goods. N %orporation fi ed amotion to dismiss the comp aint on the groundof res judicata. N %orporation a eged that

aphae shou d ha!e incorporated in hiscomp aint for interp eader his c aim forstorage fees and ad!ances and that for his

fai ure he $as barred from interposing hisc aim. aphae rep ied that he cou d notha!e c aimed storage fees and otherad!ances in his comp aint for interp eader

because he $as not yet certain as to $ho $asiab e therefor. eso !e the motion $ith

reasons. ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he motion to dismiss shou d be granted.

aphae shou d ha!e incorporated in hiscomp aint for interp eader his c aim for storagefees and ad!ances# the amounts of $hich $ereob!ious y determinab e at the time of the fi ing of

the comp aint. ,hey are part of aphae Gs causeof action $hich he may not be sp it. ?ence#$hen the $arehouseman as s the court toascertain $ho among the defendants are entit ed tothe goods# he a so has the right to as $hoshou d pay for the storage fees and otherre ated e=penses. ,he fi ing of the interp eader isa!ai ab e as a ground for dismissa of the secondcase. (Sec. 4% "#le 2%' -t is a in to acompu sory counterc aim $hich# if not set up#

sha be barred. (Sec. 2, ule 9, ; )rreAa v. iaA, ". . %o. & && , )ugust 0, 200&!

Actions" Cause of Actions" :otion to 8ismiss" barby rior /udgment (' ')

o ando fi ed a petition for dec aration of thenu ity of his marriage to %arme a because ofthe a eged psycho ogica incapacity of the atter.

&fter tria # the court rendered judgment dismissingthe petition on the ground that o ando fai ed to

pro!e the psycho ogica incapacity of his $ife. ,he judgment ha!ing become fina # o ando fi ed another petition# this time on the ground that his marriage to%arme a had been ce ebrated $ithout a icense. -s thesecond action barred by the judgment in the first:8hy: ;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the second action is not barred by the judgmentin the first because they are different causes of action.,he first is for annu ment of marriage on the ground

of psycho ogica incapacity under &rtic e 36 ofthe +ami y %ode# $hi e the second is fordec aration of nu ity of the marriage in !ie$ ofthe absence of a basic re@uirement# $hich is amarriage icense. 0 r s% 9 35(3'% ,amil- )ode . ,heyare different causes of action because the e!idencere@uired to pro!e them are not the same. DPagsisihan v.Court of )$$eals, 9* SC ) *'0(&9/0! an# other cases .

Actions" Counterclaim (' ')





,he p aintiff sued the defendant in the ,% fordamages a eged y caused by the atterHs encroachmenton the p aintiffHs ot. -n his ans$er# the defendantdenied the p aintiffHs c aim and a eged that it $as the

p aintiff $ho in fact had encroached on his;defendantHs< and. &ccording y# the defendantcounterc aimed against the p aintiff for damagesresu ting from the a eged encroachment on his ot.,he p aintiff fi ed an e= parte motion for e=tension of

time to ans$er the defendantHs counterc aim# but thecourt denied the motion on the ground that it shou dha!e been set for hearing. *n the defendantHsmotion# therefore# the court dec ared the p aintiff indefau t on the counterc aim. 8as the p aintiff !a id ydec ared in defau t: 8hy: ;5 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the p aintiff $as not !a id y dec ared in defau t.& motion for e=tension of time to fi e an ans$ermay be fi ed e= parte and need not be set forhearing.

D) ante vs. Sunga, 6' SC ) &92 (&97*! .ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4,he genera ru e is that a counterc aim must beans$ered $ithin ten ;1 < days from ser!ice.

?o$e!er# a counterc aim that raisesissues

$hich are deemed automatica y joined by thea egations of the %omp aint need not be ans$ered.

D"o?o v. "o ala, * SC ) **7 (&970! .

-n this case# the defendantHs counterc aim isa compu sory counterc aim $hich arises outor is connected $ith the transaction andoccurrence constituting the subject matter of the

p aintiffHs c aim. -t raises the same issue of $hoencroached on $hose and. ?ence# there $asno need to ans$er the counterc aim.

Actions" Counterclaim vs. Crossclaim (1999)a< 8hat is a counterc aim: ;2 <

b< Distinguish a counterc aim from acrossc aim. ;2 <

c< &# $ho is engaged in ti e insta ation business#

$as sued by )) -ndustries for breach of contract forinsta ing different marb e ti es in its offices as pro!ided in their contract. 8ithout fi ing anymotion to dismiss# & fi ed its &ns$er $ith%ounterc aim theoriEing that )) -ndustries hasno ega capacity to sue because it is not adu y registered corporation. By $ay ofcounterc aim# & as ed for mora and actuadamages as her business dep eted as a resu t ofthe $ithdra$a and cance ation by her c ients oftheir contracts due to the fi ing of the case.,he case $as dismissed after the tria courtfound that )) -ndustries is not a registered

corporation and therefore has no ega capacity tosue. ?o$e!er# it set a date for the reception ofe!idence on &Gs counterc aim. )) -ndustriesopposed on the ground that the counterc aim cou dno onger be prosecuted in !ie$ of the dismissa ofthe main

sec.4'.

("#le 11%



by : [email protected] Page 15 of 66 case. -s the stand of )) -ndustriessustainab e: )=p ain. 02

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< & %*' ,) % &- is any c aim $hicha defending party may ha!e against anopposing party. (Sec. 6% "#le 6'

b< & counterc aim is distinguished from a

% *((" % &- in that a cross"c aim is anyc aim by one party against a co"partyarising out of the transaction oroccurrence that is the subject mattereither of the origina action or of acounterc aim therein. & counterc aim isagainst an opposing party $hi e a cross"c aimis against a co"party. (Sec. 8% "#le 6'

c< o# because if no motion to dismiss has beenfi ed# any of the grounds for dismissa pro!idedin the u es may be p eaded as an affirmati!edefense in the ans$er $hich may inc ude a

counterc aim. ,his is $hat & did by fi ing an&ns$er a eging the ac of ega capacity of ))-ndustries to sue because it is not a du yregistered corporation $ith a counterc aim fordamages. ,he dismissa of the comp aint on thisground is $ithout prejudice to the prosecution ofthe counterc aim in the same action because it is acompu sory counterc aim. (Sec. 6 o! "#le 16.'

Actions" Cross$Claims" %,ird Party Claims (1997)

B and % borro$ed P4 # . from &. ,he promissory note $as e=ecuted by B and % in a /oint andse!era capacity. B# $ho recei!ed the money from &#ga!e % P2 # . . %# in turn# oanedP1 # . out of the P2 # . he recei!ed to D.a< -n an action fi ed by & against B and % $ith the

,% of IueEon %ity# can B fi e a cross"c aim against % for the amount ofP2 # . :

b< %an % fi e a third party comp aint against D forthe amount of P 1 # . :SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< Jes. B can fi e a cross"c aim against % for theamount of 2 # . gi!en to %. & cross"c aim is ac aim fi ed by one party against a co"party arising out ofthe transaction or occurrence that is the subjectmatter of the origina action or a counterc aim thereinand may inc ude a c aim that the party against $hom itis asserted is or may be iab e to the cross"c aimant fora or part of a c aim asserted against the cross"c aimant. (Sec. 8 "#le 6'

;b< o# % cannot fi e a third"party comp aint against D because the oan of P1 # has no connection$ith the opponentGs c aim. % cou d ha!e oaned themoney out of other funds in his possession.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

Jes# % can fi e a third"party comp aint againstD because the oan of 1 # . $as ta en out ofthe P2 # recei!ed from B and hence the oansee s




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) contribution in respect to his opponentGs c aim. (Sec.11 o! "#le 6'

Actions" 8erivative Suit vs. Class Suit (' )Distinguish a deri!ati!e suit from a c ass suit.SUGGESTED ANSWER4& D) - &,- ) ('-, is a suit in e@uity that is fi ed bya minority shareho der in beha f of a corporation toredress $rongs committed against it# for $hich thedirectors refuse to sue# the rea party in interest beingthe corporation itse f

e3ruar &9, 200&! # $hi e a % &(( ('-, is fi edregarding a contro!ersy of common or generainterest in beha f of many persons so numerous that itis impracticab e to join a as parties# a number$hich the court finds sufficient y representati!e $ho

may sue or defend for the benefit of a .-t is $orth noting that a deri!ati!e suit is a represen"tati!e suit# just i e a c ass suit.

Actions" &iling" Civil Actions - Criminal Action (' )8hi e cruising on a high$ay# a ta=icab dri!en

by ans hit an e ectric post. &s a resu tthereof# its passenger# /o!y# suffered seriousinjuries. ans $as subse@uent y charged

before the unicipa ,ria %ourt $ith rec essimprudence resu ting in serious physica injuries.

,hereafter# /o!y fi ed a ci!i action against ourdes#

the o$ner of the ta=icab# for breach of contract# andans for @uasi"de ict. ourdes and ans fi ed a

motion to dismiss the ci!i action on the ground ofitis pendentia# that is# the pendency of the ci!i action

imp ied y instituted in the crimina action for rec essimprudence resu ting in serious physica injuries.

eso !e the motion $ith reasons. ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he motion to dismiss shou d be denied. ,he action for

breach of contract against the ta=icab o$ner cannot be barred by the crimina action against the ta=icabdri!er# a though the ta=icab o$ner can be he dsubsidiari y iab e in the crimina case# if the dri!er is

inso !ent. *n the other hand# the ci!i action for @uasi"de ict against the dri!er is an independent ci!i action under&rtic e 33 of the %i!i %ode and (ec. 3# u e 111 of the

u es of %ourt# $hich can be fi ed separate y and can proceed independent y of the crimina action andregard ess of the resu t of the atter. (Sa son v. awa ,". . %os. &600*' **, -ul 2&,200'!

Actions" ntervention" e<uisites (' )8hat are the re@uisites for an inter!ention by a non"

party in an action pending in court: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he re@uisites for inter!ention areK1. ega interest in the matter in a contro!ersyF or2. ega interest in the success of either of the

partiesF or(Sec. 12% "#le3'

(8int v. 8i Ju, ".+8 %o. & / ' ,

Page 16 of









Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) tothe (upreme %ourt from the %ourt of&ppea s# (andiganbayan and the ,% under

u e 45.2. ,he first can be fi ed on y on the grounds of

ac or e=cess of jurisdiction or gra!eabuse of discretion tantamount to ac ore=cess of jurisdiction# $hi e the second is

based on the errors of a$ of the o$er court.

3. ,he first shou d be fi ed $ithin si=ty ;6 < daysfrom notice of the judgment# order or reso utionsought to be assai ed (Sec. 4. "#le 65' # $hi ethe second shou d be fi ed $ithin fifteen ;15<days from notice of the judgment or fina orderor reso ution appea ed from# or of the denia of the

petitionerGs motion for ne$ tria orreconsideration fi ed in due time after notice ofthe judgment. (Sec. 2% "#le 45'

4. ,he first cannot genera y be a!ai ed of asa substitute for a ost appea under u es4 # 41# 42# 43 and 45.

5. 'nder the first# the o$er court is imp eaded as a

party respondent (Sec. 5 o! "#le 65'% $hi eunder the second# the o$er court is not imp

eaded.(Sec. 4 o! "#le o! 45'

Certiorari" ule ? vs. ule + (' )ay the aggrie!ed party fi e a petition for certiorari

in the (upreme %ourt under u e 65 of the 1AA7u es of %i!i Procedure# instead of fi ing a

petition for re!ie$ on certiorari under u e 45thereof for the nu ification of a decision of the%ourt of &ppea s in the e=ercise either of itsorigina or appe ate jurisdiction: )=p ain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4,o ' -+J & D)%-(-* of the %ourt of&ppea s the aggrie!ed party shou d fi e a P),-,-*+* ) -)8 * %) ,-* & - in the (upreme %ourtunder u e 45 of the u es of %ourt instead of fi ing a

petition for certiorari under u e 65 e=cept under!ery e=ceptiona circumstances. & ong ine of decisionsof the (upreme %ourt# too numerous to mention#ho ds that certiorari is not a substitute for a ost appea .-t shou d be noted# ho$e!er# $hen the %ourt of&ppea s imposes the death pena ty# or a esser

pena ty for offenses committed on such occasion#appea by petition for re!ie$ or ordinary appea . -ncases $hen the %ourt of &ppea s imposes rec usion

perpetua# ife imprisonment or a esser pena ty#appea is by notice of appea fi ed $ith the %ourt of&ppea s.

Contem t" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (199!)& fi ed a comp aint for the reco!ery of o$nership of

and against B $ho $as represented by her counse N. -nthe course of the tria # B died. ?o$e!er# N fai ed tonotify the court of BGs death. ,he court proceeded tohear the case and rendered judgment against B.

&fter the /udgment became fina # a $rit of e=ecution



by : [email protected] Page 1> of 66 $as issued against %# $ho being BGs so eheir# ac@uired the property.Did the fai ure of counse N to inform the court ofBGs death constitute direct contempt: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. -t is not direct contempt under (ec. 1 of u e71# but it is indirect contempt $ithin the pur!ie$ of(ec 3 of u e 71. ,he a$yer can a so be the

subject of discip inary action. (Sec. 16% "#le 3'

8efault (' )Defendant $as dec ared in defau t by the ,% ; ,%<.P aintiff $as a o$ed to present e!idence in supportof his comp aint. Photocopies of officia receipts andorigina copies of affida!its $ere presented in court#identified by p aintiff on the $itness stand andmar ed as e=hibits. (aid documents $ere offered by

p aintiff and admitted in e!idence by the court on the basis of $hich the ,% rendered judgment in fa!or ofthe p aintiff# pursuant to the re ief prayed for. 'ponreceipt of the judgment# defendant appea s to the %ourt

of &ppea s c aiming that the judgment is not !a id because the ,% based its judgment on mere photocopies and affida!its of persons not presented in court.-s the c aim of defendant !a id: )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he c aim of defendant is not !a id because under the1AA7 u es# reception of e!idence is not re@uired.

&fter a defendant is dec ared in defau t# the courtsha proceed to render judgment granting thec aimant such re ief as his p eading may $arrant#un ess the court in its discretion re@uires the c aimant tosubmit e!idence# $hich may be de egated to thec er of court. (Sec. 3% "#le 9'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4,he c aim of defendant is !a id# because the courtrecei!ed e!idence $hich it can order in its o$ndiscretion# in $hich case the e!idence of the p aintiffmust pass the basic re@uirements of admissibi ity.

8efault (' 1)ario $as dec ared in defau t but before

judgment $as rendered# he decided to fi e a motionto set aside the order of defau t.a< 8hat shou d ario state in his motion in order

to justify the setting aside of the order ofdefau t: ;3 <

b< -n $hat form shou d such motion be: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< -n order to justify the setting aside of the order of

defau t# ario shou d state in his motion thathis fai ure to ans$er $as due to fraud# accident#mista e or e=cusab e neg igence and that he has ameritorious defense. [Sec. 3(b' o! "#le 9% .

b< ,he motion shou d be under oath. ;-d.<

8efault" *rder of 8efault" ffects (1999)





1. 8hen may a party be dec ared in defau t: ;2 <2. 8hat is the effect of an *rder of Defau t: ;2 <3. +or fai ure to seasonab y fi e his &ns$er despite

due notice# & $as dec ared in defau t in a caseinstituted against him by B. ,he fo o$ing day#&Gs mistress $ho is $or ing as a c er in the sa a ofthe /udge before $hom his case is pending#

informed him of the dec aration of defau t. *nthe same day# & presented a motion under oath toset aside the order of defau t on the ground thathis fai ure to ans$er $as due to fraud and he has ameritorious defense. ,hereafter# he $ent abroad.&fter his return a $ee ater# $ith the case stiundecided# he recei!ed the order dec aring himin defau t. ,he motion to set aside defau t $asopposed by B on the ground that it $as fi ed before& recei!ed notice of his ha!ing been dec ared indefau t# citing the ru e that the motion to set asidemay be made at anytime after notice but before

judgment. eso !e the otion.

;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. & party may be dec ared in defau t $hen hefai s to ans$er $ithin the time a o$edtherefor# and upon motion of the c aiming

party $ith notice tothe defending party# and proof of such fai ure.(Sec. 3% "#le 9'

2. ,he effect of an *rder of Defau t is that thecourt may proceed to render judgment grantingthe c aimant such re ief as his p eading may$arrant un ess the court in its discretion re@uires

the c aimant to submit e!idence ;-d.< ,he party in defau t cannot ta e part in the tria butsha be entit ed to notice of subse@uent

proceedings. (Sec. 3[ '

3. &ssuming that the motion to set aside comp ies$ith the other re@uirements of the ru e# itshou d be granted. & though such a motionmay bemade after notice but before judgment (Sec. 3[o! "#le 9' # $ith more reason may it be fi edafter disco!ery e!en before receipt of theorder of defau t.

8efault" emedies" Party 8eclared in 8efault (199!)8hat are the a!ai ab e remedies of a party dec ared-n defau tK1. Before the rendition of judgmentF 012. &fter judgment but before its fina ityF and

02 13. &fter fina ity of judgment: 02SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he a!ai ab e remedies of a party dec ared indefau t are as fo o$sK1. BEFORE THE RENDITION OF JUDGMENT

;a< he may fi e a motion under oath to set

aside the order of defau t on the groundsof fraud# accident# mista e or e=cusab eneg igence and that he has a meritorious

1% "#le 65'

by : [email protected]






c. %ertiorari under u e 65.(See 5alsan 4nter$rises, +nc. v. Baliwag 5ransit, +nc.,". . %o. &262*/, -ul /, &999!

8efault" emedies" Substantial Com liance (' )+or fai ure of 9./. to fi e an ans$er $ithin thereg ementary period# the %ourt# upon motion of

# dec ared 9/ in defau t. -n due time# 9/

fi ed an un!erified motion to ift the order ofdefau t $ithout an affida!it of merit attached toit. 9/ ho$e!er attached to the motion his ans$erunder oath# stating in said ans$er his reasonsfor his fai ure to fi e an ans$er on time# as$e as his defenses. 8i the motion to ift theorder of defau t prosper: )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# there is substantia comp iance $ith the ru e.& though the motion is un!erified# the ans$erattached to the motion is !erified. ,he ans$ercontains $hat the motion to ift the order of defau t andthe affida!it of merit shou d contain# $hich are the

reasons of mo!antHs fai ure to ans$er as $e as hisdefenses. (Sec. D3 of ule 9, &997 ules of Civil Proce#ure; Cf. Citi3an , %.). v. Court of )$$eals,

0' SC ) 679, D&999 ; Consul v. Consul, &7 SC )667, 67& D&966 ; 5olentino v. Carlos, 66 Phil, &'*0, &'&'' D&9 / , %asser v. Court of )$$eals, &9& SC ) 7/

D&992 !.

8emurrer to vidence (' 1)%ar os fi ed a comp aint against Pedro in the ,% of*Eamis %ity for the reco!ery of the o$nership of a car.Pedro fi ed his ans$er $ithin the reg ementary

period. &fter the pre"tria and actua tria # and after%ar os has comp eted the presentation of hise!idence# Pedro mo!ed for the dismissa of thecomp aint on the ground that under the facts pro!en andthe a$ app icab e to the case# %ar os is not entit edto the o$nership of the car. ,he ,% grantedthe motion for dismissa . %ar os appea ed the order ofdismissa and the appe ate court re!ersed the order ofthe tria court. ,hereafter# Pedro fi ed a motion $ith the

,% as ing the atter to a o$ him to present hise!idence. %ar os objected to the presentation ofe!idence by Pedro.

(hou d the ,% grant PedroHs motion to present hise!idence: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. PedroHs motion shou d be denied. ?e canno onger present e!idence. ,he u es pro!ide thatif the motion for dismissa is granted by the triacourt but on appea the order of dismissa isre!ersed# he sha be deemed to ha!e $ai!edthe right to present e!idence. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 33%

"#les o! )i*il +roced#re'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

o# because $hen the appe ate court re!ersedthe order of the tria court it shou d ha!erendered judgment in fa!or of %ar os. ( #ebral *.)o#r o! eals% 252 S)" 353% 1996'

by : [email protected] Page 2 of 668emurrer to vidence" Civil Case vs. Criminal Case(' )%ompare the effects of a denia of demurrer toe!idence in a ci!i case $ith those of a deniaof demurrer to e!idence in a crimina case. 4SUGGESTED ANSWER4-n a ci!i case# the defendant has the right to fi e ademurrer to e!idence $ithout ea!e of court. -f his

demurrer is denied# he has the right to presente!idence. -f his demurrer is granted and on appea by the p aintiff# the appe ate court re!erses the order andrenders judgment for the p aintiff# the defendant oseshis right to present e!idence. ; u e 33<.

-n a crimina case# the accused has to obtain ea!eof court to fi e a demurrer to e!idence. -f heobtains ea!e of court and his demurrer to e!idenceis denied# he has the right to present e!idence inhis defense. -f his demurrer to e!idence isgranted# he is ac@uitted and the prosecutioncannot appea .

-f the accused does not obtain ea!e of court andhis demurrer to e!idence is denied# he $ai!es hisright to present e!idence and the case is decided onthe basis of the e!idence for the prosecution.

,he court may a so dismiss the action on theground of insufficiency of the e!idence on its o$ninitiati!e after gi!ing the prosecution theopportunity to be heard. (Sec. 23 o! "#le 119'

8iscovery" :odes of 8iscovery (' )Describe brief y at east fi!e ;5< modes ofdisco!ery under the u es of %ourt. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

+i!e modes of disco!ery under the u es of%ourt areK1. DEPOSITION .By ea!e of court after jurisdiction has

been obtained o!er any defendant or o!er property $hich is the subject of the action# or$ithout such ea!e after an ans$er has beenser!ed# the testimony of any person# $hether a

party or not# may be ta en# at the instance of any party# by deposition upon ora e=amination or$ritten interrogatories. (Sec. 1% "#le 23% 1997

"#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

2. INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES. 'nder thesame conditions specified in section 1 of u e 23#any party sha fi e and ser!e upon any ad!erse

party $ritten interrogatories regarding materiaand re e!ant facts to be ans$ered by the partyser!ed. ; Sec. 1% "#le 25% 1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

3. ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY. &t any timeafter issues ha!e been joined# a party may fi e andser!e upon any other party a $ritten re@uest for theadmission by the atter of the genuineness of anymateria and re e!ant document or of thetruth of any materia and re e!ant matter offact.



(Sec. 1% "#le 26% 1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

Version 1997-2006 !dated "# DondeeRemedial Law BarExamination Q & A (1997-2006 )4. PRODUCTION OR

INSPECTION OFDOCUMENTS ORTHINGS. 'pon motionof any party sho$inggood cause therefore#

a court may orderany party to produceand permit theinspection andcopying or

photographing ofany designateddocuments# etc. ororder any party to

permit entry upondesignated and or

property forinspecting#

measuring#sur!eying# or

photographing the property or anydesignatedre e!ant object oroperation thereon.(Sec. 1% "#le 27% 1997

"#le 27 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

8iscovery" :odes"Sub oena 8uces %ecum

(1997)-n an admira ty case fi ed by & against J (hipping

ines ;$hose principaoffices are in ani a< inthe ,%# Da!ao %ity# thecourt issued a subpoenaduces tecum directing J#the president of theshipping company# toappear and testify at thetria and to bring $ith himse!era documents.

;a< *n $hat !a idground can J refuse tocomp y $ith thesubpoena duces tecum:;b< ?o$ can & ta e thetestimony of J and

present the documentsas e=hibits other thanthrough thesubpoena from the ,%:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< J can refuse to comp y$ith the subpoena duces

tecum on the ground that heresides more than 5 ;no$1 < i ometers from the

p ace $here he is to testify#(Sec. 9 o! !ormer "#le 23$ Sec. 10o! ne& "#le 21'.

;b< & can ta e thetestimony of J and present

the documents as e=hibits by ta ing his depositionthrough ora e=amination or$ritten interrogatories. ("#le24$ ne& "#le 23' ?e may a sofi e a motion for the

production or inspection ofdocuments. ("#le 27'.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

;a< ,he $itness can a sorefuse to comp y $ith thesubpoena duces tecumon the ground that the

documents are not re e!antand there $as no tender offees for one dayGsattendance and the

i ometrage a o$ed by theru es.

8iscovery" Production andns ection of 8ocuments

(' '),he p aintiff sued thedefendant in the ,% to co ecton a promissory note# the terms

of $hich $ere stated in thecomp aint and a photocopyattached to the comp aint asan anne=. Beforeans$ering# the defendantfi ed a motion for an orderdirecting the p aintiff to

produce the origina of thenote so that the defendantcou d inspect it and !erify hissignature and the hand$rittenentries of the dates andamounts.1. (hou d the judge

grant the defendantHsmotion for productionand inspection of theorigina of the

promissory note: 8hy:;2 <

2. &ssuming that anorder for productionand inspection $asissued but the p aintifffai ed to comp y $ith it#



ho$ shou d thedefendant p ead tothe a egede=ecution of thenote: ;3 <

by : [email protected] 21 of 66

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;1<Jes# becauseupon motion of any

party sho$inggood cause# thecourt in $hich theaction is pending

may order any party to produceand permit theinspection ofdesignateddocuments. ("#le27'. ,he defendanthas the right toinspect and !erifythe origina of the

promissory note sothat he cou dinte igent y preparehis ans$er.

;2<,he defendant isnot re@uired to denyunder oath thegenuineness anddue e=ecution of the

promissory note# because of the non"comp iance by the

p aintiff $ith theorder for production

and inspection ofthe originathereof. ("#le 8% sec.8'. ALTERNATI3EANSWER4;2< ,he defendantmay fi e a motionto dismiss thecomp aint because ofthe refusa of the

p aintiff to obey theorder of the court

for the productionand inspection of the promissory note.["#le 29 Sec. 3(c' .

8ismissal" :otion to8ismiss" esJudicata (' )&B# as mother and inher capacity as egaguardian of her

egitimate minorson# %D# brought

action for supportagainst )+# asfather of %D and&BHs a$fu y$edded husband.)+ fi ed hisans$er denying his

paternity $ithcounterc aim for

damages.(ubse@uent y# &Bfi ed a manifestationin court that in !ie$of the denia made by)+# it $ou d be futi eto pursue the caseagainst )+. &Bagreed to mo!e forthe dismissa ofthe comp aint#subject to thecondition that )+ $i$ithdra$ his counterc aim for damages.&B and )+ fi ed a

joint motion todismiss. ,he courtdismissed the case$ith prejudice. ateron# minor son %D#represented by &B#fi ed anothercomp aint for supportagainst )+. )+ fi ed a

motion to dismiss onthe ground of res judicata.

a< -s res judicata a!a id groundfor dismissa ofthe secondcomp aint:)=p ain yourans$er ;3 <

b< 8hat are the

essentia re@uisiteof res judicata:;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< o# res judicata is nota defense in an action forsupport e!en if thefirst case $asdismissed $ith

prejudice on a jointmotion to dismiss. ,he

p aintiffHs mother agreedto the dismissa of thecomp aint for support in!ie$ of the defendantHsans$er denying his

paternity $ith acounterc aim fordamages. ,his $as inthe nature of acompromise of the rightof support $hich is

prohibited by a$. ()rt,20 *, Civil Co#e; e )sis v. Court of )$$eals,

0 SC ) &76 D&999 !.

;b<,he )ssentiae@uisites of es

/udicata areK1. the judgment

or orderrenderedmust befina F

2. the courtrendering thesame mustha!e

jurisdiction ofthe subjectmatter and ofthe partiesF

3. it must be a judgment ororder on themeritsF and



by : [email protected] Page 22 of 66

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

& QUESTION OF LAW is $hen the doubt or

&orum S,o ing" 8efinition (' +)8hat is forum shopping:;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4+orum shopping is the act of a party $hich consists offi ing mu tip e suits# simu taneous y or successi!e y# forthe purpose of obtaining a fa!orab e judgment(8e son v. ffice of the 3u#s an, ". . %o. & '990,

)$ril 27, 2000; Julienco v. C), ". . %o. & &692, -une &0,&999; Che $hil 4 $ort L + $ort Cor$. v.C), ". . %os. &&2' / 9, ece 3er &2, &99*!.

&orum S,o ing" ffects" 0ac@ of Certification (' +)?oney fi ed $ith the egiona ,ria %ourt# ,aa #Batangas a comp aint for specific performance

against Bernie. +or ac of certificationagainst forum shopping# the judge dismissed thecomp aint. ?oneyGs a$yer fi ed a motion forreconsideration# attaching thereto an amendedcomp aint $ith the certification against forumshopping. -f you $ere the judge# ho$ $i youreso !e the motion: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

-f - $ere the judge# the motion shou d be denied afterhearing because# as e=press y pro!ided in the

u es# fai ure to comp y $ith the re@uirement offorum shopping is not curab e by mere amendmentof the comp aint or other initiatory p eading# butsha be cause for the dismissa of the case# $ithout

prejudice# un ess other$ise pro!ided (Sec. 5% "#le 7% 1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re'. ?o$e!er# the tria court in thee=ercise of its sound discretion# may choose to

be ibera and consider the amendment assubstantia comp iance("reat Southern Mariti e Services Cor$. v. )cuna, ". .

%o. &'0&/9, e3ruar 2/,200*; Chan v. 5Cof Ea 3oanga #el %orte, ". . %o. &'92* , )$ril &*,200'; : v. 8an# Ban , ". . & 6&00, -ul 2', 2000!.

3en. Princi les" uestions of 0a2 vs. uestions of &act(' ?)Distinguish Iuestions of a$ from Iuestions of fact.

(Sec. 3 o! "#le130'

officia receipts and affida!its are$ithout proof of oss of the origina s.

o! e "e*ised "#le on S#mmar- +roced#re'.

(Sec.9

,he c aim of defendant is !a id# because a thoughsummary procedure re@uires mere y the submission of

position papers# the e!idence submitted $ith the position paper must be admissib e in e!idence.

Photocopies ofnot admissib e

4. there must be bet$een the t$o cases identityof parties# identity of subject matter# andidentity of causes of action. (San iego v.

Car#ona, 70 Phil, 2/& D&9'0 !

vidence" Admissibility" P,otoco ies (' )-f the photocopies of officia receipts and

photocopies of affida!its $ere attached to the position paper submitted by p aintiff in an action forun a$fu detainer fi ed $ith unicipa ,ria %ourton $hich basis the court rendered judgment in fa!orof p aintiff: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4




difference arises as to $hat the a$ is on a certain set offacts# $hi e a QUESTION OF FACT is $hen thedoubt or difference arises as to the truth or fa sehood ofa eged facts. ( a os v. Pe$si Cola Bottling Co., &9

SC ) 2/9, D&9670 !.

Judgment" Annulment of Judgment" 3rounds (199!)8hat are the grounds for the annu ment ofa judgment of the ,% ; ,%<: 02SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he grounds for annu ment of judgment of the ,%are )=trinsic +raud and ac of /urisdiction.(Sec% 2% "#le 47% 1997 "#les o! )i*il +roced#re.'

Judgment" nforcement" $year eriod (1997)&# a resident of Dagupan %ity# secured afa!orab e judgment in an ejectment case against N#a resident of IueEon %ity# from the ,%of

ani a. ,he judgment# entered on 15 /une1AA1# had not as yet been e=ecuted.a< -n /u y 1AA6# & decided to enforce the judgment

of the ,%of ani a. 8hat is the procedure to be fo o$ed by & in enforcing the judgment:

b< 8ith $hat court shou d & institute the proceedings:

SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< & can enforce the judgment by another actionre!i!ing the /udgment because it can no onger beenforced by motion as the fi!e"year period $ithin$hich a judgment may be enforced by motion hasa ready e=pired. (Sec. 6 o! !ormer and ne& "#le 39'.

;b< & may institute the proceedings in the ,% inaccordance $ith the ru es of !enue because theenforcement of the /udgment is a persona action

incapab e of pecuniary estimation.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

;b< & may institute the proceeding in a,%$hich has jurisdiction o!er the area $here the

rea property in!o !ed is situated. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 4'.

Judgment" nforcement" &oreign Judgment (' )'nder &rtic e 1144 of the e$ %i!i %ode# anaction upon a judgment must be brought $ithin1 years from the time the right of actionaccrues. -s this pro!ision app icab e to anaction fi ed in the Phi ippines to enforce aforeign judgment: )=p ain. ;1 <ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

&rtic e 1144 of the %i!i %ode $hich re@uires that anaction upon a judgment ;though $ithout distinction<must be brought $ithin 1 years from the time theright of action accrues# does not app y to an actionfi ed in the Phi ippines to enforce a foreign judgment.8hi e $e can say that $here the a$ does notdistinguish# $e shou d not distinguish# sti the a$does not e!ident y contemp ate the inc usion of




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) foreign judgments. & oca judgment may beenforced by motion $ithin fi!e years and by action$ithin the ne=t fi!e years. ("#le 39' ,hat is notthe case $ith respect to foreign judgments$hich cannot be enforced by mere motion.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

&rtic e 1144 of the %i!i %ode re@uires that anaction upon a judgment ;though $ithout

distinction< must be brought $ithin 1 years fromthe time the right of action accrues. ,here seemsno cogent reason to e=c ude foreign judgmentsfrom the operation of this ru e# subject to there@uirements of u e 3A# (ec. 4> of the u esof %ourt $hich estab ishes certain re@uisitesfor pro!ing the foreign judgment. Pursuant to these

pro!isions# an action for the enforcement of theforeign judgment may be brought at any time$ithin 1 years from the time the right ofaction accrues.

Judgment" ;ecution ending A eal (' ')

,he tria court rendered judgment ordering thedefendant to pay the p aintiff mora and e=emp arydamages. ,he judgment $as ser!ed on the p aintiff on*ctober 1# 2 1 and on the defendant on *ctober 5#2 1. *n *ctober ># 2 1# the defendant fi ed anotice of appea from the judgment# but the fo o$ingday# *ctober A# 2 1# the p aintiff mo!ed for thee=ecution of the judgment pending appea . ,he triacourt granted the motion upon the posting by the

p aintiff of a bond to indemnify the defendant fordamages it may suffer as a resu t of the e=ecution.,he court ga!e as a specia reason for its order theimminent inso !ency of the defendant.-s the order of e=ecution pending appeacorrect: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because a$ards for mora and e=emp arydamages cannot be the subject of e=ecution pendingappea . ,he e=ecution of any a$ard for mora ande=emp ary damages is dependent on the outcome of themain case. iabi ities for mora and e=emp arydamages# as $e as the e=act amounts remainuncertain and indefinite pending reso ution by the%ourt of &ppea s or (upreme %ourt. D CP+ v. 8antin,& ' SC ) 9* (&9/*!; +nternational School, +nc. v. Courtof )$$eals, 09 SC ) '7' (&999! .ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4Jes# because on y mora and e=emp ary damagesare a$arded in the judgment and they are notdependent on other types of damages.

oreo!er# the motion for e=ecution $as fi ed$hi e the court had jurisdiction o!er the caseand $as in possession of the origina record.

-t is based on good reason $hich is the imminent

inso !ency of the defendant. ; u e 3A# sec. 2<

by : [email protected] Page 23 of 66Judgment" nterlocutory *rder" Partial SummaryJudgments (' ?)&fter defendant has ser!ed and fi ed his ans$er to

p aintiffs comp aint for damages before the proper,%# p aintiff ser!ed and fi ed a motion ;$ith

supporting affida!its< for a summary judgment in hisfa!or upon a of his c aims. Defendant ser!ed andfi ed his opposition ;$ith supporting affida!its< to the

motion. &fter due hearing# the court issued an order ;1<stating that the court has found no genuine issue as toany materia fact and thus conc uded that p aintiff isentit ed to judgment in his fa!or as a matter of a$e=cept as to the amount of damages reco!erab e# and;2< according y ordering that p aintiff sha ha!e

judgment summari y against defendant for suchamount as may be found due p aintiff for damages#to be ascertained by tria on *ctober 7# 2 4# at>K3 oGc oc in the morning. ay defendant proper yta e an appea from said order: *r# may defendant

proper y cha enge said order thru a specia ci!i actionfor certiorari: eason. ;5 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4 o# p aintiff may not proper y ta e an appea fromsaid order because it is an inter ocutory order# not a finaand appea ab e order (Sec. 4 o! "#le 35'. -t does notdispose of the action or proceeding ; Sec. 1 o! "#le 39 <.

P& ,-& (' & J /'D ) ,( areinter ocutory. ,here is sti something to be done#$hich is the tria for the adjudication of damages(Province of Pangasinan v. Court of )$$eals, 220 SC )726 D&99 -; "uevarra v. Court of )$$eals, 209 Phil.2'& D&9/ !# but the defendant may proper y

cha enge said order thru a specia ci!i action forcertiorari. (Sec. 1 [c and las ar. o! "#le 41'

Judgment" Judgment on t,e Pleadings (1999)a< 8hat are the grounds for judgment on

the p eadings: ;2 < b< &Gs &ns$er admits the materia a egations of BGs

%omp aint. ay the court mo # ro rio render judgment on the p eadings: )=p ain. ;2 <

c< & brought an action against her husband B forannu ment of their marriage on the ground of

psycho ogica incapacity# B fi ed his &ns$erto the %omp aint admitting a thea egations therein contained. ay & mo!efor judgment on the p eadings: )=p ain. ;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< ,he grounds for judgment on the p eadingsare $here an ans$er fai s to tender anissue# or other$ise admits the materiaa egations of the ad!erse partyGs p eading.(Sec. 1% "#le 34'.

b< o# a motion must be fi ed by the ad!erse party.(Sec. 1% "#le 34' ,he court cannot mo #

ro riorender judgment on the p eadings.

c< o# because e!en if BGs ans$er to &Gs comp aint for





by : [email protected]$hich is tantamount to remo!a $ithout cause#contrary to the fundamenta guarantee on non"

remo!a e=cept for continued tooccupy thedisputed positionand e=ercise his

functions therein#the proper remedyis @uo $arranto#not mandamus.

"arces v. Court of )$$eals, 2*9 SC )99 (&996! ALTERNATI3EANSWER4

Jes# the court iscorrect in itsru ing.

andamus ies$hen therespondentun a$fu ye=c udes anotherfrom the useand enjoymentof a right oroffice to $hichsuch other isentit ed. (Sec. 2%

"#le 65'. -n thiscase# Pab o hasnot un a$fu ye=c uded +abian

from the *fficeof ) ection

egistrar. ,heremedy of+abian is to fi ean action of@uo $arranto inhis name againstPab o forusurping theoffice. (Sec. 5%

"#le 66'

Judgment"Soundness"Attac,ment (' '),he p aintiffobtained a $ritof pre iminaryattachment upon a

bond of P1 mi ion.,he $rit $as

e!ied on thedefendantHs

property# but it$as discharged

upon the posting

by the defendant ofa counterbond in thesame amount of P1mi ion. &fter tria #the court rendered

judgment findingthat the p aintiff hadno cause of actionagainst the defendant

and that he hadsued out the $rit ofattachmentma icious y.&ccording y# thecourt dismissed thecomp aint andordered the p aintiffand its surety to pay

joint y to thedefendant P1.5mi ion as actuadamages# P .5

mi ion as moradamages and P .5mi ion as e=emp arydamages.)!a uate thesoundness of the

judgment from the point of !ie$ of procedure. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he judgmentagainst the surety isnot sound if duenotice $as notgi!en to him ofthe app icant fordamages. ("#le 57%

sec. 20' oreo!er#the judgmentagainst the suretycannot e=ceed theamount of itscounterbond of P1mi ion.

Judgments"nforcement";amination of

8efendant (' '),he p aintiff# a

ani a resident#sued the defendant#a resident of

a o os Bu acan# inthe ,%" ani a fora sum of money.8hen the sherifftried to ser!e the

summons $ith acopy of thecomp aint on thedefendant at hisBu acan residence#the sheriff $asto d that thedefendant hadgone to ani a

for business and$ou d not be bacunti the e!ening ofthat day. (o# thesheriff ser!ed thesummons# together$ith a copy of thecomp aint# on thedefendantHs 1>"

year"o d daughter#$ho $as a co egestudent. +or thedefendantHs fai ure toans$er the comp aint$ithin thereg ementary period#the tria court# onmotion of the

p aintiff# dec ared thedefendant in defau t. &month ater# the triacourt rendered

judgment ho ding thedefendant iab e forthe entire amount

prayed for in thecomp aint.




&. &fter the judgment had become fina # a $rit ofe=ecution $as issued by the court. &s the $rit $asreturned unsatisfied# the p aintiff fi ed a motion for anorder re@uiring the defendant to appear before it and to

be e=amined regarding his property and income.?o$ shou d the court reso !e the motion: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jurisdiction" 6abeas Cor us" Custody of :inors (' )8hi e arietta $as in her p ace of $or in a ati%ity# her estranged husband %ar o barged into herhouse in Parana@ue %ity# abducted their si="year o d son#Perci!a # and brought the chi d to his hometo$n inBaguio %ity. Despite ariettaGs p eas# %ar o refused toreturn their chi d. arietta# through counse # fi ed a

petition for habeas corpus against %ar o in the %ourt of&ppea s in ani a to compe him to produce their son#

before the court and for her to regain custody. (hea eged in the petition that despite her efforts# she cou dno onger ocate her son.

-n his comment# %ar o a eged that the petition $aserroneous y fi ed in the %ourt of &ppea s as the sameshou d ha!e been fi ed in the +ami y %ourt in Baguio%ity $hich# under epub ic &ct o. >36A# hase=c usi!e jurisdiction# o!er the petition. ariettarep ied that under u e 1 2 of the u es of %ourt# asamended# the petition may be fi ed in the %ourt of&ppea s and if granted# the $rit of habeas corpussha be enforceab e any$here in the Phi ippines.8hose contention is correct: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

ariettaGs contention is correct. ,he %ourt of

&ppea s has concurrent jurisdiction $ith the fami ycourts and the (upreme %ourt in petitions for habeascorpus $here the custody of minors is at issue#not$ithstanding the pro!ision in the +ami y %ourts&?. (". . o. 8369' that fami y courts ha!e e=c usi!e

jurisdiction in such cases. (5hornton v. 5hornton, ". . %o. &*'*9/, )ugust, 200'!

Jurisdiction" 0ac@ of Jurisdiction" Pro er Action of t,eCourt (' ?)P aintiff fi ed a comp aint for a sum of money againstdefendant $ith the e,%" a ati# the tota amountof the demand# e=c usi!e of interest# damages of

$hate!er ind# attorneyGs fees# itigation e=penses# andcosts# being P1# # . -n due time# defendant fi ed amotion to dismiss the comp aint on the ground of the

e,%Gs ac of jurisdiction o!er the subject matter.&fter due hearing# the e,% ;1< ru ed that the courtindeed ac ed jurisdiction o!er the subject matter ofthe comp aintF and ;2< ordered that the case thereforeshou d be for$arded to the proper ,% immediate y.8as the courtGs ru ing concerning jurisdictioncorrect: 8as the courtGs order to for$ard the case

proper: )=p ain brief y. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

by : [email protected] Page 25 of 66Jes. ,he e,% did not ha!e jurisdiction o!er thecase because the tota amount of the demande=c usi!e of interest# damages of $hate!er ind#attorneyGs fees# itigation e=penses# and costs#$as P1 . -ts jurisdictiona amount at this timeshou d not e=ceed P4 . . (Sec. 33 o! .+.

ig. 129% as amended b- ". . o. 7691'.

,he courtGs order to for$ard the case to the ,% is not proper. -t shou d mere y dismiss the comp aint.'nder (ec. 3 of u e 16# the court may dismiss theaction or c aim# deny the motion or order theamendment of the p eading but not to for$ard thecase to another court.

Parties" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (199!)& fi ed a comp aint for the reco!ery of o$nershipof and against B $ho $as represented by hercounse N. -n the course of the tria # B died.?o$e!er# N fai ed to notify the court of BGs death.,he court proceeded to hear the case and

rendered judgment against B. &fter the /udgment became fina # a $rit of e=ecution $as issuedagainst %# $ho being BGs so e heir# ac@uiredthe property.-f you $ere counse of %# $hat course ofaction $ou d you ta e: 03SUGGESTED ANSWER4&s counse of %# - $ou d mo!e to set aside the $rit ofe=ecution and the judgment for ac of jurisdiction and

ac of due process in the same court because the

judgment is !oid. -f N had notified the court of BGs

death# the court $ou d ha!e ordered the substitutionof the deceased by %# the so e heir of B.3' ,he court ac@uired no jurisdiction o!er % upon$hom the tria and the judgment are not binding.( erreira us. +3arra =#a. #e "onAales, &0' Phil. &' ; =#a. #ela CruA vs. Court of )$$eals, // SC ) 69*; 8awas us. Courtof )$$eals, &'6 SC ) &7 .! - cou d a so fi e anaction to annu the judgment for ac of jurisdiction

because %# as the successor of B# $as depri!ed of due process and shou d ha!e been heard before judgment.("#le 47'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER48hi e there are decisions of the (upreme %ourt$hich ho d that if the a$yer fai ed to notify the court ofhis c ientGs death# the court may proceed e!en$ithout substitution of heirs and the judgment is!a id and binding on the heirs of the deceased( loren#o vs. Colo a, &29 SC ) 0.!, as counse of %# -$i assai the judgment and e=ecution for ac ofdue process.

Parties" 8eat, of a Party" ffect (1999)8hat is the effect of the death of a partyupon a pending action: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. 8hen the c aim in a pending action is

pure y persona # the death of either of

(Sec. 16 o! "#le



the parties e=tinguishes the c aim and the action is dismissed.Version 1997-2006 !dated "# Dondee





$hich gi!e &B 12 days from entry of judgment# andVersion 1997-2006 !dated "# Dondee



Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) not from date of receipt of the *rder. ,hecourt denied his motion on the ground that the*rder had a ready become fina and can no onger

be amended to conform $ith (ection 2# u e6>. &ggrie!ed# &B fi es a petition for certiorariagainst the %ourt and %D. 8i the petition forcertiorari prosper: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes. ,he court erred in issuing an *rder granting%DHs prayer for forec osure of mortgage and ordering&B to pay %D the fu amount of the mortgage debtinc uding interest and other charges not ater than 12days from receipt of the *rder. ,he court shou dha!e rendered a judgment $hich is appea ab e. (ince noappea $as ta en# the judgment became fina on&ugust 25# 1AAA# $hich is the date of entry of

judgment. (Sec 2% "#le 36' ?ence# &B had upto December 24# 1AAA $ithin $hich to pay the amountdue. (Sec. 2% "#le 68' ,he court gra!e y abused itsdiscretion amounting to ac or e=cess of jurisdiction indenying &BHs motion praying that %D be directed to

recei!e the amount tendered.

Petition for elief - Action for Annulment (' ')ay an order denying the probate of a $i

sti be o!erturned after the period to appeatherefrom has apsed: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# an order denying the probate of a $i may beo!erturned after the period to appea therefrom has

apsed. & P),-,-* +* ) -)+ may be fi ed on thegrounds of fraud# accident# mista e or e=cusab eneg igence $ithin a period of si=ty ;6 < days after the

petitioner earns of the judgment or fina order andnot more than si= ;6< months after such judgment orfina order $as entered D ule /, secs. & L ; Soriano v.

)si, &00 Phil. 7/* (&9*7! .

&n &%,-* +* & ' ) , may a so befi ed on the ground of e=trinsic fraud $ithin four;4< years from its disco!ery# and if based on

ac of jurisdiction# before it is barred by achesor estoppe .("#le 47% secs. 2 3'

Petition for elief" n/unction (' ')

& defau t judgment $as rendered by the ,%ordering D to pay P a sum of money. ,he judgment

became fina # but D fi ed a petition for re ief andobtained a $rit of pre iminary injunction staying theenforcement of the judgment. &fter hearing# the ,%dismissed DHs petition# $hereupon P immediate ymo!ed for the e=ecution of the judgment in his fa!or.(hou d PHs motion be granted: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4PHs immediate motion for e=ecution of the judgment inhis fa!or shou d be granted because the dismissa of DHs

petition for re ief a so disso !es the $rit of pre iminary injunction staying the enforcement of the

by : [email protected] Page 27 of 66 judgment# e!en if the dismissa is not yet fina . D"oleA v. 8eoni#as, &07 SC ) &/7 (&9/&! .

Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" By 0eave of Court(' )&fter an ans$er has been fi ed# can the

p aintiff amend his comp aint# $ith ea!e ofcourt# by changing entire y the nature of the

action: 4SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# the present ru es a o$ amendmentssubstantia y a tering the nature of the cause ofaction. (Sec. 3% "#le 10% 1977 "#les o! )i*il

+roced#re$ <eirs of Marcelino Pago3o v. Court of )$$eals, 2/0 SC ) /70 D&997 !.

,his shou d on y be true# ho$e!er# $hen thesubstantia change or a teration in the cause of action ordefense sha ser!e the higher interests ofsubstantia justice and pre!ent de ay and e@ua y

promote the audab e objecti!e of the ru es $hich is tosecure a just# speedy and ine=pensi!e disposition ofe!ery action and proceeding. ; a enEue a !. %ourt of&ppea s# 363 (% & 77A 02 1 <.

Pleadings" Amendment of Com laint" By 0eaveof Court" Prescri tive Period (' )N# an i egitimate chi d of J# ce ebrated her 1>th

birthday on ay 2# 1AA6. & month before her birthday# J died. ,he egitimate fami y of J refusedto recogniEe N as an i egitimate chi d of J. &ftercount ess efforts to con!ince them# N fi ed on &pri 25#2 an action for recognition against O# $ife of J.&fter O fi ed her ans$er on &ugust 14# 2 # Nfi ed a motion for ea!e to fi e an amended comp aintand a motion to admit the said amended comp aintimp eading the three ;3< egitimate chi dren of J. ,hetria court admitted the amended comp aint on&ugust 22# 2 . 8hat is the effect of the admission ofthe amended comp aint: ?as the action of N

prescribed: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he action fi ed on &pri 25# 2 is sti $ithin thefour"year prescripti!e period $hich started to run on

ay 2# 1AA6. ,he amended comp aint imp eading thethree egitimate chi dren# though admitted on &ugust22# 2 beyond the four"year prescripti!e period#retroacts to the date of fi ing of the originacomp aint. &mendments imp eading ne$ defendantsretroact to the date of the fi ing of the comp aint

because they do not constitute a ne$ cause of action.(=erAosa v. Court of )$$eals, 299 SC ) &00 D&99/ !.; oteK ,he four"year period is based on &rtic e 2>5 of the %i!i %ode<ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

'nder the 1AA7 u es of %i!i Procedure# if anadditiona defendant is imp eaded in a ater

p eading# the action is commenced $ith regard tohim on the date of the fi ing of such ater p eading#irrespecti!e of $hether the motion for itsadmission# if necessary# is denied by the court.(Sec. 5 o! "#le 1'.










Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) copyof $hich is &nne= L&L of the comp aint andmade an integra part thereofF and ;2< that to

prosecute his comp aint# p aintiff contracted a a$yer#%%# for a fee of P5 . . -n his ans$er#defendant a eged# inter a ia# that he had no

no$ edge of the mortgage deed# and he a sodenied any iabi ity for p aintiffs contracting $ith a

a$yer for a fee.

Does defendantGs ans$er as to p aintiffHsa egation no. 1 as $e as no. 2 sufficient y raisean issue of fact: eason brief y. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4&s to p aintiffs a egation no. 1# defendant does notsufficient y raise an issue of fact# because he cannota ege ac of no$ edge of the mortgage deed since heshou d ha!e persona no$ edge as to $hether he signedit or not and because he did not deny under oaththe genuineness and due e=ecution of themortgage deed# $hich is an actionab e document. &s to

p aintiffHs a egation no. 2# defendant did not

proper y deny iabi ity as to p aintiffs contracting $ith aa$yer for a fee. ?e did not e!en deny for ac ofno$ edge. (Sec. 10 o! "#le 8'.

Pleadings" Certification Against &orum S,o ing (' )&s counse for &# B# % and D# &tty. NJ prepared acomp aint for reco!ery of possession of a

parce of and against O. Before fi ing thecomp aint# NJ disco!ered that his c ients $ere nota!ai ab e to sign the certification of non"forumshopping. ,o a!oid further de ays in the fi ingof the comp aint# NJ signed the certificationand immediate y fi ed the comp aint in court. -sNJ justified in signing the certification: 8hy:;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

*# counse cannot sign the anti"forum shoppingcertification because it must be e=ecuted bythe p aintiff or principa partyQ himse f (Sec. *,

ule 7; 4 cor$iAo v. :niversit of Baguio, 06 SC ) '97, D&999 !# since the ru e re@uires persona no$ edge by the party e=ecuting the certification# ' )((counse gi!es a good reason $hy he is not ab e tosecure his c ientsH signatures and sho$s that hisc ients $i be depri!ed of substantia justice( rtiA v. Court of )$$eals, 299 SC ) 70/, D&99/ !

or un ess he is authoriEed to sign it by his c ientsthrough a specia po$er of attorney.

Pleadings" Counterclaim against t,e Counsel of t,ePlaintiff (' ?)PN fi ed a suit for damages against DJ. -n his ans$er#DJ incorporated a counterc aim for damages against PNand &%# counse for p aintiff in said suit# a eging insaid counterc aim# inter a ia# that &%# as suchcounse # ma icious y induced PN to bring the suitagainst DJ despite &%Gs no$ edge of its utter acof factua and ega basis. -n due time# &% fi ed amotion to dismiss the counterc aim as against him on the

ground that he is not a proper party to the case#



by : [email protected] Page 2A of 66he being mere y p aintiffs counse . -s the counterc aimof DJ compu sory or not: (hou d &%Gs motion todismiss the counterc aim be granted or not:

eason. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes. ,he counterc aim of DJ is compu sory because it is one $hich arises out of or isconnected $ith the transaction or occurrence

constituting the subject matter of theopposing partyGs c aim and does notre@uire for its adjudication the presence ofthird parties of $hom the courtcannot ac@uire jurisdiction .(Sec. 7 o! "#le 6'.

,he motion to dismiss of p aintiffs counseshou d not be granted because bringing in

p aintiffs counse as a defendant in thecounterc aim is authoriEed by the u es.8here it is re@uired for the grant ofcomp ete re ief in the determinationof the counterc aim# the court sha orderthe defendantGs counse to be brought in since

jurisdiction o!er him can be obtained. (Sec. &2of ule 6; )urelio v. Court of )$$eals, &96 SC )67' D&99' !. ?ere# the counterc aim $asagainst both the p aintiff and his a$yer$ho a eged y ma icious y induced the

p aintiff to fi e the suit.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4,he counterc aim shou d be dismissed becauseit is not a compu sory counterc aim. 8hen a

a$yer fi es a case for a c ient# he shou d not besued on a counterc aim in the !ery same case hehas fi ed as counse . -t shou d be fi ed in a separate anddistinct ci!i action. (ChaveA v. San#igan3a an, &9

SC ) 2/2 D&99& !

Pleadings" :otions" Bill of Particulars (' )1. 8hen can a bi of particu ars be a!ai ed of:2. 8hat is the effect of non"comp iance $ith the

order of a bi of particu ars: 4SUGGESTED ANSWER41. Before responding to a p eading# a party may

mo!e for a bi or particu ars of any matter $hich isnot a!erred $ith sufficient definiteness or

particu arity to enab e him proper y to preparehis responsi!e p eading. -f the p eading is a rep y#the motion must be fi ed $ithin ten ;1 < daysfrom ser!ice thereof. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 12'

2. -f the order is not comp ied $ith# the court mayorder the stri ing out of the p eading orthe portions thereof to $hich the order $as

directed or ma e such other order as it deems just. (Sec. 4 o! "#le 12'

Pleadings" e ly" ffect of =on$&iling of e ly (' )N fi es a comp aint in the ,% for the reco!ery of a sumof money $ith damages against J. J fi es hisans$er denying iabi ity under the contract of sa e and

praying for the dismissa of the comp aint on theground of ac of cause of action because thecontract of sa e $as superseded by a contract of ease#




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) e=ecuted and signed by N and J t$o $ee s afterthe contract of sa e $as e=ecuted. ,he contractof ease $as attached to the ans$er. N doesnot fi e a rep y. 8hat is the effect of the non"fi ing of a rep y: )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4& rep y is genera y optiona . -f it is not fi ed# the ne$matters a eged in the ans$er are deemed

contro!erted. (Sec. 10 o! "#le 6'. ?o$e!er# since thecontract of ease attached to the ans$er is the basis ofthe defense# by not fi ing a rep y denying under oath thegenuineness and due e=ecution of said contract# the

p aintiff is deemed to ha!e admitted thegenuineness and due e=ecution thereof. (Secs. 7 an# /

ule /; 5ori3io v. Bi#in, & 2 SC ) &62 D&9/* !.

Pre/udicial uestion" /ectment vs. S ecificPerformance (' )BB fi es a comp aint for ejectment in the ,%onthe ground of non"payment of renta s against//. &fter t$o days# // fi es in the ,% a comp aint

against BB for specific performance to enforcethe option to purchase the parce of and subjectof the ejectment case. 8hat is the effect of//Hs action on BBHs comp aint: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,here is no effect. ,he ejectment case in!o !es

possession de facto on y. ,he action to enforce theoption to purchase $i not suspend the action ofejectment for non"payment of renta s. (Iill an )uto

Su$$l Cor$. v. Court of )$$eals, 20/ SC ) &0/ D&992 !.

Pre$%rial" e<uirements (' 1)i io fi ed a comp aint in the unicipa ,ria %ourt

of anuEa for the reco!ery of a sum against/uan. ,he atter fi ed his ans$er to the comp aintser!ing a copy thereof on i io.&fter the fi ing of the ans$er of /uan# $hose duty isit to ha!e the case set for pre"tria : 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&fter the fi ing of the ans$er of /uan# theP &- ,-++ has the duty to prompt y mo!e e= partethat the case be set for pre"tria . (Sec. 1% "#le18'.,he reason is that it is the p aintiff $ho no$s$hen the ast p eading has been fi ed and it is the

p aintiff $ho has the duty to prosecute.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

-n the e!ent the p aintiff fi es a rep y# his dutyto mo!e that the case be set for pre"tria arises afterthe rep y has been ser!ed and fi ed.

Provisional emedies (1999)8hat are the pro!isiona remedies under theru es: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he pro!isiona remedies under the ru es are pre iminary attachment# pre iminaryinjunction# recei!ership# rep e!in# and support

pendente ite. ("#les 57 o 61% "#les o! )o#r '.

by : [email protected] Page 3 of 66Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (1999)-n a case# the property of an incompetent underguardianship $as in custodia egis. %an it beattached: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4& though the property of an incompetent underguardianship is in custodia egis# it may be attached as infact it is pro!ided that in such case# a copy of the $rit of

attachment sha be fi ed $ith the proper court andnotice of the attachment ser!ed upon thecustodian of such property. (Sec. 7% las ar.% "#le 57'

Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (1999)ay damages be c aimed by a party prejudiced

by a $rongfu attachment e!en if the judgment isad!erse to him: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# damages may be c aimed by a party prejudiced

by a $rongfu attachment e!en if the judgment isad!erse to him. ,his is authoriEed by the u es. &c aim# for damages may be made on account of

improper# irregu ar or e=cessi!e attachment# $hichsha be heard $ith notice to the ad!erse party and hissurety or sureties. (Sec. 20, ule *7; -avellana v. . .

PlaAa 4nter$rises +nc., 2 SC ) 2/&.!

Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (' 1)ay a $rit of pre iminary attachment be issued

e=" parte: Brief y state the reason;s< for yourans$er. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# an order of attachment may be issued e="parteor upon motion $ith notice and hearing.57' ,he reason $hy the order may be issued e= parteisK that re@uiring notice to the ad!erse party anda hearing $ou d defeat the purpose of the pro!isionaremedy and enab e the ad!erse party to abscondor dispose of his property before a $rit ofattachment issues. (Min#anao Savings an# 8oan

)ssociation, +nc. v.Court of )$$eals, &72 SC ) '/0!.

Provisional emedies" Attac,ment (' )9aty fi ed an action against ,yrone for co ection of thesum of P1 i ion in the ,%# $ith an e="parteapp ication for a $rit of pre iminary attachment.

'pon posting of an attachment bond# the courtgranted the app ication and issued a $rit of

pre iminary attachment. &pprehensi!e that ,yronemight $ithdra$ his sa!ings deposit $ith the ban # thesheriff immediate y ser!ed a notice of garnishment onthe ban to imp ement the $rit of pre iminaryattachment. ,he fo o$ing day# the sheriff proceeded to,yroneGs house and ser!ed him the summons# $ithcopies of the comp aint containing the app ication for$rit of pre iminary attachment# 9atyGs affida!it# order ofattachment# $rit of pre iminary attachment andattachment bond.

(Sec. 2 o! "#le



8ithin fifteen ;15< days from ser!ice ofthe summons# ,yrone fi ed a motion to dismiss

and to




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) disso !e the $rit of pre iminary attachment onthe fo o$ing groundsK ;i< the court did notac@uire jurisdiction o!er his person because the$rit $as ser!ed ahead of the summonsF ;ii< the

$rit $as improper y imp ementedF and ;iii<said $rit $as impro!ident y issued becausethe ob igation in @uestion $as a ready fu y

paid. eso !e the motion $ith reasons. ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he motion to dismiss and to disso !e the $ritof pre iminary attachment shou d be denied.;1< ,he fact that the $rit of attachment $as ser!edahead of the summons did not affect the jurisdiction ofthe court o!er his person. -t ma es the $rit#unenforceab e. (Sec. 5% "#le. 57' ?o$e!er# a that isneeded to be done is to re"ser!e the $rit. ( nate v.

)3rogar, "M. %o. &97 9 , e3ruar 2 , &9/*!

;2< ,he $rit $as improper y imp emented. (er!inga notice of garnishment# particu ar y beforesummons is ser!ed# is not proper. -t shou d be acopy of the $rit of attachment that shou d beser!ed on the defendant# and a notice that the

ban deposits are attached pursuant to the $rit.(Sec. 7[d % "#le 57'

;3<,he $rit $as impro!ident y issued if indeed it can besho$n that the ob igation $as a ready fu y paid.,he $rit is on y anci ary to the main action. (Sec. 13%

,he a eged payment of the account cannot#

ser!e as a ground for reso !ing the impro!identissuance of the $rit# because this matter de !esinto the merits of the case# and re@uires fu "

b o$n tria . Payment# ho$e!er# ser!es as aground for a motion to dismiss.

Provisional emedies" Attac,ment vs.3arnis,ment (1999)Distinguish attachment from garnishment. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4&ttachment and garnishment are distinguished fromeach other as fo o$sK &,,&%? ) , is a

pro!isiona remedy that effects a e!y on property of a party as security for the satisfaction of any judgment that

may be reco!ered# $hi e & -(? ) , is a e!y ondebts due the judgment ob igor or defendant and othercredits# inc uding ban deposits# roya ties and other

persona property not capab e of manua de i!eryunder a $rit of e=ecution or a $rit of attachment.

Provisional emedies" n/unction (' 1)ay a $rit of pre iminary injunction be issued

e=" parte: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# a $rit of pre iminary injunction may not beissued e= parte. &s pro!ided in the u es# no

pre iminary injunction sha be granted $ithouthearing and prior notice to the party or person sought to

be enjoined. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 58' ,he reason is that a

"#les o! )i*il +roced#re'

(Sec. 4% "#le 581997

"#le 57'

304[1917 '.

(;adarang *. San amaria% 37 + il.



by : [email protected] Page 31 of 66 pre iminary injunction may cause gra!eand irreparab e injury to the party enjoined.

Provisional emedies" n/unction (' )%an a suit for injunction be apt y fi ed $iththe (upreme %ourt to stop the President ofthe Phi ippines from entering into a peaceagreement $ith the ationa Democratic +ront:

;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4 o# a suit for injunction cannot apt y be fi ed $ith the(upreme %ourt to stop the President of thePhi ippines from entering into a peace agreement$ith the ationa Democratic +ront# $hich is a

pure y po itica @uestion.,he President of the Phi ippines is

immune from suit.

Provisional emedies" n/unctions" Ancillary emedyvs. :ain Action (' +)Distinguish bet$een injunction as an anci ary

remedy and injunction as a main action. ;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4-njunction as an anci ary remedy refers to the

pre iminary injunction $hich re@uires the e=istence of a pending principa caseF $hi e injunction as a mainaction refers to the principa case itse f that prays for theremedy of permanent y restraining the ad!erse partyfrom doing or not doing the act comp ained of.

Provisional emedies" n/unctions" ssuance 2 outBond (' +)

ay a egiona ,ria %ourt issue injunction$ithout bond: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# if the injunction that is issued is a finainjunction. enera y# ho$e!er# pre iminaryinjunction cannot issue $ithout bond un esse=empted by the tria court (Sec. 4[b o! "#le 58'.

Provisional emedies" n/unctions" e<uisites (' +)8hat are the re@uisites for the issuance of ;a< a $rit of

pre iminary injunctionF and ;b< a fina $rit of injunction:

e@uisites for the issuance of aKSUGGESTED ANSWER4a. 8rit of Pre iminary -njunction

are R

;1< & !erified comp aint sho$ingF;2< ,he e=istence of a right in esseF;3< io ation or threat of !io ation of such rightF;4< Damages or injuries sustained or that $i besus" tained by reason of such !io ationF;5< otice to a parties of raff e and of hearingF;6< ?earing on the app icationF;7< +i ing of an appropriate bond and ser!ice

thereof.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

b. 8hi e a fina $rit of injunction may be rendered by judgment after tria # sho$ing app icant to beentit ed to the $rit (Sec. 9% "#le 58 1997 "#les o! )i*il

+roced#re'.Version 1997-2006 !dated "# Dondee




Provisional emedies" eceivers,i (' 1)/oa@uin fi ed a comp aint against /ose for theforec osure of a mortgage of a furniture factory $ith a

arge number of machinery and e@uipment. Duringthe pendency of the forec osure suit# /oa@uin earnedfrom re iab e sources that /ose $as @uiet y andgradua y disposing of some of his machinery and

e@uipment to a businessman friend $ho $as a soengaged in furniture manufacturing such that fromconfirmed reports /oa@uin gathered# the machineryand e@uipment eft $ith /ose $ere no ongersufficient to ans$er for the atterHs mortgageindebtedness. -n the meantime judgment $asrendered by the court in fa!or of /oa@uin but thesame is not yet fina .

9no$ing $hat /ose has been doing. -f you$ere /oa@uinHs a$yer# $hat action $ou d youta e to preser!e $hate!er remainingmachinery and e@uipment are eft $ith /ose:8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,o preser!e $hate!er remaining machinery ande@uipment are eft $ith /ose# /oa@uinHs a$yer shou dfi e a !erified app ication for the appointment by thecourt of one or more recei!ers. ,he u es pro!idethat recei!ership is proper in an action by themortgagee for the forec osure of a mortgage $hen itappears that the property is in danger of being $asted ordissipated or materia y injured and that its !a ue is

probab y insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt.(Sec. 1 o! "#le 59'.

Provisional emedies" e levin (1999)8hat is ep e!in: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

ep e!in or de i!ery of persona property consists in thede i!ery# by order of the court# of persona

property by the defendant to the p aintiff# upon thefi ing of a bond. (Calo v. ol#an, 76 Phil. ''* D&9'6 !

Provisional emedies" Su ort Pendente 0ite (1999)Before the ,%# & $as charged $ith rape of his 16"year o d daughter. During the pendency of thecase# the daughter ga!e birth to a chi d

a eged y as a conse@uence of the rape.,hereafter# she as ed the accused to support thechi d# and $hen he refused# the former fi ed a

petition for support pendente ite. ,he accused#ho$e!er# insists that he cannot be made to gi!esuch support arguing that there is as yet nofinding as to his gui t. 8ou d you agree $ith thetria court if it denied the app ication for support

pendente ite: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he pro!isiona remedy of support pendente itemay be granted by the ,% in the crimina action forrape. -n crimina actions $here the ci!i iabi ity

inc udes support for the offspring as a conse@uenceof the crime and the ci!i aspect thereof has not been



by: [email protected] Page 32 of 66 $ai!ed# reser!ed or instituted prior to its fi ing#the accused may be ordered to pro!ide support

pendente ite to the chi d born to the offended partya eged y because of the crime. (Sec. 6 o! "#le 61.'

Provisional emedies" Su ort Pendente 0ite (' 1)odesto $as accused of seduction by irginia# a

poor# unemp oyed young gir # $ho has a chi d by

odesto. irginia $as in dire need of pecuniaryassistance to eep her chi d# not to say of herse f#a i!e. ,he crimina case is sti pending in court anda though the ci!i iabi ity aspect of the crime has not

been $ai!ed or reser!ed for a separate ci!i action#the tria for the case $as foreseen to ta e t$o ongyears because of the hea!i y c ogged court ca endar

before the judgment may be rendered.-f you $ere the a$yer of irginia# $hat actionshou d you ta e to he p irginia in the meantimeespecia y $ith the prob em of feeding the chi d:;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,o he p irginia in the meantime# her a$yershou d app y for S# or +enden e /i e as

pro!ided in the u es. -n crimina actions$here the ci!i iabi ity inc uded support for theoffspring as a conse@uence of the crime and theci!i aspect thereof has not been $ai!ed orreser!ed for a separate ci!i action# the accusedmay be ordered to pro!ide support pendent e ite tothe chi d born to the offended party. (Sec. 6 o! "#le

61'

Provisional emedies" % * (' 1)&n app ication for a $rit of pre iminary injunction$ith a prayer for a temporary restraining order isinc uded in a comp aint and fi ed in a mu ti"sa a ,%consisting of Branches 1#2#3 and 4. Being urgent innature# the )=ecuti!e /udge# $ho $as sitting inBranch 1# upon the fi ing of the aforesaid app icationimmediate y raff ed the case in the presence of the

judges of Branches 2#3 and 4. ,he case $as raff ed toBranch 4 and judge thereof immediate y issued atemporary restraining order.-s the temporary restraining order !a id: 8hy:;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. -t is on y the )=ecuti!e /udge $ho can issueimmediate y a temporary restraining order effecti!eon y for se!enty"t$o ;72< hours from issuance. oother /udge has the right or po$er to issue atemporary restraining order e= parte. ,he /udge to$hom the case is assigned $i then conduct asummary hearing to determine $hether thetemporary restraining order sha be e=tended# but in nocase beyond 2 days# inc uding the origina 72" hour

period. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 58'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

,he temporary restraining order is not !a id because the @uestion does not state that thematter is of e=treme urgency and the app icant$i suffer gra!e injustice and irreparab e injury.(Sec. 5 o! "#le 58'





Provisional emedies" % * (' +)Define a temporary restraining order ;, *<. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

& temporary restraining order is an order issuedto restrain the opposite party and to maintain thestatus @uo unti a hearing for determining the

propriety of granting a pre iminary injunction(Sec. 4[c and [d % "#le 58%1997 "#les o! )i*il

+roced#re'.

Provisional emedies" % * vs. Status uo *rder (' +)Differentiate a , * from a status @uo order. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4& status @uo order ;(I*< is more in the nature of acease and desist order# since it does not direct thedoing or undoing of acts# as in the case of prohibitory ormandatory injuncti!e re ief. & , * is on y good for2 days if issued by the ,%F 6 days if issued by the%&F unti further notice if issued by the (%. ,he (I* is$ithout any prescripti!e period and may be issued$ithout a bond. & , * dies a natura death afterthe a o$ab e periodF the (I* does not. & , * is

pro!isiona . (I* asts unti re!o ed. & , * is note=tendib e# but the (I* may be subject to agreement ofthe parties.

Provisional emedies" % *" CA Justice 8e t. (' +)ay a justice of a Di!ision of the %ourt of &ppea s

issue a , *: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# a justice of a di!ision of the %ourt of &ppea smay issue a , *# as authoriEed under u e 5> and by(ection 5# u e - of the - %& $hich additiona yre@uires that the action sha be submitted on the ne=t$or ing day to the absent members of the di!isionfor the ratification# modification or reca (<eirs of thelate -ustice -ose B.8. e es v. Court of )$$eals, ". .

%os. & *'2* 26, %ove 3er &', 2000!.

Provisional emedies" % *" 8uration (' +)8hat is the duration of a , * issued bythe )=ecuti!e /udge of a egiona ,ria %ourt:;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

-n cases of e=treme urgency# $hen the app icant$i suffer gra!e injustice and irreparab einjury# the duration of a , * issued e= parte

by an )=ecuti!e /udge of a egiona ,ria %ourtis 72 hours (2nd ar. o! Sec. 5% "#le 58 1997 "#les o!)i*il +roced#re' . -n the e=ercise of his regu arfunctions o!er cases assigned to his sa a# an)=ecuti!e /udge may issue a , * for a durationnot e=ceeding a tota of 2 days.

eglementary Period" Su lemental Pleadings (' ),he ,% rendered judgment against (,# copy of$hich $as recei!ed by his counse on +ebruary 2>#2 . *n arch 1 # 2 # (,# through counse # fi ed amotion for reconsideration of the decision $ithnotice to the % er of %ourt submitting the motionfor the consideration of the court. *n arch 15#

2 # rea iEing that the otion ac ed a notice ofhearing# (,Hs counse fi ed a supp ementa p eading.




8as the motion for econsideration fi ed$ithin the reg ementary period: )=p ain.;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# because the ast day of fi ing a motionfor reconsideration $as arch 15 if +ebruaryhad 2> days or arch 16 if +ebruary had 2A days.

& though the origina motion for reconsideration$as defecti!e because it ac ed a notice ofhearing# the defect $as cured on time by itsfi ing on arch 15 of a supp ementa

p eading# pro!ided that motion $as set for hearingand ser!ed on the ad!erse party at east three;3< days before the date of hearing. (Sec. 4% "#le 15' .ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

(ince the supp ementa p eading $as notset for hearing# it did not cure the defectof the origina motion.

emedies" A eal to SC" A eals to CA (' ')

a< 8hat are the modes of appea to the(upreme %ourt: ;2 <

b< %omment on a proposa to amend u e122# (ection 2;b<# in re ation to (ection3;c<# of the e!ised u es of %riminaProcedure to pro!ide for appea to the%ourt of &ppea s from the decisions of the

,% in crimina cases# $here the pena tyimposed is rec usion perpetua or ifeimprisonment# subject to the right of theaccused

to appea to the (upreme %ourt. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&. ,he modes of appea to the (upreme %ourt areK ;a<&PP)& BJ %) ,-* & - on pure @uestions of

a$ under u e 45 through a petition for re!ie$ oncertiorariF and ;b< * D- & J &PP)& in criminacases through a notice of appea from con!ictionsimposing rec usion perpetua or ife imprisonment or$here a esser pena ty is in!o !ed but for offenses

committed on the same occasion or $hich arose out ofthe same occurrence that ga!e rise to the moreserious offense. ("#le 122% sec. 3' %on!ictions imposingthe death pena ty are e e!ated through automaticre!ie$.

B. ,here is no constitutiona objection to pro!iding in the u es of %ourt for an appea to the%ourt of &ppea s from the decisions of the ,% incrimina cases $here the pena ty imposed isrec usion perpetua or ife imprisonment subject tothe right of the accused to appea to the (upreme

%ourt# because it does not depri!e the (upreme%ourt of the right to e=ercise u timate re!ie$ ofthe judgments in such cases.

emedies" A eal" %C to CA (1999)a. 8hen is an appea from the ,% to the %ourt of

&ppea s deemed perfected: ;2 S b. NNN recei!ed a copy of the ,% decision on /une A#

1AAAF JJJ recei!ed it on the ne=t day# /une 1 #1AAA. NNN fi ed a otice of &ppea on /une 15#1AAA. ,he parties entered into a compromise on





/une 16# 1AAA. *n /une 13# 1AAA# JJJ# $ho did notappea # fi ed $ith the ,% a motion for appro!aof the %ompromise &greement. NNN changedhis mind and opposed the motion on the ground thatthe ,% has no more jurisdiction. u e on themotion assuming that the records ha!e not yet beenfor$arded to the %&. ;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a. &n appea from the ,% to the %ourtof &ppea s is deemed perfected as to the appe antupon the fi ing of a notice of appea in the ,% indue time or $ithin the reg ementary period ofappea . &n appea by record on appea isdeemed perfected as to the appe ant $ithrespect to the subject matter thereof upon theappro!a of the record on appea fi ed in duetime. (Sec. 9% "#le 41'

b. ,he contention of NNN that the ,% has no more jurisdiction o!er the case is not correct because at thetime that the motion to appro!e the compromise

had been fi ed# the period of appea of JJJ had notyet e=pired. Besides# e!en if that period had a readye=pired# the records of the case had not yet beenfor$arded to the %ourt of &ppea s. ,he ru es

pro!ide that in appea s by notice of appea # the courtoses jurisdiction o!er the case upon the

perfection of the appea s fi ed in due time and thee=piration of the time to appea of the other parties.(Sec. 9% ird ar.% "#le 41'

,he ru es a so pro!ide that prior to the transmittaof the record# the court may# among others#appro!e compromises. (Sec. 9% !i! ar.% "#le 41'

; oteK /une 13# the date of the fi ing of themotion for appro!a of the %ompromise&greement# appears to be a c erica error<

emedies" A eal" ule ? vs. ule + (1999)a< Distinguish a petition for certiorari as a mode

of appea from a specia ci!i action forcertiorari. ;2 <

b< ay a party resort to certiorari $hen appea issti a!ai ab e: )=p ain. ;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4a. & P),-,-* +* ) -)8 * %) ,-* & - as amode of appea may be distinguished from a specia

ci!i action for certiorari in that the petition forcertiorari as a mode of appea is go!erned by u e 45and is fi ed from a judgment or fina order of the ,%#the (andiganbayan or the %ourt of &ppea s# $ithinfifteen ;15< days from notice of the judgment appea edfrom or of the denia of the motion for ne$ tria orreconsideration fi ed in due time on @uestions of a$on y (Secs. 1 and 2' F (P)%-& %- - &%,-* +*%) ,-* & - is go!erned by u e 65 and is fi edto annu or modify judgments# orders orreso utions rendered or issued $ithout or in e=cess of

jurisdiction or $ith gra!e abuse of discretiontantamount to ac or e=cess of jurisdiction# $hen

by : [email protected] Page 34 of 66there is no appea nor any p ain# speedy andade@uateremedy in the ordinary course of a$# to be fi ed$ithin si=ty ;6 < days from notice of the judgment#

order or reso ution subject of the petition.;(ecs.1

and 4.<ADDITIONAL ANSWER41< -n appea by certiorari under u e 45# the petitionerand respondent are the origina parties to the action andthe o$er court is not imp eaded. -n certiorari# under

u e 65# the o$er court is imp eaded.

2< -n appea by certiorari# the fi ing of amotion for reconsideration is not re@uired#$hi e in the specia ci!i action of certiorari#such a motion is genera y re@uired.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

b. *# because as a genera ru e# certiorari is proper ifthere is no appea (Sec. 1 o! "#le 65.' ?o$e!er# if

appea is not a speedy and ade@uate remedy#certiorari may be resorted to. (4chaus v. Court of )$$eals, &99 SC ) /&.! %ertiorari is sanctioned#e!en if appea is a!ai ab e# on the basis of a

patent# capricious and $himsica e=ercise ofdiscretion by a tria judge as $hen an appea $inot prompt y re ie!e petitioner from the injuriouseffects of the disputed order (=as>ueA vs. o3illa )lenio, 27& SC ) 67!

emedies" 5oid 8ecision" Pro er emedy (' ?)&fter p aintiff in an ordinary ci!i action before the

,%F OO has comp eted presentation of his e!idence#

defendant $ithout prior ea!e of court mo!ed fordismissa of p aintiffs comp aint for insufficiency of p aintiffHs e!idence. &fter due hearing of the motion andthe opposition thereto# the court issued an order# readingas fo o$sK ,he %ourt hereby grantsdefendantGs motion to dismiss and according y orders thedismissa of p aintiffHs comp aint# $ith the coststa=ed against him. -t is so ordered.L -s the order ofdismissa !a id: ay p aintiff proper y ta e an appea :

eason. ;5 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he order or decision is !oid because it does not

state findings of fact and of a$# as re@uired by (ec. 14# &rtic e --- of the %onstitution and(ec. 1# u e 36. Being !oid# appea is nota!ai ab e. ,he proper remedy is certiorari under

u e 65.ANOT5ER ANSWER4

)ither certiorari or ordinary appea may beresorted to on the ground that the judgment is !oid.&ppea # in fact# may be the more e=pedientremedy.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

Jes. ,he order of dismissa for insufficiency ofthe p aintiffs e!idence is !a id upon defendantGs

motion to dismiss e!en $ithout prior ea!e of



court. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 33' .Jes# p aintiff may proper y ta e an appea becausethe dismissa of the comp aint is a fina andappea ab e order. ?o$e!er# if the order ofdismissa is re!ersed


Remedial Law BarExamination Q & A(1997-2006 ) on appea #the p aintiff is deemedto ha!e $ai!ed his rightto present e!idence.;-d.<

S ecial Civil Action"

/ectment (1997)*n 1 /anuary 1AA #N eased the$arehouse of & undera ease contract $ith a

period of fi!e years. *n> /une 1AA6# & fi ed

an un a$fu detainercase against N $ithouta prior demand for N to!acate the premises.;a< %an N contest hisejectment on the groundthat there $as no

prior demand for himto !acate the

premises:;b< -n case the

unicipa ,ria %ourtrenders judgment in fa!orof &# is the judgmentimmediate ye=ecutory:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< Jes. N can contesthis ejectment on theground that there$as no priordemand to !acatethe premises. ; Sec. 2of ule 70; Casilanvs.5o assi l0 SC )26&; +esaca vs.Cuevas. &2*

SC ) * <.

;b< Jes# because the judgment of the unicipa,ria %ourt against thedefendant N is

immediate y e=ecutoryupon motion un ess anappea has been

perfected# a supersedeas bond has been fi ed andthe periodic deposits ofcurrent renta s. -f any#as determined by the

judgment $i be made$ith the appe ate court.(Sec. 8 o! !ormer "#le 70$Sec. 19 o! ne& "#le 70'.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

;a< Jes# N can contesthis ejectment on theground that since hecontinued enjoying thething eased for fifteendays after thetermination of the easeon /anuary A# 1AA5 $iththe ac@uiescence of the

essor $ithout a noticeto the contrary# there$as an - P -)D )8

)&(). ( r . 1670. )i*il)ode'.

S ecial Civil Action"/ectment (199!)

-n an action forun a$fu detainer inthe unicipa ,ria%ourt ; ,%<# defendantN raised in his &ns$erthe defense that p aintiff& is not the rea o$nerof the house subject ofthe suit. N fi ed acounterc aim against &for the co ection of adebt of P> # p usaccrued interest ofP15# and attorneyGsfees of P2 # .1. -s NGs defense

tenab e: 032. Does the ,%ha!e jurisdiction o!erthe counterc aim: 02SUGGESTED ANSWER4 K1. o. NGs defense isnot tenab e if the actionis fi ed by a essoragainst a essee.?o$e!er# if the right of

possession of the p aintiff depends onhis o$nership then thedefense is tenab e.

2. ,he counterc aim is$ithin the jurisdiction ofthe unicipa ,ria%ourt $hich does note=ceed P1 # #

because the principademand is P> # #e=c usi!e of interest andattorneyGs fees. (Sec. 33%

.+. ?o$e!er#

ig. 129% asamended.'



inasmuch asaactionsof

forcib e entry andun a$fu detainer aresubject to

by: [email protected] Page 35 of 66 summary procedureand since thecounterc aim is on y

permissi!e# itcannot beentertained by the

unicipa %ourt.("e*ised "#le onS#mmar- +roced#re.'

S ecial Civil Action"&oreclosure (' )& borro$ed from theDe!e opment Ban ofthe Phi ippines ;DBP<the amount of P1mi ion secured by thetit ed and of his friendB $ho# ho$e!er# didnot assume persona

iabi ity for the oan. &defau ted and DBPfi ed an action for

judicia forec osure ofthe rea estatemortgage imp eading& and B asdefendants. -n duecourse# the courtrendered judgmentdirecting & to pay theoutstanding account ofP1.5 mi ion ;principa

p us interest< to the ban . o appea $asta en by & on theDecision $ithin thereg ementary period.& fai ed to pay the

judgment debt $ithinthe period specifiedin the decision.%onse@uent y# the courtordered the forec osuresa e of the mortgaged

and. -n thatforec osure sa e# the

and $as so d to theDBP for P1.2 mi ion.,he sa e $assubse@uent yconfirmed by thecourt# and theconfirmation of thesa e $as registered$ith the egistry ofDeeds on 5 /anuary2 2.

*n 1 /anuary 2 3#the ban fi ed an e="

parte motion $ith thecourt for the issuanceof a $rit of

possession to oust Bfrom the and. -t a sofi ed a deficiency

c aim for P> # .against & and B. thedeficiency c aim $asopposed by & and B.;a< eso !e the motionfor the issuance of a$rit of possession.;b< eso !e the

deficiency c aim ofthe ban . 6

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< -n judiciaforec osure by ban s

such as DBP# themortgagor or debtor$hose rea propertyhas been so d onforec osure has theright to redeem the

property so d $ithinone year after thesa e ;or registrationof the sa e<. ?o$e!er#the purchaser at theauction sa e has theright to obtain a $ritof possession after thefina ity of the orderconfirming the sa e.(Sec. 3 o! "#le 68$ Sec.47 o! " 8791. < e

eneral an ing /a& o!2000'. ,he motion for$rit of possession#ho$e!er# cannot befi ed e= parte. ,heremust be a notice ofhearing.

;b< ,he deficiency

c aim of the ban may be enforced against themortgage debtor &#

but it cannot beenforced against B#the o$ner of themortgaged property#$ho did not assume

persona iabi ity forthe oan.

S ecial Civil Action"Petition for Certiorari

(' '),he defendant $asdec ared in defau t in the

,% for his fai ure to fi ean ans$er to a comp aintfor a sum of money. *nthe basis of the

p aintiffHs e= parte presentation of e!idence# judgment by defau t $asrendered against thedefendant. ,he defau t

judgment $as ser!ed onthe defendant on *ctober1# 2 1. *n *ctober 1 #2 1# he fi es a !erifiedmotion to ift the



Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) order of defau t and to set aside the judgment. -n hismotion# the defendant a eged that# immediate y uponreceipt of the summon# he sa$ the p aintiff andconfronted him $ith his receipt e!idencing his

payment and that the p aintiff assured him that he$ou d instruct his a$yer to $ithdra$ the comp aint.,he tria court denied the defendantHs motion becauseit $as not accompanied by an affida!it of merit. ,he

defendant fi ed a specia ci!i action for certiorariunder u e 65 cha enging the denia order.&. -s certiorari under u e 65 the properremedy: 8hy: ;2 <B. Did the tria court abuse its discretion or act$ithout or in e=cess of its jurisdiction in denying thedefendantHs motion to ift the order of defau t

judgment: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&. ,he petition for certiorari under u e65 fi ed by the defendant is the proper remedy

because appea is not a p ain# speedy and ade@uateremedy in the ordinary course of a$. -n appea # thedefendant in defau t can on y @uestion the decisionin the ight of the e!idence of the p aintiff. ,hedefendant cannot in!o e the receipt to pro!e

payment of his ob igation to the p aintiff.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4&. 'nder ordinary circumstances# the proper remedy ofa party $rong y dec ared in defau t is either toappea from the judgment by defau t or fi e a petition forre ief from judgment. D-ao, +nc. v. Court of )$$eals,2*& SC ) 9& (&99*!

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

B. Jes# the tria court gra!e y abused its discretion or

acted $ithout or in e=cess of jurisdiction in denying thedefendantHs motion because it $as notaccompanied by a separate affida!it of merit. -n his!erified motion to ift the order of defau t and to setaside the judgment# the defendant a eged thatimmediate y upon the receipt of the summons# hesa$ the p aintiff and confronted him $ith his receiptsho$ing payment and that the p aintiff assured himthat he $ou d instruct his a$yer to $ithdra$ thecomp aint. (ince the good defense of the defendant$as a ready incorporated in the !erified motion# there$as not need for a separate affida!it of merit. DCa$uA v.Court of )$$eals, 2 SC ) '7& (&99'!; Mago v. Court of

)$$eals, 0 SC ) 600 (&999! .

S ecial Civil Action" uo arranto (' 1)& group of businessmen formed an association in%ebu %ity ca ing itse f %ars %. to distribute C se cars insaid city. -t did not incorporate itse f under the a$ nordid it ha!e any go!ernment permit or icense to conductits business as such. ,he (o icitor enera fi ed

before a ,% in ani a a !erified petition for @uo$arranto @uestioning and see ing to stop theoperations of %ars %o. ,he atter fi ed a motion todismiss the petition on the ground of improper !enue

by : [email protected] Page 36 of 66 c aiming that its main office and operations arein %ebu %ity and not in ani a.-s the contention of %ars %o. correct: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. &s e=press y pro!ided in the u es# $henthe (o icitor enera commences the actionfor @uo $arranto# it may be brought in a ,% inthe %ity of ani a# as in this case# in the %ourt of

&ppea s or in the (upreme %ourt. (Sec. 7 o! "#le 66'

S ecial Civil Actions" :andamus (' +)-n 1AA6# %ongress passed epub ic &ct o. >1>A#other$ise no$n as the oterGs egistration &ct of1AA6# pro!iding for computeriEation of e ections.Pursuant thereto# the %* ) )% appro!ed the

oterGs egistration and -dentification (ystem ; -(<Project. -t issued in!itations to pre"@ua ify and bid forthe project. &fter the pub ic bidding# +oto ina $asdec ared the $inning bidder $ith a bid of P6 bi ion and$as issued a otice of &$ard. But %* ) )%%hairman ener o objected to the a$ard on the

ground that under the &ppropriations &ct# the budget forthe %* ) )%Gs moderniEation is on y P1 bi ion.?e announced to the pub ic that the -( projecthas been set aside. ,$o %ommissioners sided $ith%hairman o# but the majority !oted to upho d thecontract.

ean$hi e# +oto ina fi ed $ith the ,% a petitionfor mandamus compe the %* ) )% to imp ement thecontract. ,he *ffice of the (o icitor enera ;*( <#representing %hairman o# opposed the petition onthe ground that mandamus does not ie to enforcecontractua ob igations. During the proceedings#the majority %ommissioners fi ed a manifestationthat %hairman o $as not authoriEed by the %* ) )%)n Banc to oppose the petition.

+s a $etition for an#a us an a$$ro$riate re e#to enforce contractual o3ligations (*F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the petition for mandamus is not an appropriateremedy because it is not a!ai ab e to enforce acontractua ob igation. andamus is directed on y toministeria acts# directing or commanding a person to doa ega duty (C M484C v. Gui?ano Pa#illa, ". .

%o. &*&992, Se$te 3er &/, 2002; Sec. , ule 6*!.

Summons(e!en years after the entry of judgment# the

p aintiff fi ed an action for its re!i!a . %an thedefendant successfu y oppose the re!i!a of the

judgment by contending that it is nu and !oid because the ,%" ani a did not ac@uire jurisdiction o!er his person: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he ,%" ani a shou d deny the motion because it isin !io ation of the ru e that no judgment ob igorsha be re@uired to appear before a court# for the

purpose of e=amination concerning his property and






Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) income# outside the pro!ince or city in $hichsuch ob igor resides. -n this case the judgmentob igor resides in Bu acan. ("#le 39% sec.36'.

Summons (1999)a< 8hat is the effect of absence of summons on

the judgment rendered in the case: ;2 < b< 8hen additiona defendant is imp eaded in

the action# is it necessary that summons beser!ed upon him: )=p ain. ;2 <

c< -s summons re@uired to be ser!ed upona defendant $ho $as substituted for thedeceased: )=p ain. ;2 <

d< & sued NN %orporation ;NN%<# a corporationorganiEed under Phi ippine a$s# for specific

performance $hen the atter fai ed to de i!er ,"shirts to the former as stipu ated in their contract ofsa e. (ummons $as ser!ed on thecorporationGs cashier and director. 8ou d youconsider ser!ice of summons on either officersufficient: )=p ain. ;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4a< ,he effect of the absence of summons on a

judgment $ou d ma e the judgment nu and!oid because the court $ou d not ha!e

jurisdiction o!er the person of the defendant# but ifthe defendant !o untari y appeared before the court#his appearance is e@ui!a ent to the ser!ice ofsummons. (Sec. 20% "#le 14'

b< Jes. (ummons must be ser!ed on an additionadefendant imp eaded in the action so thatthe court can ac@uire jurisdiction o!er him#

un ess he ma es a !o untary appearance.c< o. & defendant $ho $as substituted for the

deceased need not be ser!ed $ith summons because it is the court $hich orders him as the

ega representati!e of the deceased to appear andsubstitute the deceased. (Sec. 16 o! "#le 3.'

d< (ummons on a domestic corporation through itscashier and director are not !a id under the

present ru es. (Sec. 11% "#le 14' ,hey ha!e beenremo!ed from those $ho can be ser!ed $ithsummons for a domestic corporation. %ashier

$as substituted by treasurer. ;-d.<

Summons" Substituted Service (' ?)(ummons $as issued by the ,% and actua yrecei!ed on time by defendant from his $ife at theirresidence. ,he sheriff ear ier that day had de i!eredthe summons to her at said residence becausedefendant $as not home at the time. ,he sheriffsreturn or proof of ser!ice fi ed $ith the court in sumstates that the summons# $ith attached copy of thecomp aint# $as ser!ed on defendant at his residence thruhis $ife# a person of suitab e age and discretion thenresiding therein. Defendant mo!ed to dismiss on

by : [email protected] Page 37 of 66the ground that the court had no jurisdiction o!erhis

person as there $as no !a id ser!ice of summons onhim because the sheriffs return or proof of ser!icedoes not sho$ that the sheriff first made agenuine attempt to ser!e the summons ondefendant persona y before ser!ing it thru his$ife.

-s the motion to dismiss meritorious: 8hat isthe purpose of summons and by $hom may it beser!ed: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he motion to dismiss is not meritorious becausethe defendant actua y recei!ed the summons ontime from his $ife. (er!ice on the $ife $assufficient.(Boticano v. Chu, &'/ SC ) *'& D&9/7 !. -t is the duty ofthe court to oo into the sufficiency of the ser!ice.,he sheriffs neg igence in not stating in hisreturn that he first made a genuine effort to ser!ethe summons on the defendant# shou d not prejudice

the p aintiff. (Ma$a v. Court of )$$eals, 2&' SC ) '&71&992!. ,he purpose of the summons is toinform the defendant of the comp aint fi ed againsthim and to enab e the court to ac@uire jurisdictiono!er his person. -t maybe ser!ed by the sheriff or hisdeputy or any person authoriEed by the court.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4Jes. ,he motion to dismiss is meritorious.(ubstituted ser!ice cannot be effected un ess thesheriffs return sho$s that he made a genuine attempt toeffect persona ser!ice on the husband.

Summons" 5alidity of Service" ffects (' +)

,ina uerrero fi ed $ith fi ed the egiona ,ria%ourt of Binan# aguna# a comp aint for sum ofmoney amounting to P1 i ion against %ar os %orro.,he comp aint a eges# among others# that %ar os

borro$ed from ,ina the said amount as e!idenced by a promissory note signed by %ar os and his $ife# joint y and se!era y. %ar os $as ser!ed $ithsummons $hich $as recei!ed by inda# his secretary.?o$e!er# %ar os fai ed to fi e an ans$er to thecomp aint $ithin the 15"day reg ementary period.?ence# ,ina fi ed $ith the court a motion to dec are%ar os in defau t and to a o$ her to present e!idence e=

parte. +i!e days thereafter# %ar os fi ed his !erifiedans$er to the comp aint# denying under oath thegenuineness and due e=ecution of the promissorynote and contending that he has fu y paid his oan$ith interest at 12 per annum.

&. Ias the su ons vali#l serve# on Carlos(2.*F!

ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4,he summons $as not !a id y ser!ed on %ar os be"cause it $as ser!ed on his secretary and there@uirements for substituted ser!ice ha!e not beenfo o$ed# such as a sho$ing that efforts ha!e beene=erted to ser!e the same on %ar os and such attempt has



fai ed despite due di igence (Manotoc v. C), ". . %o. & 097', )ugust &6, 2006; )ngPing v. C),

". . %o. &269'7, -ul &*, &999!.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4






De ia sued ictor for persona injuries $hichshe a eged y sustained $hen she $as struc

by a car dri!en by ictor. ay the court recei!ein e!idence# o!er proper and time y objection by

De ia# a certified true copy of a judgment of ac@uittain a crimina prosecution charging ictor $ith hit"and"run dri!ing in connection $ith De iaHs injuries: 8hy:;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4






by: [email protected] Page 3A of 66 he fi ed his demurrer to e!idence $ithout ea!eof court. (Sec. 23 o! "#le 119'.

Actions" Commencement of an Action" 8oubleJeo ardy (' ?)(P*1 % % fi ed $ith the ,% in IueEon %ity; e,%"I%< a s$orn $ritten statement du ysubscribed by him# charging ;an actua resident of

%ebu %ity< $ith the offense of s ight physicainjuries a eged y inf icted on (P( ;an actua residentof IueEon %ity<. ,he /udge of the branch to $hich thecase $as raff ed thereupon issued an orderdec aring that the case sha be go!erned by the u e on(ummary Procedure in crimina cases. (oonthereafter# the /udge ordered the dismissa of the case forthe reason that it $as not commenced byinformation# as re@uired by said u e.

(ometime ater# based on the same facts gi!ing riseto the s ight physica injuries case# the %ityProsecutor fi ed $ith the same e,%"I% aninformation for attempted homicide against thesame . -n due time# before arraignment#

mo!ed to @uash the information on theground of doub e jeopardy and after due hearing#the /udge granted his motion. 8as the dismissaof the comp aint for s ight physica injuries

proper: 8as the grant of the motion to @uash theattempted homicide information correct: eason

;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# the dismissa of the comp aint for s ight physica injuries is proper because in etropo itan

ani a and in chartered cities# the case has to be commenced on y by information. (Sec. 11% "e*ised "#le on S#mmar- +roced#re'. o# the grant of the motion to @uash the attemptedhomicide information on the ground ofdoub e jeopardy $as not correct# because there $asno !a id prosecution for s ight physica injuries.

Actions" 8iscretionary Po2er of &iscal (1999)& fi ed $ith the *ffice of the +isca a %omp aintfor estafa against B. &fter the pre iminaryin!estigation# the +isca dismissed the %omp aintfor ac of merit. ay the +isca be compe ed bymandamus to fi e the case in court: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he pub ic prosecutor may not be compe ed by mandamus to fi e the case in court becausethe determination of probab e cause is $ithinthe discretion of the prosecutor. ,he remedy is anappea to the (ecretary of /ustice. (Sec. 4 "#le 112.'

Actions" n/unction (1999)8i injunction ie to restrain the commencement ofa crimina action: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&s a genera ru e# injunction $i not ie to restraina crimina prosecution e=ceptK




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) a<,o afford ade@uate protection to the

constitutiona rights of the accusedF b< 8hen necessary for the order y administration

of justice or to a!oid oppression ormu tip icity of actionsF

c< 8hen doub e jeopardy is c ear y apparentFd< 8here the charges are manifest y fa se

and moti!ated by the ust for !engeanceF

e< 8here there is c ear y no prima facie caseagainst the accused and a motion to @uashon thatground has been denied.(See cases cite# in o3erts, -r., vs. Court of )$$eals,2*' SC ) 07 D&996 an# Broc a v. 4nrile, &92

SC ) &/ D&990 .!

Arrest" arrantless Arrest" Preliminarynvestigation (' ?)

&N s$ind ed J in the amount of P1 # sometime inmid"2 3. *n the strength of the s$orn statement gi!en

by J persona y to (P*1 /uan amos

sometime in mid"2 4# and $ithout securing a$arrant# the po ice officer arrested &N. +orth$ith the po ice officer fi ed $ith the %ity Prosecutor of ani a acomp aint for estafa supported by JLs s$ornstatement and other documentary e!idence. &fter duein@uest# the prosecutor fi ed the re@uisite information$ith the ,%. o pre iminary in!estigation $asconducted either before or after the fi ing of theinformation and the accused at no time as ed forsuch an in!estigation. ?o$e!er# before arraignment#the accused mo!ed to @uash the information on theground that the prosecutor suffered from a $ant ofauthority to fi e the information because of his fai ure to

conduct a pre iminary in!estigation before fi ing theinformation# as re@uired by the u es of %ourt. -s the$arrant ess arrest of &N !a id: -s he entit ed to a

pre iminary in!estigation before the fi ing of theinformation: )=p ain. ;5 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he $arrant ess arrest is not !a id becausethe a eged offense has not just beencommitted. ,he crime $as a eged y committedone year before the arrest. (Sec. 5 (b' o! "#le 113'.

Jes# he is entit ed to a pre iminary

in!estigation because he $as not a$fu yarrested $ithout a $arrant (See Sec. 7 o! "#le112'. ?e can mo!e for a rein!estigation.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4?e is not entit ed to a pre iminary in!estigation

because the pena ty for estafa is the sum of P1 # doesnot e=ceed 4 years and 2 months. 'nder (ec. 1# second

par.# u e 112# a pre iminary in!estigation is notre@uired. ( o e: < e enal - is no s a ed in e >#es ion.'

Arrest" arrantless Arrests - Searc,es (1997)& $as i ed by B during a @uarre o!er a hostess in anightc ub. ,$o days after the incident# and upon

comp aint of the $ido$ of &# the po ice arrested B

( o *s. )o#r o! eals. 206 S)"138'.

113'.(Sec. 5%

"#le



by : [email protected] Page 4 of 66 $ithout a $arrant of arrest and searched hishouse $ithout a search $arrant.a< %an the gun used by B in shooting &# $hich

$as seiEed during the search of the houseof B# be admitted in e!idence:

b< -s the arrest of B ega :c< 'nder the circumstances# can B be con!icted of

homicide:SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< o. ,he gun seiEed during the search of thehouse of B $ithout a search $arrant is not admissib e ine!idence. (Secs. 2 and 3[2 % r . o! )ons i # ion'.

oreo!er# the search $as not an incident to aa$fu arrest of a person under (ec. 12 of u e

126.

;b< o. & $arrant ess arrest re@uires that the crime hasin fact just been committed and the po icearresting has persona no$ edge of facts that the

person to be arrested has committed it.?ere# the crime has not just been committed

since a period of t$o days had a ready apsed# and the po ice arresting has no such persona no$ edge because he $as not present $hen the incidenthappened.;c< Jes. ,he gun is not indispensab e inthe con!iction of & because the court mayre y on testimonia or other e!idence.

Arrest" arrantless Arrests - SeiDures (' )-n a buy"bust operation# the po ice operati!es arrested

the accused and seiEed from him a sachet of shabuand an un icensed firearm. ,he accused $as charged int$o -nformations# one for !io ation of the

Dangerous Drug &ctQ# as amended# and another fori ega possession of firearms.

,he accused fi ed an action for reco!ery of thefirearm in another court against the po iceofficers $ith an app ication for the issuance of

a $rit of rep e!in. ?e a eged in his %omp aintthat he $as a mi itary informer $ho had beenissued a $ritten authority to carry said firearm.,he po ice officers mo!ed to dismiss thecomp aint on the ground that the subjectfirearm $as in custodia egis. ,he court deniedthe motion and instead issued the $rit ofrep e!in.;a< 8as the seiEure of the firearm !a id:;b< 8as the denia of the motion to dismiss proper:6SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< Jes# the seiEure of the firearm $as !a id because it

$as seiEed in the course of a !a id arrest in a buy"bustoperation. (Sec. 12 and 13 o! "#le 126' & search$arrant $as not necessary. (Peo$le v. SalaAar, 266

SC ) 607 D&997 !.

;b< ,he denia of the motion to dismiss $asnot proper. ,he court had no authority to issue the$rit of rep e!in $hether the firearm $as incustodia egis




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) ornot. ,he motion to reco!er the firearm shou d befi ed in the court $here the crimina actionis pending.

Arrest" arrantless Arrests" *b/ection (' )+ $as arrested $ithout a $arrant by

po icemen $hi e he $as $a ing in a busystreet. &fter pre iminary in!estigation# he $as

charged $ith rape and the correspondinginformation $as fi ed in the ,%. *narraignment# he p eaded not gui ty. ,ria on themerits ensued. ,he court rendered judgmentcon!icting him. *n appea # + c aims thatthe judgment is !oid because he $as i ega yarrested. -f you $ere the (o icitor enera #counse for the Peop e of the Phi ippines# ho$$ou d you refute said c aim: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4&ny objection to the i ega ity of the arrest of theaccused $ithout a $arrant is deemed $ai!ed $hen he

p eaded not gui ty at the arraignment $ithout raising the

@uestion. , is too ate to comp ain about a$arrant ess arrest after tria is commenced andcomp eted and a judgment of con!iction renderedagainst the accused. (Peo$le v. Ca3iles, 2/' SC ) &99,

D&999 !

Bail (' ')D $as charged $ith murder# a capita offense. &fterarraignment# he app ied for bai . ,he triacourt ordered the prosecution to present itse!idence in fu on the ground that on y onthe basis of such presentation cou d itdetermine $hether the e!idence of DHs gui t $asstrong for purposes of bai . -s the ru ingcorrect: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the prosecution is on y re@uired to presentas much e!idence as is necessary to determine$hether the e!idence of DHs gui t is strong for

purposes of bai .("#le 114% sec. 8'.

Bail" A eal (199!)-n an information charging them of urder#

po icemen &# B and % $ere con!icted of ?omicide. &appea ed from the decision but B and % did not. Bstarted ser!ing his sentence but % escaped and is at

arge. -n the %ourt of &ppea s# & app ied for bai but $asdenied. +ina y# the %ourt of &ppea s rendered a decisionac@uitting & on the ground that the e!idence pointed tothe P& as the i ers of the !ictim.1. 8as the %ourt of &ppea Gs denia of

&Gs app ication for bai proper: 022. %an B and % be benefited by the decision of the

%ourt of &ppea s: 03SUGGESTED ANSWER41# Jes# the %ourt of &ppea s proper y denied &Gsapp ication for bai . ,he court had the discretion todo so. & though & $as con!icted of homicide on y#since he $as charged $ith a capita offense# on appea

by : [email protected] Page 41 of 66he cou d be con!icted of the capita offense.( 3osavs. Court of )$$eals, 266 SC ) 2/&.!ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

'nder %ircu ar o. 2"A2# & is entit ed to bai because he $as con!icted of homicide and hencethe e!idence of gui t of murder is not strong.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

2. B# $ho did not appea # can be benefited by the

decision of the %ourt of &ppea s $hich is fa!orab eand app icab e to him.

,he benefit $i a so app y to %e!en

if his appea is dismissed because of his escape.

Bail" A lication" 5enue (' ')-f an information $as fi ed in the ,%"

ani a charging D $ith homicide and he $as

arrested in IueEon %ity# in $hat court orcourts may he app y for bai : )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

D may app y for bai in the ,%" ani a$here the information $as fi ed or in the

,%"IueEon %ity $here he $as arrested# or ifno judge# thereof is a!ai ab e# $ith anymetropo itan tria judge# municipa tria judge ormunicipa circuit tria judge therein. ("#le 114% sec.17'.

Bail" &orms of Bail (1999)-n $hat forms may bai be gi!en: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Bai may be gi!en by a corporate surety# or througha property bond# cash deposit or recogniEance.

Bail" :atter of ig,t (1999)8hen the accused is entit ed as a matter of right to

bai # may the %ourt refuse to grant him bai on theground that there e=ists a high degree of probabi ity thathe $i abscond or escape: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

-f bai is a matter of right# it cannot be denied on theground that there e=ists a high degree of probabi itythat the accused $i abscond or escape. 8hatthe court can do is to increase the amount of

the bai . *ne of the guide ines that the judge mayuse in fi=ing a reasonab e amount of bai is the probabi ity of the accused appearing in tria .

Bail" :atter of ig,t vs. :atter of 8iscretion (1999)8hen is bai a matter of right and $hen is it amatter of discretion: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Ihen Bail is a atter of right@& persons in custody sha ;a< before or aftercon!iction by the metropo itan and municipa triacourts# and ;b< before con!iction by the ,% of anoffense not punishab e by death# rec usion perpetua

)riminal +roced#re.'

(Sec. 11 [a . "#le 122% "#leso!



or ife imprisonment# be admitted to bai as amatter of right# $ith sufficient sureties# or bere eased on recogniEance as prescribed by a$ or

u e 114. (Sec. 4% "#le 114% "#les o! )o#r % asamended b- )irc#lar o. 12=94.'


Remedial Law BarExamination Q & A (1997-2006 )

Ihen 3ail is a atter of#iscretion@'pon con!iction by the

,% of an offense not punishab e by death#rec usion perpetua or

ife imprisonment# onapp ication of theaccused. -f the pena tyof imprisonmente=ceeds si= years butnot more than 2years# bai sha bedenied upon a sho$ing

by the prosecution#$ith notice to theaccused# of thefo o$ing or othersimi ar circumstancesK

1. ,hat the accused isa recidi!ist# @uasi"re"cidi!ist orhabitua de in@uent#or has committedthe crimeaggra!ated by thecircumstance ofreiterationF

2. ,hat the accused isfound to ha!e

pre!ious y escapedfrom egaconfinement#e!aded sentence# orhas !io ated theconditions of his

bai $ithout !a id justificationF

3. ,hat the accusedcommitted theoffense $hi e on

probation# paro e# orunder conditiona

pardonF

4. ,hat thecircumstances of theaccused or his caseindicate the

probabi ity of f ightif re eased on bai For

5. ,hat there is undueris that during the

pendency of theappea # the accusedmay commitanother crime. ;(ec.

1# -d.<

Bail" :atter of ig,t vs. :atterof 8iscretion (' +)8hen is bai a matter ofright and $hen is it a matterof discretion: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Bai is a matter of right ;a< before or after con!iction by the inferior courtsF ;b< before con!iction by the

,% of an offense not punishab e by death#rec usion perpetua or ifeimprisonment.# $hen thee!idence of gui t is notstrong (Sec. 4% "#le 114%2000 "#les o! )riminal

+roced#re'.

Bai is discretionaryK 'poncon!iction by the ,% ofan offense not

punishab e by death#rec usion perpetua or ifeimprisonment (Sec. 5% "#le114% 2000 "#les o! )riminal

+roced#re'.

Bail" itness Posting Bail(1999)

ay the %ourt re@uire a$itness to post bai :)=p ain your ans$er. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes. ,he court may re@uirea $itness to post bai if heis a materia $itness and

bai is needed to secure hisappearance. ,he ru es

pro!ide that $hen the courtis satisfied# upon proof oroath# that a materia $itness$i not testify $henre@uired# it may# uponmotion of either party#order the $itness to post

bai in such sum as may be deemed proper. 'ponrefusa to post bai # thecourt sha commit him to

prison unti he comp iesor is ega y discharged afterhis testimony is ta en. (Sec.6% "#le 119'

Com laint vs. nformation(1999)Distinguish a %omp aintfrom -nformation. ;2 <



by : [email protected] ANSWER4

-n crimina procedure# a comp aint is a s$orn$rittenstatement charging a person $ith an offense#subscribed by the offended party# any peace officer or other peace officer charged $ith the enforcement of

the a$ !io ated.(Sec. 3% "#le 110%1985

+roced#re'$ $hi ean information$riting charginga person $ith anoffensesubscribed bythe prosecutorand fi ed $ith thecourt . (Sec. 4% d.'

8emurrer tovidence" Contract

of Carriage (' ?)&N# a a ati"

bound paying passenger ofPB'# a pub icuti ity bus# diedinstant y on boardthe bus on accountof the fata head$ounds hesustained as aresu t of thestrong impact ofthe co ision

bet$een the busand a dump tructhat happened$hi e the bus $assti tra!e ing on)D(& to$ards

a ati. ,heforegoing facts#among others# $eredu y estab ishedon e!idence"in"chief by the

p aintiff ,J# so e

heir of &N# in,JHs actionagainst the subjectcommon carrierfor breach ofcontract ofcarriage. &fter,J had restedhis case# thecommon carrierfi ed a demurrerto e!idence#contending that

p aintiffHs e!idenceis insufficient

because it did notsho$ ;1< thatdefendant $asneg igent and ;2<that such neg igence$as the pro=imatecause of the

co ision. (hou d thecourt grant or denydefendantGs demurrerto e!idence: eason

brief y. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he court shou dnot grant defendantGsdemurrer to e!idence

because the case is for breach of contract ofcarriage. Proof thatthe defendant $as

neg igent and thatsuch neg igence $asthe pro=imate causeof the co ision isnot re@uired.()rticles &&70 an#220&,Civil Co#e; (Men#oAav. Phil. )irlines, +nc.,90 Phil. / 6 D&9*2 ;

Batangas5rans$ortation Co. v.Cagui 3al, 22

SC )&7& : 96/ ;

)3eto v. P)8, &&* SC ) '/9 D&9/2 ; )3oitiA v. Court of )$$eals, &29 SC ) 9* D&9/' !.

8emurrer tovidence" 2 o 0eave

of Court (199!)+acing a charge of

urder# N fi ed a petition for bai .,he petition $asopposed by the

prosecution butafter hearing thecourt granted bai toN. *n the firstschedu ed hearingon the merits# the

prosecutionmanifested that it$as not adducingadditiona e!idenceand that it $asresting its case. Nfi ed a demurrer

to e!idence$ithout ea!e ofcourt but it $asdenied by the court.1. Did the courtha!e the discretionto deny thedemurrer toe!idence under

the circumstancesmentioned abo!e:;2 <2. -f the ans$er tothe preceding@uestion is in theaffirmati!e# can N

adduce e!idence in hisdefense after the deniaof his demurrer toe!idence: 013. 8ithout further proceeding and on theso e basis of thee!idence of the

prosecution# can the

court ega y con!ictN for urder: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER41. Jes. ,he %ourthad the discretion todeny the demurrer tothe e!idence# becausea though the








a< 8as the pro!isiona dismissa of the case proper:

b< eso !e the otion to Iuash.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< ,he pro!isiona dismissa of the case$as proper because the accused ga!e his e=pressconsent thereto and the offended party $asnotified. -t $as not necessary for the offended

party to gi!e her consent thereto. (Sec. 8 o! "#le117'.

;b< ,he motion to @uash the information shou d bedenied because# $hi e the pro!isiona dismissa hada ready become permanent# the prescripti!e periodfor fi ing the murder charge had not prescribed.,here $as no doub e jeopardy because the first case$as dismissed before the accused had p eaded to thecharge. (Sec. 7 o! "#le 117'.

8ouble Jeo ardy (' ')D $as charged $ith s ight physica injuries in the

,%. ?e p eaded not gui ty and $ent to tria . &fter the prosecution had presented its e!idence# the tria courtset the continuation of the hearing on another date. *nthe date schedu ed for hearing# the prosecutorfai ed to appear# $hereupon the court# on motion of D#dismissed the case. & fe$ minutes ater# the prosecutorarri!ed and opposed the dismissa of the case. ,hecourt reconsidered its order and directed D to

present his e!idence. Before the ne=t date of triacame# ho$e!er# D mo!ed that the ast order beset aside on the ground that the reinstatementof the case had p aced him t$ice in jeopardy.&cceding to this motion# the court again dismissedthe case. ,he prosecutor then fi ed an information inthe ,%# charging D $ith direct assau t based onthe same facts a eged in the information fors ight physica injuries but $ith the added a egationthat D inf icted the injuries out of resentment for$hat the comp ainant had done in the performance ofhis duties as chairman of the board of e ectioninspectors. D mo!ed to @uash the second information onthe ground that its fi ing had p aced him in doub e

jeopardy. ?o$ shou d DHs motion to @uash be reso !ed:;4 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

DHs motion to @uash shou d be granted on theground of doub e jeopardy because the first offensecharged is necessari y inc uded in the second offensecharged. D raculan v. onato, &'0 SC ) '2* (&9/*! .ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

DHs motion to @uash shou d be denied becausethe t$o dismissa s of the case against him $ereon his motion ;hence $ith his e=press consent< andhis right to a speedy tria $as not !io ated.

8ouble Jeo ardy" E grading" *riginal C,arges (' )+or the mu tip e stab $ounds sustained by the!ictim# oe $as charged $ith frustrated

homicide in the ,%. 'pon arraignment# he entered a p ea of gui ty to said crime. either the court nor the prosecution



by : [email protected] Page 44 of 66$as a$are that the !ictim had died t$o days ear ier onaccount of his stab $ounds. Because of his gui ty

p ea# oe $as con!icted of frustrated homicide andmeted the corresponding pena ty. 8henthe prosecution earned of the !ictimGs death# itfi ed $ithin fifteen ;15< days therefrom a motionto amend the information to upgrade thecharge from frustrated homicide to

consummated homicide. oe opposed themotion c aiming that the admission of theamended information $ou d p ace him in doub e

jeopardy. eso !e the motion $ith reasons. ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he amended information to consummatedhomicide from frustrated homicide does not p acethe accused in doub e jeopardy. &s pro!idedin the second paragraph of Sec. 7% "#le 117%2000

"#les o! )riminal +roced#re # the con!iction of theaccused sha not be a bar to another

prosecution for an offense $hich necessari yinc udes the offense charged in the former

comp aint or information $henK ;a< thegra!er offense de!e oped due to super!eningfacts arising from the same act or omissionconstituting the former chargeF or ;b< the factsconstituting the gra!er charge became no$n or$ere disco!ered on y after a p ea $as enteredin the former comp aint or information.?ere# $hen the p ea to frustrated homicide $asmade# neither the court nor the prosecution $asa$are that the !ictim had died t$o days ear ier on

account of his stab $ounds.

;tradition (' ?)P and (tate NN ha!e a subsisting )=tradition

,reaty. Pursuant thereto PGs (ecretary of /ustice;(*/< fi ed a Petition for )=tradition before the

,% a eging that /uan 9$an is the subject of anarrest $arrant du y issued by the proper criminacourt of (tate NN in connection $ith a crimina case forta= e!asion and fraud before his return to P as a

ba i bayan. Petitioner prays that /uan be e=traditedand de i!ered to the proper authorities of (tate NNfor tria # and that to pre!ent /uanGs f ight in theinterim# a $arrant for his immediate arrest be issued.Before the ,% cou d act on the petition fore=tradition# /uan fi ed before it an urgent motion# in sum

praying ;1< that (o/Gs app ication for an arrest$arrant be set for hearing and ;2< that /uan bea o$ed to post bai in the e!ent the court $ou d issue anarrest $arrant. (hou d the court grant or deny /uanGs

prayers: eason. ;5 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4'nder the )=tradition ,reaty and a$# theapp ication of the (ecretary of /ustice for a $arrant ofarrest need not be set for hearing# and /uan cannot bea o$ed to post bai if the court $ou d issue a $arrant ofarrest. ,he pro!isions in the u es of %ourt onarrest and bai are not basica y app icab e.("overn ent of the :nite# States of ) erica v.

Puruganan, /9 SC ) 62 D2002 !





nformation (' 1),he prosecution fi ed an information against /osefor s ight physica injuries a eging the actsconstituting the offense but $ithout anymorea eging that it $as committed after /oseHsun a$fu entry in the comp ainantHs abode.8as the information correct y prepared bythe prosecution: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he aggra!ating circumstance of un a$fuentry in the comp ainantHs abode has to bespecified in the informationF other$ise# it cannot

be considered as aggra!ating. (Sec. 8 o! "#le110% "e*ised "#les o! )riminal +roced#re'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

,he information prepared by the prosecutor isnot correct because the accused shou d ha!e

been charged $ith @ua ified trespass to d$e ing.

nformation" Amendment (' 1)&mando $as charged $ith frustrated

homicide. Before he entered his p ea and upon thead!ice of his counse # he manifested his$i ingness to admit ha!ing committed theoffense of serious physica injuries. ,he

prosecution then fi ed an amendedinformation for serious physica injuriesagainst &mando.8hat steps or action shou d the prosecution ta e sothat the amended information against &mando$hich do$ngrades the nature of the offense cou d

be !a id y made: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

-n order that the amended information $hich

do$ngrades the nature of the offense cou d be!a id y made# the prosecution shou d fi e a motionto as for ea!e of court $ith notice to theoffended party.(Sec.14 o! "#le 110% "e*ised "#les o! )riminal +roced#re'.,he ne$ ru e is for the protection of theinterest of the offended party and to pre!ent

possib e abuse by the prosecution.

nformation" Amendment" 8ouble Jeo ardy" Bail (' ')&. D and ) $ere charged $ith homicide in

one information. Before they cou d bearraigned# the prosecution mo!ed to amend the

information to e=c ude ) therefrom. %an thecourt grant the motion to amend: 8hy: ;2 <B. *n the facts abo!e stated# suppose the

prosecution# instead of fi ing a motion to amend#mo!ed to $ithdra$ the information a togetherand its motion $as granted. %an the prosecution re"fi e the information a though this time formurder: )=p ain ;3 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&. Jes# pro!ided notice is gi!en to theoffended party and the court states its reasons forgranting the same. ("#le 110% sec. 14'.

by : [email protected] Page 45 of 66B. Jes# the prosecution can re"fi e theinformation for murder in substitution of theinformation for homicide because no doub e jeopardyhas as yet attached. D"alveA v. Court of )$$eals, 2 7

SC ) 6/* (&99'! .

nformation" Amendment" Su ervening vents (1997)& $as accused of homicide for the i ing of

B. During the tria # the pub ic prosecutorrecei!ed a copy of the marriage certificate of &and B.;a< %an the pub ic prosecutor mo!e for theamendment of the information to charge & $ith thecrime of parricide:;b< (uppose instead of mo!ing for the amendmentof the information# the pub ic prosecutor

presented ine!idence the

marriage certificate

$ithout objection on the part of the defense#cou d &be con!icted of parricide:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< o. ,he -nformation cannot be amendedto change the offense charged from homicideto parricide. +irst y# the marriage is not asuper!ening fact arising from the actconstituting the charge of homicide. (Sec. 7[a o!

"#le 117'. (econd y# after p ea# amendments may be done on y as to matters of form. ,heamendment is substantia because it $i changethe nature of the offense. (Sec. &' of ule &&0;

ional#o us. acu cu . &0/ SC ) 7 6!.

;b< o. & can be con!icted on y of homicide notof parricide $hich is a gra!er offense. ,he

accused has the constitutiona rights of due process and to be informed of the nature andthe cause of the accusation against him. (Secs. 1%14 (1' and (2? r . . 1987 )ons i # ion'%

nformation" Bail (' )&fter the re@uisite proceedings# the Pro!inciaProsecutor fi ed an -nformation for homicide against N.,he atter# ho$e!er# time y fi ed a Petition for

e!ie$ of the eso ution of the Pro!inciaProsecutor $ith the (ecretary of /ustice $ho# in duetime# issued a eso ution re!ersing the reso ution of thePro!incia Prosecutor and directing him to

$ithdra$ the -nformation.

Before the Pro!incia Prosecutor cou d comp y$ith the directi!e of the (ecretary of /ustice#the court issued a $arrant of arrest against N.

,he Pub ic Prosecutor fi ed a otion to Iuash the8arrant of &rrest and to 8ithdra$ the -nformation#attaching to it the eso ution of the (ecretary of/ustice. ,he court denied the motion. ;6 <a< 8as there a ega basis for the court to deny the

motion: b< -f you $ere the counse for the accused# $hat



remedies# if any# $ou d you pursue: SUGGESTED ANSWER4




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) a.Jes# there is a ega basis for the court to deny themotion to @uash the $arrant of arrest and to$ithdra$ the information. ,he court is not bound bythe eso ution of the (ecretary of /ustice. (Cres$o v.

Mogul, &*& SC ) '62 D&9/7 !.

b. -f - $ere the counse for the accused# -$ou d surrender the accused and app y for bai

because the offense is mere y homicide# a non"capita offense. &t the pre"tria # - $ou d ma e astipu ation of facts $ith the prosecution $hich$ou d sho$ that no offense $as committed.

nformation" :otion to uas, (' )B% is charged $ith i ega possession of firearmsunder an -nformation signed by a Pro!inciaProsecutor. &fter arraignment but before pre"tria # B%found out that the Pro!incia Prosecutor had no authorityto sign and fi e the information as it $as the %ityProsecutor $ho has such authority. During the pre"

tria # B% mo!es that the case against him be

dismissed on the ground that the -nformation is defecti!e because the officer signing it ac ed the authority to doso. ,he Pro!incia Prosecutor opposes the motion on theground of estoppe as B% did not mo!e to @uash the-nformation before arraignment. -f you are counse for B%#$hat is your argument to refute the opposition of thePro!incia Prosecutor: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4- $ou d argue that since the Pro!incia Prosecutor had noauthority to fi e the information# the court did not ac@uire

jurisdiction o!er the person of the accused and o!erthe subject matter of the offensecharged.

D&999 !.?ence# this ground is not $ai!ed if not raised in amotion to @uash and cou d be raised at the pre"tria .

nformation" :otion to uas, (' )odo fo is charged $ith possession of un icensed

firearms in an -nformation fi ed in the ,%. -t $asa eged therein that odo fo $as in possession of t$oun icensed firearmsK a .45 ca iber and"a .32 ca iber.'nder epub ic &ct o. >2A4# possession of an

un icensed .45 ca iber gun is punishab e by prisionmayor in its minimum period and a fine ofP3 . . # $hi e possession of an un icensed .32ca iber gun is punishab e by prision correctiona in itsma=imum period and a fine of not ess thanP15# . .&s counse of the accused# you intend to fi e a motion to@uash the -nformation. 8hat ground or groundsshou d you in!o e: )=p ain. ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he ground for the motion to @uash is that more thanone offense is charged in the information. (Sec. 3[! %

"#le 117% 2000 "#les o! )riminal +roced#re' i e$ise# the

,% has no jurisdiction o!er the second offense of

(Sec. 8% "#le 117% "#les o!)o#r '.

(Sec.3%

(Cu#ia v. Court of )$$eals, 2/' SC ) &7



by : [email protected] Page 46 of 66 possession of an un icensed .32 ca iber gun# punishab e by prision correctiona in its ma=imum period and a fine of not ess than P15. . . -t isthe

,% that has e=c usi!e and origina jurisdiction o!er a offenses punishab e by imprisonment not e=ceeding si= years.(Sec. 2% ". . o. 7691% amending .+. lg. 129'

nformation" :otion to uas," 3rounds (199!)1. i!e t$o ;2< grounds to

@uash an -nformation.022. -f the -nformation is not accompanied by a

certification that a pre iminary in!estigationhas

been conducted. -s the -nformation !oid:03

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. ,$o grounds to @uash an -nformation areKa< ,hat the facts charged do not

constitute an offenseF and

b< ,hat the court trying the casehas no jurisdiction o!er theoffense charged or the person ofthe accused.

c< ,hat the officer $ho fi ed theinformation had no authority to dosoF

d< ,hat it does not conform substantia yto the prescribed formF

e< ,hat more than one offense ischarged e=cept in those cases in

$hich e=isting a$s prescribe a sing e punishment for !arious offensesF

f< ,hat the crimina action or iabi ity has been e=tinguishedF

g< ,hat it contains a!erments $hich# iftrue# $ou d constitute a egae=cuse or justificationF and

h< ,hat the accused has been pre!ious ycon!icted or in jeopardy of being con!icted#

or ac@uitted of the offense charged. "#le 117. "#les o! )riminal +roced#re.'

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

2. o. ,he certification $hich is pro!ided in (ec. 4#u e 112. u es of %rimina Procedure# is not

an indispensab e part of the information. (Peo$levs.

8a$ura, 2** SC ) /*.!

Judgment" Promulgation of Judgment (1997)N# the accused in a homicide case before the

,%. Dagupan %ay# $as persona ynotified of the promu gation of judgment inhis case set for 1 December 1AA6. *n said date.N $as not present as he had to attend to the tria ofanother crimina case against him in ,ar ac#,ar ac. ,he tria court denied the motion of thecounse of N to postpone the promu gation.;a< ?o$ sha the court promu gate the judgment inthe absence of the accused:;b< %an the tria court a so order the arrest of N:SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< -n the absence of the accused# the promu gationsha be made by recording the /udgment in the




by : [email protected] Page 47 of 66

Parties" Prosecution of *ffenses (' )Jour friend JJ# an orphan# 16 years o d# see s

judgment. 8 */0, March 22, &9*0!

(Melo v. Peo$le, ". . %o.

,o secure the proper and most e=peditious re ease ofariano from the ationa Penitentiary# his counse

shou d fi eK ;a< a petition for habeas corpus for thei ega confinement of ariano ; u e 1 2<# or ;b< amotion in the court $hich con!icted him# to nu ifythe e=ecution of his sentence or the order of hiscommitment on the ground that a super!eningde!e opment had occurred

despite the fina ity of the

crimina doc et and a copy thereof ser!ed upon theaccused or counse . (Sec. 6. ird ar.% "#le 120'

;b< o# the tria court cannot order the arrest of N if the judgment is one of ac@uitta and# in any e!ent# his fai ureto appear $as $ith justifiab e cause since he had toattend to another crimina case against him.

Jurisdiction" Com le; Crimes (' )-n comp e= crimes# ho$ is the jurisdiction of a courtdetermined: 4SUGGESTED ANSWER4-n a comp e= crime# jurisdiction o!er the $ho ecomp e= crime must be odged $ith the tria courtha!ing jurisdiction to impose the ma=imum and mostserious pena ty imposab e on an offense forming part ofthe comp e= crime. (Cu os v. "arcia, &60 SC ) 02

D&9// !.

Jurisdiction" &inality of a Judgment (' )ariano $as con!icted by the ,% for

raping ictoria and meted the pena ty of rec usion perpetua. 8hi e ser!ing sentence at the ationaPenitentiary# ariano and ictoria $ere married.

ariano fi ed a motion in said court for hisre ease from the penitentiary on his c aim thatunder epub ic &ct o. >353# his marriage to

ictoria e=tinguished the crimina action againsthim for rape# as $e as the pena ty imposed onhim. ?o$e!er# the court denied the motion on theground that it had ost jurisdiction o!er the caseafter its decision had become fina and e=ecutory.;7 <a) Is the filing of the ourt orre t! "#plain$SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he court can ne!er ose jurisdiction so ong as itsdecision has not yet been fu y imp emented andsatisfied. +ina ity of a judgment cannot operate todi!est a court of its jurisdiction. ,he court retains aninterest in seeing the proper e=ecution andimp ementation of its judgments# and to that e=tent# mayissue such orders necessary and appropriate for these

purposes. (4chegara v. Secretar of -ustice, ". . %o. & 20*, -anuar &9, &999!

b) %hat remedy&remedies should the ounsel of'ariano ta(e to se ure his proper and moste#peditious release from the ational *enitentiary!"#plain$

SUGGESTED ANSWER4




your ega ad!ice. (he te s you that OO#her unc e# subjected her to acts of asci!iousnessFthat $hen she to d her grandparents# they to d herto just eep @uiet and not to fi e charges againstOO# their son. +ee ing !ery much aggrie!ed# sheas s you ho$ her unc e OO can be made to ans$erfor his crime.a< 8hat $ou d your ad!ice be: )=p ain. ;3 <

b< (uppose the crime committed against JJ by her

unc e OO is rape# $itnessed by your mutuafriend NN. But this time# JJ $as pre!ai edupon by her grandparents not to fi e charges.NN as s you if she can initiate the comp aintagainst OO.8ou d your ans$er be the same: )=p ain.;2 <.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a<- $ou d ad!ise the minor# an orphan of 16 years ofage# to fi e the comp aint herse f independent y of hergrandparents# because she is not incompetent orincapab e to doing so upon grounds other than herminority. (Sec. 5% "#le 110% "#les o! )riminal +roced#re.'

;b<(ince rape is no$ c assified as a %rime &gainst

Persons under the &nti" ape a$ of 1AA7 (" 8353'% -

$ou d ad!ise NN to initiate the comp aint against OO.

Plea of 3uilty" to a 0esser *ffense (' ')D $as charged $ith theft of an artic e $orth

p15# . . 'pon being arraigned# he p eaded notgui ty to the offense charged. ,hereafter# before triacommenced# he as ed the court to a o$ him tochange his p ea of not gui ty to a p ea of gui t but on y toestafa in!o !ing P5# . . %an the court a o$ D tochange his p ea: 8hy: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because a p ea of gui ty to a esser offense may be a o$ed if the esser offense is necessari yinc uded in the offense charged. ("#le 116% sec. 2'.)stafa in!o !ing P5# . is not necessari yinc uded in theft of an artic e $orth P15# .

Pre/udicial uestion (1999)8hat is a prejudicia @uestion: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

& prejudicia @uestion is an issue in!o !ed in aci!i action $hich is simi ar or intimate yre ated to the issue raised in the criminaaction# the reso ution of $hich determines$hether or not the crimina action may proceed.(Sec. 5 o! "#le 111.'ANOT5ER ANSWER4

& prejudicia @uestion is one based on a factdistinct and separate from the crime but sointimate y connected $ith it that it determinesthe gui t or innocence of the accused.

Pre/udicial uestion (' )%N is charged $ith estafa in court for fai ure to remit to

sums of money co ected by him ;%N< for in payment for goods purchased from # by






Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) depositing the amounts in his ;%NHs< persona

ban account. %N fi es a motion to suspend proceedings pending reso ution of a ci!i case ear ierfi ed in court by %N against for accountingand damages in!o !ing the amounts subject of thecrimina case. &s the prosecutor in the crimina case#

brief y discuss your grounds in support of youropposition to the motion to suspend proceedings.;5 <.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&s the prosecutor# - $i argue that the motionto suspend is not in order for the fo o$ing reasonsK1. ,he ci!i case fi ed by %N against

for accounting and damages does notin!o !e an issue simi ar to or intimate yre ated to the issue of estafa raised in thecrimina action.

2. ,he reso ution of the issue in the ci!i case foraccounting $i not determine $hether or not thecrimina action for estafa may proceed.111% "#les o! )riminal +roced#re.'

Pre/udicial uestion" Sus ension of Criminal Action(1999)& a eged y so d to B a parce of and $hich & ater a soso d to N. B brought a ci!i action fornu ification of the second sa e and as ed that the sa emade by & in his fa!or be dec ared !a id. & theoriEedthat he ne!er so d the property to B and his

purported signatures appearing in the first deed ofsa e $ere forgeries. ,hereafter# an -nformation forestafa $as fi ed against & based on the same doub e sa ethat $as the subject of the ci!i action. & fi ed a L otionfor (uspension of &ctionL in the crimina case#contending that the reso ution of the issue in the ci!icase $ou d necessari y be determinati!e of his gui tor innocence. -s the suspension of the crimina action inorder: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes. ,he suspension of the crimina action is in order

because the defense of & in the ci!i action# that he ne!er so dthe property to B and that his purported signatures in the firstdeed of sa e $ere forgeries# is a prejudicia @uestion thereso ution of $hich is determinati!e of his gui t orinnocence. -f the first sa e is nu and !oid# there $ou d be nodoub e sa e and & $ou d be innocent of the offense ofestafa.( as v. asul, &00 SC ) &2*.!

Pre$%rial Agreement (' ?)ayor , $as charged of ma !ersation through

fa sification of officia documents. &ssisted by &tty. *Pas counse de parte during pre"tria # he signed together$ith *mbudsman Prosecutor , a L/oint (tipu ation of+acts and Documents#L $hich $as presented to the(andiganbayan. Before the court cou d issue a pre"triaorder but after some de ay caused by &tty. *P# he $assubstituted by &tty. I as defense counse . &tty. I forth$ithfi ed a motion to $ithdra$ the L/oint (tipu ation#L a eging thatit is prejudicia to the accused because it contains# inter

(Sec. 1 o! !ormer "#le 20$ Sec% 1 o! ne& "#le

("#le118%

(Sec. 5% "#le



by : [email protected] Page 4> of 66a ia# the statement that the LDefense admitted a thedocumentary e!idence of the Prosecution#L thus

ea!ing the accused itt e or no room to defendhimse f# and !io ating his rightagainst se f" incrimination. (hou d thecourt grant or deny I Gs motion: eason.;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he court shou d deny I Gs motion. -f inthe pre" tria agreement signed by the accusedand his counse # the accused admits thedocumentary e!idence of the prosecution# itdoes not !io ate his right against se f"incrimination. ?is a$yer cannot fi e amotion to $ithdra$. & pre"tria order is notneeded. (Ba as v. San#igan3a an, 9& SC )'&*(2002N!. ,he admission of such documentarye!idence is a o$ed by the ru e.(Sec. 2 of ule &&/; Peo$le v. <ernan#eA, 260

SC ) 2* D&996 !.

Pre$%rial" Criminal Case vs. Civil Case (1997)i!e three distinctions bet$een a pre"tria in a crimina case and a pre"tria in aci!i case.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,hree distinctions bet$een a pre"tria in acrimina case and a pre"tria in a ci!i case areas fo o$sK1. ,he pre"tria in a crimina caseis conducted on y

L$here the accused and counse agreeLSec. 1' K $hi e the pre"tria in a ci!icase is

mandatory.18'.

2. ,he pre"tria in a crimina case does not consider the possibi ity of a compromise# $hich is oneimportant aspect of the pre"tria in a ci!i case.(Sec. 1 o! !ormer "#le 20$ Sec. 2 o! ne& "#le 18'.

3. -n a crimina case# a pre"tria agreement isre@uired to be reduced to $riting and signed by theaccused and his counse (See$ "#le 118% Sec. 4' F$hi e in a ci!i case# the agreement may becontained in the pre"tria order. (Sec. 4 o! !ormer

"#le 20$ See 7 o! ne& "#le 78'.

Provisional 8ismissal (' ')-n a prosecution for robbery against D# the

prosecutor mo!ed for the postponement of the firstschedu ed hearing on the ground that he had ost hisrecords of the case. ,he court granted the motion

but# $hen the ne$ date of tria arri!ed# the prosecutor# a eging that he cou d not ocate his

$itnesses# mo!ed for the pro!isiona dismissa of thecase. -f DHs counse does not object# may the courtgrant the motion of the prosecutor: 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because a case cannot be pro!isiona ydismissed e=cept upon the e=press consent of theaccused and $ith notice to the offended party.("#le 117% sec. 8'.

emedies" 5oid Judgment (' ?)&N $as charged before the JJ ,% $ith theft of

je$e ry !a ued at P2 . # punishab e $ith




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) imprisonment of up to 1 years of prision mayorunder the e!ised Pena %ode. &fter tria # he$as con!icted of the offense charged#not$ithstanding that the materia facts du yestab ished during the tria sho$ed that theoffense committed $as estafa# punishab e byimprisonment of up to eight years of prisionmayor under the said %ode. o appea ha!ing been

ta en therefrom# said judgment of con!iction became fina . -s the judgment of con!iction !a id: -sthe said judgment re!ie$ab e thru a specia ci!iaction for certiorari: eason. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# the judgment of con!iction for theft upon aninformation for theft is !a id because the courthad jurisdiction to render judgment. ?o$e!er#the judgment $as gross y and b atant y erroneous.,he !ariance bet$een the e!idence and the

judgment of con!iction is substantia since thee!idence is one for estafa $hi e the judgment isone for theft. ,he e ements of the t$o crimes arenot the same. (8auro Santos v. Peo$le, &/& SC ) '/7! .*ne offense does not necessari y inc ude or isinc uded in the other. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 120'.

,he judgment of con!iction is re!ie$ab e bycertiorari e!en if no appea had been ta en# because the

judge committed a gra!e abuse of discretiontantamount to ac or e=cess of his jurisdiction incon!icting the accused of theft and in !io ating due

process and his right to be informed of the natureand the cause of the accusation against him# $hichma e the judgment !oid. 8ith the mista e incharging the proper offense# the judge shou d ha!edirected the fi ing of the proper information andthereafter dismissed the origina information. (Sec. 19 o!

"#le 119'.

Searc, arrant" :otion to uas, (' )Po ice operati!es of the 8estern Po ice District#Phi ippine ationa Po ice# app ied for a search$arrant in the ,% for the search of the house of/uan (antos and the seiEure of an undeterminedamount of shabu. ,he team arri!ed at the house of(antos but fai ed to find him there. -nstead# the teamfound oberto %o. ,he team conducted a search in thehouse of (antos in the presence of oberto %o and

barangay officia s and found ten ;1 < grams ofshabu. oberto %o $as charged in court $ith i ega

possession of ten grams of shabu. Before hisarraignment# oberto %o fi ed a motion to @uash the$arrant on the fo o$ing grounds ;a< it $as not theaccused named in the search $arrantF and ;b< the$arrant does not describe the artic e to be seiEed $ithsufficient particu arity. eso !e the motion $ithreasons. ;4 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he motion to @uash shou d be denied. ,he name of

the person in the search $arrant is not important. -t

is not e!en necessary that a particu ar person be






;c< ,he proper court is the (andiganbayan $hich has jurisdiction o!er crimes committed by a consu orhigher officia in the dip omatic ser!ice. (Sec.'(c!. P &606, as a en#e# 3 ). %o. 797*!.,he (andiganbayan is a nationa court.(%uneA v. San#igan3a an, &&& SC ) ' D&9/2 . -t hason y one !enue at present# $hich is in etro ani a#

unti &. o. 7A75# pro!iding for t$o other branchesin %ebu and in %agayan de *ro# is imp emented.A %&#" i$% A#'-%&'4

;b< ,he information may be fi ed either in %a ambaor in a ati %ity# not in ,agaytay %ity $here nooffense had as yet been committed#

;c< &ssuming that the (andiganbayan hasno jurisdiction# the proper !enue is the first

,% in $hich the charge is fi ed (Sec. 15(d'. "#le110'.

E3IDENCE

Admissibility (199!),he barangay captain reported to the po ice that N$as i ega y eeping in his house in the barangay an&rma ite 16 rif e. *n the strength of thatinformation# the po ice conducted a search of thehouse of N and indeed found said rif e. ,he po iceraiders seiEed the rif e and brought N to the po icestation. During the in!estigation# he !o untari ysigned a ($orn (tatement that he $as possessing saidrif e $ithout icense or authority to possess# and a8ai!er of ight to %ounse . During the tria of N for

i ega possession of firearm# the prosecutionsubmitted in e!idence the rif e. ($orn (tatement and8ai!er of ight to %ounse # indi!idua y ru e on theadmissibi ity in e!idence of theK1. if eF 022. ($orn (tatementF and 02 13. 8ai!er of ight to %ounse of N. 01SUGGESTED ANSWER41. ,he rif e is not admissib e in e!idence because it$as seiEed $ithout a proper search $arrant. &$arrant ess search is not justified. ,here $as time tosecure a search $arrant. (Peo le us. ncinada 3. . o.11+7' E *ctober '. 1997 and ot,er cases)

2. ,he s$orn statement is not admissib e in e!idence because it $as ta en $ithout informing him of hiscustodia rights and $ithout the assistance of counse$hich shou d be independent and competent and

preferab y of the choice of the accused. (Peo le us.JanuarioE '+7 SC A + !.)

3. ,he $ai!er of his right to counse is notadmissib e because it $as made $ithout theassistance of counse of his choice. (Peo le us.3ome E '7 SC A = .)

Admissibility (' ')





Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) before $hom they signed the statements $asa a$yer# he $as not functioning as a a$yer# nor canhe be considered as an independent counse . 8ai!erof the right to a a$yer must be done in $riting and inthe presence of independent counse . (Peo le v.:a,inayE ' SC A = 11999G" Peo le v. s irituE ' SC A

F1999G ).

Admissibility" Admission of 3uilt" e<uirements (' +)8hat are the re@uirements in order that anadmission of gui t of an accused during a custodiain!estigation be admitted in e!idence: ;2.5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. ,he admission must be !o untary.2. ,he admission must be in $riting.3. ,he admission must be made $ith the

assistance of competent# independent counse .4. ,he admission must be e=press (Peo$le v.

Prinsi$e, ". . %o. & */62, Ma 2, 2002!.5. -n case the accused $ai!es his rights to

si ence and to counse # such $ai!er must be

in $riting# e=ecuted $ith the assistanceof competent# independent counse .

Admissibility" 8ocument" =ot raised in t,e Pleading(' ?)-n a comp aint for a sum of money fi ed before the

,%# p aintiff did not mention or e!en just hint at anydemand for payment made on defendant beforecommencing suit. During the tria # p aintiff du yoffered )=h. L&L in e!idence for the stated purposeof pro!ing the ma ing of e=trajudicia demand ondefendant to pay P5 . # the subject of the suit.)=h. L&L $as a etter of demand for defendant

to pay said sum of money $ithin 1 days from receipt#addressed to and ser!ed on defendant some t$omonths before suit $as begun. 8ithout objectionfrom defendant# the court admitted )=h. L&L ine!idence. 8as the courtGs admission of )=h. L&L ine!idence erroneous or not: eason. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he courtGs admission of )=h. L&L in e!idence isnot erroneous. -t $as admitted in e!idence$ithout objection on the part of the defendant. -tshou d be treated as if it had been raised in the

p eadings. ,he comp aint may be amended toconform to the e!idence# but if it is not so

amended# it does not affect the resu t of the triaon this issue. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 10'.

Admissibility" lectronic vidence (' )a< (tate the ru e on the admissibi ity of an

e ectronic e!idence. b< 8hen is an e ectronic e!idence regarded as

being the e@ui!a ent of an origina documentunder theBest )!idence u e: 4

SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< 8hene!er a ru e of e!idence refers to the term$riting# document# record# instrument# memorandum or

any other form of $riting# such term sha be



by : [email protected] Page 51 of 66 deemed to inc ude an e ectronic document asdefined in these u es. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 3% "#les o!

lec ronic *idence e!!ec i*e #g#s 1% 2001'.

&n e ectronic document is admissib e in e!idence ifit comp ies $ith the ru es on admissibi ity

prescribed by the u es of %ourt and re ateda$s and is authenticated in the manner

prescribed by these u es. (Sec. 2 o! "#le 3% d.'.,he authenticity of any pri!ate e ectronicdocument must be pro!ed by e!idence that ithad been digita y signed and other appropriatesecurity measures ha!e been app ied. (Sec. 2 o! "#le5% d.'.

;b< &n e ectronic document sha be regarded as thee@ui!a ent of an origina document under theBest )!idence u e if it is a printout or outputreadab e by sight or other means# sho$n toref ect the data accurate y. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 4'

Admissibility" *b/ect or eal vidence (199?)&t the tria of &ce for !io ation of the DangerousDrugs &ct# the prosecution offers in e!idence a

photocopy of the mar ed P1 . bi s used in thebuy"bustQ operation. &ce objects to the introduction of

the photocopy on the ground that the Best)!idence u e prohibits the introduction ofsecondary e!idence in ieu of the origina .

a< -s the photocopy rea ;object< e!idenceor documentary e!idence:

b< -s the photocopy admissib e in e!idence:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< ,he photocopy of the mar ed bi s is rea;object< e!idence not documentary e!idence#

because the mar ed bi s are rea e!idence.

b< Jes# the photocopy is admissib e ine!idence# because the best e!idence ru e doesnot app y to object or rea e!idence.

Admissibility" *b/ections (1997)8hat are the t$o inds of objections: )=p ain each

brief y. i!en an e=amp e of each.SUGGESTED ANSWER4,$o inds of objections areK ;1< the e!idence being

presented is not re e!ant to the issueF and ;2< thee!idence is incompetent or e=c uded by the a$ or theru es# (Sec. 3% "#le 138'. &n e=amp e of the first is$hen the prosecution offers as e!idence the a egedoffer of an -nsurance company to pay for thedamages suffered by the !ictim in a homicide case.(See 1997 o. 14'.)=amp es of the second are e!idence obtainedin !io ation of the %onstitutiona prohibitionagainst unreasonab e searches and seiEures andconfessions and admissions in !io ation of therights of a person under custodia -n!estigation.ALTERNATI3E ANSWERS4







SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< ,he offer by & to pay thehospita iEation e=penses of B is notadmissib e in e!idence to pro!e his gui t in

both the ci!i and crimina cases. ("#le 130%Sec. 27% !o#r ar.'.

;b< o. -t is irre e!ant. ,he ob igation ofthe insurance company is based on thecontract of insurance and is not admissib e ine!idence against the accused because it $as notoffered by the accused but by the insurancecompany $hich is not his agent.

Admissibility" Private 8ocument (' )ay a pri!ate document be offered# and

admitted in e!idence both as documentarye!idence and as object e!idence: )=p ain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes# it can be considered as both documentaryand object e!idence. & pri!ate document may beoffered and admitted in e!idence both asdocumentary e!idence and as object e!idence.& document can a so be considered as anobject for purposes of the case. *bjects ase!idence are those addressed to thesenses of the court.Documentary e!idence consists of $ritings orany materia containing etters# $ords# numbers#figures# symbo s or other modes of $rittene=pressions# offered ns proof of their contents.

;Sec. 2% "#le 130% "#les

?ence# a pri!ate document may be presented

as object e!idence in order to Gestab ish certain physica e!idence or characteristics that are !isib e onthe paper and $ritings that comprise the document.

Admissibility" Proof of &iliation" Action ofPartition (' )

inda and spouses &rnu fo and egina %eres $ereco"o$ners of a parce of and. inda died intestateand $ithout any issue. ,en ;1 < persons headed by/oce yn# c aiming to be the co atera re ati!es of thedeceased inda# fi ed an action for partition $ith the

,% praying for the segregation of indaHs T share#submitting in support of their petition the baptismacertificates of se!en of the petitioners# a fami y bib e

be onging to inda in $hich the names of the petitioners ha!e been entered# a photocopy of the birth certificate of /oce yn# and a certification of the

oca ci!i registrar that its office had been comp ete yraEed by fire. ,he spouses %eres refused to partition on

the fo o$ing groundsK 1< the baptisma certificates ofthe parish priest are e!idence on y of theadministration of the sacrament of baptism and they donot pro!e fi iation of the a eged co atera re ati!es ofthe deceasedF 2< entry in the fami y bib e is hearsayF 3<the certification of the registrar on non"a!ai abi ity ofthe records of birth does not pro!e fi iationK 4< in

partition cases $here fi iation to the deceased is indispute# prior and separate judicia dec aration ofheirship in a sett ement of estate proceedings isnecessaryF and 5< there is need for pub ication as rea




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) property is in!o !ed. &s counse for /oce yn and herco"petitioners# argue against the objections ofthe spouses %eres so as to con!ince the courtto a o$ the partition. Discuss each of the fi!e ;5<arguments brief y but comp ete y. ;1 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4;1< ,he baptisma certificate can sho$ fi iation or

pro!e pedigree. -t is one of the other means a o$ed

under the u es of %ourt and specia a$s to sho$ pedigree. (5rini#a# v. Court of )$$eals, 2/9 SC ) &// D&99/ ; <eirs of +8gnacio Conti v. Court of )$$eals, 00 SC ) '* D&99/ !.

;2< )ntries in the fami y bib e may be recei!ed ase!idence of pedigree. (Sec. '0, ule & 0, ules of Court!.

;3< ,he certification by the ci!i registrar of thenon" a!ai abi ity of records is needed to

justify the presentation of secondary e!idence#$hich is the photocopy of the birth certificate of

/oce yn. (<eirs of +gnacio Conti v. Court of )$$eals, su$ra.!

;4< Dec aration of heirship in a sett ement proceeding is not necessary. -t can be made in theordinary action for partition $herein the heirs aree=ercising the right pertaining to the decedent#their predecessor"in" interest# to as for partitionas co"o$ners ;-d.<

;5<)!en if rea property is in!o !ed# no pub ication isnecessary# because $hat is sought is the meresegregation of indaHs share in the property. (Sec. 1 o!

"#le 69$ d.'

Admissibility" ules of vidence (1997)i!e the reasons under ying the adoption of the

fo o$ing ru es of e!idenceK;a< Dead an u e;b< Paro )!idence u e;c< Best )!idence u e;d< ,he ru e against the admission ofi ega y obtained e=trajudicia confession;e< ,he ru e against the admission of an offer ofcompromise in ci!i casesSUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he reasons behind the fo o$ing ru es are asfo o$sK ;a< +" + ' RU-" K if death hasc osed the ips of one party# the po icy of the a$ isto c ose the ips of the other. ("oni v. Courtof)$$eals, 8 77' '. Se$te 3er 2 , &9/6, &'' SC )222!. ,his is to pre!ent the temptation to perjury

because death has a ready sea ed the ips of the party.

;b< * R.- "/I+" " RU-" K -t is designed to gi!ecertainty to a transaction $hich has been reduced to$riting# because $ritten e!idence is much morecertain and accurate than that $hich rests on f eeting

memory on y. (,rancisco% "#les o! )o#r Aol. A % +ar . . 154'



by : [email protected] Page 53 of 66;c< "2 "/I+" " RU-" K ,his u e isadopted for the pre!ention of fraud and is dec ared to

be essentia to the pure administration of justice. (;oran% Aol. 5% . 12.' -f a party is in possession of such e!idence and $ithho ds it#the presumption natura y arises that the

better e!idence is $ithhe d forfraudu ent purposes. (,rancisco. "#les o! )o#r %

*ol. A . +ar % % 121%122'

;d< &n i ega y obtained e=trajudiciaconfession nu ifies the intrinsic !a idity ofthe confession and renders it unre iab e ase!idence of the truth. (;oran% *ol. 5% . 257' it isthe fruit of a poisonous tree.

;e< ,he reason for the ru e against theadmission of an offer of compromise in ci!icase as an admission of any iabi ity is that

parties are encouraged to enter intocompromises. %ourts shou d endea!orto persuade the itigants in a ci!i case toagree upon some fair compromise. ( r .2029% )i*il )ode'. During pre"tria # courtsshou d direct the parties to consider the

possibi ity of an amicab e sett ement. (Sec.1[a o! !ormer "#le 20: Sec. 2 [a o! ne& "#le 16'.

Best vidence ule (1997)8hen & oaned a sum of money to B. &typed a sing e copy of the promissory note#$hich they both signed & made t$o photo

;=ero=ed< copies of the promissory note# gi!ingone copy to B and retaining the other copy. &entrusted the type$ritten copy to his counsefor safe eeping. ,he copy $ith &Gs counse$as destroyed $hen the a$ office $as

burned.a< -n an action to co ect on the promissory

note# $hich is deemed to be the Lorigina Lcopy for the purpose of the LBest )!idence

u eL: b< %an the photocopies in the hands of the parties be considered Ldup icate origina copiesL:

c< &s counse for &# ho$ $i you pro!e the oangi!en to & and B:

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a<,he copy that $as signed and ost is theon y Lorigina L copy for purposes of the Best)!idence u e. (Sec. 4 [b o! "#le 130'.

;b< o# ,hey are not dup icate origina copies

because there are photocopies $hich $ere notsigned ; :a,ilum v. Court of A ealsE 17 SC A

=!' <# ,hey constitute secondary e!idence. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 130'.

;c< ,he oan gi!en by & to B may be pro!ed bysecondary e!idence through the =ero=ed copies of the

promissory note. ,he ru es pro!ide that $hen theorigina document is ost or destroyed# or cannot be

produced in court# the offerer# upon proof of itse=ecution or e=istence and the cause of itsuna!ai abi ity $ithout bad faith on his part# may

pro!e its contents by a copy# or by a recita of itscontents in some authentic document# or by the




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) testimony of $itnesses in the order stated. (Sec.5 o! "#le 130'.

Burden of Proof vs. Burden of vidence (' ?)Distinguish Burden of proof and burden ofe!idence.SUGGESTED ANSWER4Burden of proof is the duty of a party to presente!idence on the facts in issue necessary to estab ishhis c aim or defense by the amount of e!idencere@uired by a$. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 131'% $hi e burden ofe!idence is the duty of a party to go for$ard $ith thee!idence to o!erthro$ prima facie e!idenceestab ished against him. (Bautista v. SarmientoE 1 ! SC A

!7 F19! G).

C,aracter vidence (' ')D $as prosecuted for homicide for a eged y

beating up to death $ith an iron pipe.&. ay the prosecution introduce e!idence that

had a good reputation for peacefu ness and

non" !io ence: 8hy: ;2 <B. ay D introduce e!idence of specific !io entacts

by : 8hy: ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&. ,he prosecution may introduce e!idence ofthe good or e!en bad mora character of the !ictimif it tends to estab ish in any reasonab e degreethe probabi ity or improbabi ity of the offensecharged. ["#le 130% sec. 51 a (3' . -n this case# thee!idence is not re e!ant.

B. Jes# D may introduce e!idence of

specific !io ent acts by . )!idence that one did ordid not do a certain thing at one time is notadmissib e to pro!e that he did or did not do thesame or a simi ar thing at another timeF but itmay be recei!ed to pro!e a specific intent or

no$ edge# identity# p an# system# scheme# habit#custom or usage# and the i e. ("#le 130% sec.34'.

Confession" Affidavit of ecantation (199!)1. -f the accused on the $itness stand repeats

his ear ier uncounse ed e=trajudiciaconfession imp icating his co"accused in the

crime charged# is that testimony admissib ein e!idence against the atter: 03

2. 8hat is the probati!e !a ue of a$itnessG&ffida!it of ecantation: 02

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

1. Jes. ,he accused can testify by repeating hisear ier uncounse ed e=trajudicia confession#

because he can be subjected to cross"e=amination.

2. *n the probati!e !a ue of an affida!it ofrecantation# courts oo $ith disfa!or uponrecantations because they can easi y be secured from

$itnesses# usua y through intimidation or for amonetary consideration# ecanted testimony ise=ceeding y unre iab e. ,here is a $ays the probabi ity

(Sec.49%



by : [email protected] Page 54 of 66 that it $i be repudiated. (:olina vs. Peo le. ' 9SC A1 !.)

&acts" 0egislative &acts vs. Ad/udicative &acts (' ?)egis ati!e facts and adjudicati!e facts.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

egis ati!e facts refer to facts mentioned in a statuteor in an e=p anatory note# $hi e adjudicati!e factsare facts found in a court decision.

6earsay vidence (' ')omeo is sued for damages for injuries

suffered by the p aintiff in a !ehicu ar accident./u ieta# a $itness in court# testifies that omeo to dher ;/u ieta< that he ; omeo< heard &ntonio# a$itness to the accident# gi!e an e=cited accountof the accident immediate y after its occurrence.-s /u ietaHs testimony admissib e against omeoo!er proper and time y objection: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# /u ietaHs testimony is not admissib eagainst omeo# because $hi e the e=citedaccount of &ntonio# a $itness to theaccident# $as to d to omeo# it $as on y

omeo $ho to d /u ieta about it# $hich ma es ithearsay.

6earsay vidence vs. * inion vidence (' ?)?earsay e!idence and opinion e!idence.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

?earsay e!idence consists of testimony that is not based on persona no$ edge of the person testifying#(see Sec. 36% "#le 130'% $hi e opinion e!idence ise=pert e!idence based on the persona

no$ edge s i #e=perience or training of the person testifying

d.' and e!idence of an ordinary $itness onimited matters (Sec. 50% d.'.

6earsay" ;ce tion" 8ead :an Statute (' 1)a=imo fi ed an action against Pedro#the administrator of the estate of deceased /uan# forthe reco!ery of a car $hich is part of the atterHsestate. During the tria # a=imo presented $itness

ariano $ho testified that he $as present $hena=imo and /uan agreed that the atter $ou d

pay a renta of P2 # . for the use ofa=imoHs car for one month after $hich /uan

shou d immediate y return the car to a=imo.Pedro objected to the admission of arianoHstestimony.-f you $ere the judge# $ou d you sustainPedroHs objection: 8hy: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the testimony is admissib e in e!idence because$itness ariano $ho testified as to $hat a=imo and/uan# the deceased person agreed upon# is notdis@ua ified to testify on the agreement. ,hosedis@ua ified are parties or assignors of parties to acase# or persons in $hose beha f a case is prosecuted#against the administrator or /uanHs estate# upon a




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) c aim or demand against his estate as to any matterof fact occurring before /uanHs death. (Sec. 23 o!

"#le 130'

6earsay" ;ce tion" 8ying 8eclaration (199!)e@uisites of Dying Dec aration. 02 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he re@uisites for the admissibi ity of a dying

dec aration areK ;a< the dec aration is made by thedeceased under the consciousness of his impendingdeathF ;b< the deceased $as at the time competent as a$itnessF ;c< the dec aration concerns the cause andsurrounding circumstances of the dec arantGs deathFand ;d< the dec aration is offered in a ;crimina < case$herein the dec arantGs death is the subject of in@uiry.(People vs.Santos, 270 SCRA 650.)ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4,he dec aration of a dying person# made under theconsciousness of an impending death# may berecei!ed in any case $herein his death is the subject of-n@uiry# as e!idence of the cause and surrounding

circumstances of such death. (Sec. 37 o! "#le 13B.'

6earsay" ;ce tion" es 3estae" * inion of*rdinary itness (' )Dencio barged into the house of arce a# tied her to achair and robbed her of assorted pieces of je$e ry andmoney. Dencio then brought %andida# arce aGs maid#to a bedroom $here he raped her. arce a cou dhear %andida crying and p eadingK L?u$agU aa$a

a sa a inUL &fter raping %andida# Dencio f ed from thehouse $ith the oot. %andida then untied arce aand rushed to the po ice station about a i ometera$ay and to d Po ice *fficer oberto aa$a that

Dencio had barged into the house of arce a# tiedthe atter to a chair and robbed her of her je$e ry andmoney. %andida a so re ated to the po ice officerthat despite her p eas# Dencio had raped her. ,he

po iceman noticed that %andida $as hysterica andon the !erge of co apse. Dencio $as charged $ithrobbery $ith rape. During the tria # %andida can no

onger be ocated. ;> <

a! +f the $rosecution $resents Police fficer o3erto Maawa to testif on what Can#i#a ha# tol# hi , woul#such testi on of the $olice an 3e hearsa 4 $lain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he testimony of the po iceman is not hearsay. -t is part of the res gestae. -t is a so an independent yre e!ant statement. ,he po ice officer testified of hiso$n persona no$ edge# not to the truth of%andidaGs statement# i.e.# that she to d him# despiteher p eas# Dencio had raped her. (Peo$le v. "a##i,". .

%o. 7'06*, e3ruar 27,&9/9!

3! +f the $olice officer will testif that he notice# Can#i#ato 3e h sterical an# on the verge of colla$se, woul# suchtesti on 3e consi#ere# as o$inion, hence, ina# issi3le

4 $lain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# it cannot be considered as opinion# because he

$as testifying on $hat he actua y obser!ed. ,he ast paragraph of (ec. 5 # u e 13 # e!ised u es of




)!idence# e=press y pro!ides that a$itness may testify on his impressions ofthe emotion# beha!ior# condition orappearance of a person.

6earsay" ;ce tions (1999)a< Define hearsay e!idence: ;2 <

b< 8hat are the e=ceptions to the hearsay ru e:;2 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a. ?earsay e!idence may be defined ase!idence that consists of testimony not comingfrom persona no$ edge (Sec. 36% "#le 130%

"#les o! )o#r '. ?earsay testimony is thetestimony of a $itness as to $hat he has heardother persons say about the facts in issue.

b. ,he e=ceptions to the hearsay ru e areK dyingdec aration# dec aration against interest# actor dec aration about pedigree# fami y

reputation or tradition regarding pedigree#common reputation# part of the res ges ae #entries in the course of business# entries inofficia records# commercia ists and the i e#

earned treatises# and testimony or deposition at

a former proceeding. (37 o 47% "#le 13B% "#leso! )o#r '

6earsay" ;ce tions" 8ying 8eclaration (1999),he accused $as charged $ith robbery andhomicide. ,he !ictim suffered se!era stab

$ounds. -t appears that e e!en ;11< hours after thecrime# $hi e the !ictim $as being brought to thehospita in a jeep# $ith his brother and a po iceman ascompanions# the !ictim $as as ed certain@uestions $hich he ans$ered# pointing to theaccused as his assai ant. ?is ans$ers $ere put do$nin $riting# but since he $as a in a critica condition#his brother and the po iceman signed the statement.-s the statement admissib e as a dying dec aration:

)=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes. ,he statement is admissib e as a dyingdec aration if the !ictim subse@uent y died and hisans$ers $ere made under the consciousness ofimpending death (Sec. 37 o! "#le 130' . ,he fact thathe did not sign the statement point to the accused as hisassai ant# because he $as in critica condition# doesnot affect its admissibi ity as a dying dec aration. &dying dec aration need not be in $riting (Peo$le v.=iovicente, 2/6 SC ) &!

6earsay" na licable (' )N $as charged $ith robbery. *n the strength of a$arrant of arrest issued by the court# N $as arrested by

po ice operati!es. ,hey seiEed from his person ahandgun. & charge for i ega possession of firearm$as a so fi ed against him. -n a press conferenceca ed by the po ice# N admitted that he had robbed the!ictim of je$e ry !a ued at P5 # . .

,he robbery and i ega possession of firearm cases$ere tried joint y. ,he prosecution presented ine!idence a ne$spaper c ipping of the report to thereporter $ho $as present during the press conference




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) stating that N admitted the robbery. -t

i e$ise presented a certification of the P P+irearms and )=p osi!e *ffice attesting that theaccused had no icense to carry any firearm. ,hecertifying officer# ho$e!er# $as not presented as a$itness. Both pieces of e!idence $ere objected to bythe defense. ;6 <a< -s the ne$spaper c ipping admissib e in

e!idence against N: b< -s the certification of the P P +irearm and

)=p osi!e *ffice $ithout the certifyingofficertestifying on it admissib e in e!idence againstN:

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< Jes# the ne$spaper c ipping is admissib eine!idence against N. regard ess of the truth or fa sity of astatement# the hearsay ru e does not app y and thestatement may be sho$n $here the fact that it ismade is re e!ant. )!idence as to the ma ing of such

statement is not secondary but primary# for thestatement itse f may constitute a fact in issue or becircumstantia y re e!ant as to the e=istence of suchfact. ("otesco +nvest ent Cor$oration vs. Chatto, 2&0

SC ) &/ D&992 !

;b< Jes# the certification is admissib e ine!idence against N because a $ritten statement signed

by an officer ha!ing the custody of an officia record or by his deputy that after di igent search no record or entryof a specified tenor is found to e=ist in the records of hisoffice# accompanied by a certificate as abo!e pro!ided#is admissib e as e!idence that the records of his officecontain no such record or entry.(Sec. 28 o! "#le 132'.

Judicial =otice" vidence (' ))=p ain brief y $hether the ,% may# mo #

ro rio # ta e judicia notice ofK ;5 <&. 5he street na e of etha $heta ine

h #ro chlori#e is sha3u.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he ,% may mo # ro rio ta e judicia notice of thestreet name of methamphetamine hydroch oride isshabu# considering the chemica composition ofshabu. (Peo$le v. Macasling, "M, %o. 90 '2, Ma 27,

&99 !

2. r#inances a$$rove# 3 unici$alitiesun#er its territorial ?uris#iction;

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

-n the absence of statutory authority# the ,% maynot ta e judicia notice of ordinances appro!ed bymunicipa ities under their territoria jurisdiction#e=cept on appea from the municipa tria courts#$hich too judicia notice of the ordinance in@uestion. (:.S. v. Blanco, ". , %o. &2' *, %ove 3er 9,&9&7; :.S. v. <ernan#eA, ". . %o. 9699, )ugust 26,&9&*!

. oreign laws;SUGGESTED ANSWER4

(Sec. 46. "#le130'.

(Sec. 1 o! "#le



by : [email protected] Page 56 of 66,he ,% may not genera y ta e judicia notice of foreign a$s (+n re 4state of -ohnson, ". . %o.&2767,

%ove 3er &6, &9&/; lue er v. <i , ". . %o.26 6, March &7, &9 0!, $hich must be pro!ed i e

any other matter of fact (S -oe 8ieng v. S Guia,". . %o. '7&/, March &9, &9&0! e=cept in a fe$instances# the court in the e=ercise of its sound

judicia discretion# may ta e notice of foreigna$s $hen Phi ippine courts are e!ident yfami iar $ith them# such as the (panish %i!i%ode# $hich had ta en effect in the Phi ippines#and other a ied egis ation. (Par#o v. e$u3lic,". . %o. 822'/ -anuar 2 , &9*0; elga#o v. e$u3lic, ". .

%o. 8 2*'6, -anuar .2/, &9*0!

'. ules an# egulations issue# 3 >uasi ?u#icial 3o#ies i $le enting statutes;

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he ,% may ta e judicia notice ofu es and egu ations issued by

@uasi"judicia bodies imp ementingstatutes# because they are capab e ofun@uestionab e demonstration (Chatta al v.Collector of Custo s, ". . %o. &6 '7,

%ove 3er ,&920! # un ess the a$ itse fconsiders such ru es as an integra part of thestatute# in $hich case judicia notice becomesmandatory.

*. a$e a 3e co itte# even in

$u3lic $laces.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he ,% may ta e judicia notice of the fact that rapemay be committed e!en in pub ic p aces. ,he Lpub icsettingL of the rape is not an indication of consent.(Peo$le v. 5ongson, ". . %o. 9&26&, e3ruar &/, &99&!,he (upreme %ourt has ta en judicia notice of thefact that a man o!ercome by per!ersity and beast y

passion chooses neither the time# p ace# occasion nor!ictim. (Peo$le v, Barcelona, ". . %o. /2*/9, cto3er &,&990!

Judicial =otice" vidence" &oreign 0a2 (1997)a< i!e three instances $hen a Phi ippine court can

ta e judicia notice of a foreign a$. b< ?o$ do you pro!e a $ritten foreign a$:c< (uppose a foreign a$ $as p eaded as part of the

defense of defendant but no e!idence $as presented to pro!e the e=istence of said a$#$hat is the presumption to be ta en by the courtas to the $ordings of said a$L:

SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< ,he three instances $hen a Phi ippine court canta e judicia notice of a foreign a$ areK ;1< $hen thePhi ippine courts are e!ident y fami iar $ith theforeign a$ (;oran. Aol. 5% . 34% 1980 edi ion'$ ;2< $hentheforeign a$ refers to the a$ of nations129' and ;3< $hen it refers to a pub ished treatise#

periodica or pamph et on the subject of a$ ifthe court ta es judicia notice of the fact that the$riter thereof is recogniEed in his profession orca ing ase=pert on the subject





;b< & $ritten foreign a$ may be e!idenced by anofficia pub ication thereof or by a copy attested bythe officer ha!ing the ega custody of the record# or byhis deputy# and accompanied. -f the record is not ept inthe Phi ippines# $ith a certificate that such officerhas the custody# if the office in $hich the record is

ept is in a foreign country# the certificate may bemade by a secretary of the embassy or egation#

consu genera # consu # !ice"consu # or consu aragent or by any officer in the foreign ser!ice of thePhi ippines stationed in the foreign country in $hich therecord is ept# and authenticated by the sea of hisoffice (Sec. 2', ule & 2, Eala ea v. C), 22/

SC ) 2 !.

;c< ,he presumption is that the $ordings ofthe foreign a$ are the same as the oca a$.(%orthwest

rient )irlines v. Court of )$$eals, 2'& SC ) &92; Moran, =ol. 6. $age ', &9/0 e#ition; 8i v. Collector ofCusto s, 6 Phil. '72! . ,his is no$n as the

P *%)(('& P )(' P,-* .

:emorandum (199+)N states on direct e=amination that he once ne$the facts being as ed but he cannot reca themno$. 8hen handed a $ritten record of the facts hetestifies that the facts are correct y stated# butthat he has ne!er seen the $riting before.-s the $riting admissib e as pastreco ection recorded: )=p ain#SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# because for the $ritten record to be admissib eas past reco ection recorded. -t must ha!e been

$ritten or recorded by N or under his direction at thetime $hen the fact occurred# or immediate ythereafter# or at any other time $hen the fact $asfresh in his memory and he ne$ that the same $ascorrect y $ritten or recorded. (Sec. 16 o! "#le 132' But inthis case N has ne!er seen the $riting before.

*ffer of vidence (1997)& tria court cannot ta e into considerationin deciding a case an e!idence that has not

been Lforma y offeredL. 8hen are the fo o$ing pieces of e!idence forma y offered:;a< ,estimonia e!idence

;b< Documentary e!idence;c< *bject e!idenceSUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< ,estimonia e!idence is forma y offered atthe time the $itness is ca ed to testify. ("#le 132.Sec. 35% !irs ar.'.

;b< Documentary e!idence is forma y offeredafter the presentation of the testimonia e!idence.("#le 132% Sec. 35% second ar.'.

;c< ,he same is true $ith object e!idence. -t isa so offered after the presentation of the

testimonia e!idence.




*ffer of vidence" res inter alios acta (' )N and J $ere charged $ith murder. 'ponapp ication of the prosecution# J $asdischarged from the -nformation to be uti iEedas a state $itness. ,he prosecutor presented Jas $itness but forgot to state the purpose of his

testimony much ess offer it in e!idence. Jtestified that he and N conspired to i the !ictim

but it $as N $ho actua y shot the !ictim. ,hetestimony of J $as the on y materia e!idenceestab ishing the gui t of N. J $as thorough ycross" e=amined by the defense counse .&fter the prosecution rested its case# the defensefi ed a motion for demurrer to e!idence basedon the fo o$ing grounds.

;a< ,he testimony of J shou d be e=c uded because its purpose $as not initia y stated andit $as not forma y offered in e!idenceas re@uired by (ection 34# u e 132 ofthe e!ised u es of )!idenceF and;b<JHs testimony is not admissib e againstN pursuant to the ru e on res inter a iosactaQ.

u e on the motion for demurrer to e!idenceon theabo!e grounds. ;6 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he demurrer to the e!idence shou d bedenied becauseKa< ,he testimony of J shou d not be

e=c uded because the defense counse did notobject to his testimony despite the fact thatthe prosecutor forgot to state its purpose oroffer it in e!idence. oreo!er# the defensecounse thorough y cross" e=amined J andthus $ai!ed the objection.

b< ,he res in er alios ac a r#le does not app y because J testified in open court and $as

subjected to cross e=amination.*ffer of vidence" %estimonial - 8ocumentary (199?)8hat is the difference bet$een an offerof testimonia e!idence and an offer ofdocumentary e!idence:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

&n offer of testimonia e!idence is made at the timethe $itness is ca ed to testify# $hi e an offerof documentary e!idence is made after the

presentation of a partyHs testimonia e!idence. (Sec.35% "#le 132'.

* inion ule (199?)&t o anHs tria for possession and use of the

prohibited drug# no$n as shabuK# his gir friend9im# testified that on a particu ar day# he $ou d see

o an !ery prim and proper# a ert and sharp# but thatthree days after# he $ou d appear haggard# tired ando!er y ner!ous at the s ightest sound he $ou d hear.

o an objects to the admissibi ity of 9imHs testimonyon the ground that 9im mere y stated her opinion$ithout ha!ing been first @ua ified as e=pert $itness.(hou d you# as judge# e=c ude the testimony of9im:




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 )SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. ,he testimony of 9im shou d not bee=c uded. )!en though 9im is not an e=pert$itness# 9im may testify on her impressions of theemotion# beha!ior# condition or appearance of a

person. (Sec. 50% las ar.% "#le 130'.

Parol vidence ule (' 1)Pedro fi ed a comp aint against ucio for the reco!ery ofa sum of money based on a promissory notee=ecuted by ucio. -n his comp aint# Pedro a egedthat a though the promissory note says that it is

payab e $ithin 12 days# the truth is that the note is payab e immediate y after A days but that if Pedro is$i ing# he may# upon re@uest of ucio gi!e the atter upto 12 days to pay the note. During the hearing# Pedro

testified that the truth is that the agreement bet$een himand ucio is for the atter to pay immediate y after ninetydayHs time. & so# since the origina note $as $ith ucio andthe atter $ou d not surrender to Pedro the origina note $hich

ucio ept in a p ace about one dayHs trip from$here he recei!ed the notice to produce the note and in spiteof such notice to produce the same $ithin si= hours fromreceipt of such notice# ucio fai ed to do so. Pedro

presented a copy of the note $hich $as e=ecuted at

the same time as the origina and $ith identica contents.

a< *!er the objection of ucio# $i Pedro bea o$ed to testify as to the true agreement orcontents of the promissory note: 8hy: ;2 <

b< *!er the objection of ucio# can Pedro present acopy of the promissory note and ha!e it admittedas !a id e!idence in his fa!or: 8hy: ;3 <

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a< Jes# because Pedro has a eged in his comp aintthat the promissory note does not e=press the trueintent and agreement of the parties. ,his is ane=ception to the paro e!idence ru e. [Sec. 9(b' o!

"#le 130% "#les o! )o#r

b< Jes# the copy in the possession of Pedro is adup icate origina and $ith identica contents.

oreo!er# the fai ure of ucio to producethe origina of the note is e=cusab e because he $as not gi!enreasonab e notice# as re@uirement under the u es beforesecondary e!idence may be presented.(Sec. 6 o! "#le 130% "#les o! )o#r '

=ote>The pro !""or# $o%e !" &$ &'%!o$&()e *o'+ e$% &$* %heor!,!$&) or & 'op# %hereo- "ho+)* h& e (ee$ &%%&'he* %o%he 'o p)&!$%.(Sec. 7 of Rule 9, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure). I$"+'h & '&"e/ %he ,e$+!$e$e"" &$* *+e e0e'+%!o$ o- %he $o%e/ !-$o% *e$!e* +$*er o&%h/ o+)* (e *ee e* &* !%%e*.(Sec. 8 of Rule 9, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)

Pre onderance vs. Substantial vidence (' )Distinguish preponderance of e!idence fromsubstantia e!idence. 4SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o! "#le130 .

[Sec.4(b'



by : [email protected] Page 5> of66

P )P* D) & %) *+ ) -D) %) meansthat the e!idence as a $ho e adduced byone side is superior to that of the other. ,his isapp icab e in ci!i cases. (Sec. & of ule & ;

Munici$alit of Monca#a v. Ca?uigan, 2& Phil, &/' D&9&2 !.

('B(,& ,-& ) -D) %) is thatamount of re e!ant e!idence $hich areasonab e mind might accept as ade@uateto justify a conc usion. ,his is app icab ein case fi ed before administrati!e or @uasi"

judicia bodies. (Sec. 5 o! "#le 133'

Privilege Communication (199!)% is the chi d of the spouses ? and 8.? sued his $ife 8 for judicia dec aration ofnu ity of marriage under &rtic e 36 of the+ami y %ode. -n the tria # the fo o$ingtestified o!er the objection of 8K %# ? and D#a doctor of medicine $ho used to treat 8.

u e on 8Gs objections $hich are thefo o$ingK1. ? cannot testify against her because of theru e on marita pri!i egeF 012. % cannot testify against her because of thedoctrine on parenta pri!i egeF and 023. D cannot testify against her because of thedoctrine of pri!i eged communication

bet$een patient and physician. 02

SUGGESTED ANSWER41. ,he ru e of marita pri!i ege cannot be in!o ed in theannu ment case under u e 36 of the +ami y %ode

because it is a ci!i case fi ed by one against the other#(Sec. 22 % "#le 130. "#les o! )o#r .'

2. ,he doctrine of parenta pri!i ege cannoti e$ise be in!o ed by 8 as against the testimony

of %# their chi d. % may not be compe ed totestify but is free to testify against her. (Sec. 25.

"#le 130. "#les o! )o#r $ r . 215% ,amil- )ode.'

3. D# as a doctor $ho used to treat 8# isdis@ua ified to testify against 8 o!er herobjection as to any ad!ice or treatment gi!en byhim or any information $hich he may ha!eac@uired in his professiona capacity. (Sec. 24[c % "#le 130. "#les o! )o#r .'ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4-f the doctorGs testimony is pursuant to there@uirement of estab ishing the psycho ogicaincapacity of 8# and he is the e=pert ca ed upon totestify for the purpose# then it shou d be a o$ed.

( e$u3lic vs. Court of )$$eals an# Molina, 26S SC ) &9/.!

Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (19!9)*dy sued spouses %esar and Baby for a sum ofmoney and damages. &t the tria # *dy ca ed Baby as hisfirst $itness. Baby objected# joined by %esar# on theground that she may not be compe ed to testify againsther husband. *dy insisted and contended that after a #she $ou d just be @uestioned about a conferencethey had $ith the barangay captain# a




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) matter $hich is not confidentia in nature. ,hetria court ru ed in fa!or of *dy. 8as the ru ing

proper: 8i your ans$er be the same if thematters to be testified on $ere no$n to Baby orac@uired by her prior to her marriage to %esar:)=p ain.SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. 'nder the u es on )!idence# a $ife cannot be

e=amined for or against her husband $ithout hisconsent# e=cept in ci!i cases by one against the other# orin a crimina case for a crime committed by oneagainst the other. (ince the case $as fi ed by *dyagainst the spouses %esar and Baby# Baby cannot becompe ed to testify for or against %esar $ithout hisconsent. (8eAa a vs. o#rigueA, 2 SC ) &&66!.

,he ans$er $ou d be the same if the mattersto be testified on $ere no$n to Baby or ac@uired

by her prior to her marriage to %esar# becausethe marita dis@ua ification ru e may be in!o ed$ith respect to testimony on any fact. -t isimmateria $hether such matters $ere no$n toBaby before or after her marriage to %esar.

Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' )ida and omeo are ega y married.omeo is charged to court $ith the crime of

serious physica injuries committed against (e mo#son of ida# step" son of omeo. ida $itnessedthe inf iction of the injuries on (e mo by omeo.,he pub ic prosecutor ca ed ida to the $itnessstand and offered her testimony as aneye$itness. %ounse for omeo objected onthe ground of the marita dis@ua ification ru eunder the u es of %ourt.a< -s the objection !a id: ;3 <

b< 8i your ans$er be the same if idaHstestimony is offered in a ci!i case for reco!eryof persona

property fi ed by (e mo against omeo: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a< o. 8hi e neither the husband nor the $ifemay testify for or against the other $ithout theconsent of the affected spouse# one e=ception is if thetestimony of the spouse is in a crimina case fora crime committed by one against the other orthe atterHs direct descendants or ascendants. (Sec%22% "#le 130' . ,he case fa s under this e=ception

because (e ma is the direct descendant of the spouseide.

;b< o. ,he marita dis@ua ification ru e app ies thistime. ,he e=ception pro!ided by the ru es is in a ci!icase by one spouse against the other. ,he case herein!o !es a case by (e mo for the reco!ery of

persona property against idaHs spouse# omeo.

Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' ?)NJO# an a ien# $as crimina y charged of promoting and

faci itating chi d prostitution and other se=ua abusesunder ep. &ct o. 761 . ,he principa $itnessagainst him $as his +i ipina $ife# &B%. )ar ier# shehad comp ained that NJOGs hote $as

( r#ono v. a>uigan, 62

(Sec. 22% "#le



by : [email protected] Page 5A of 66 being used as a center for se= tourism andchi dtraffic ing. ,he defense counse for NJO objectedtothe testimony of &B% at the tria of the chi d

prostitution case and the introductionof the affida!its she e=ecuted against herhusband as a !io ation of espousa

confidentia ity and marita pri!i ege ru e.-t turned out that D)+# the minor daughterof &B% by her first husband $ho $as a+i ipino# $as mo ested by NJO ear ier.,hus# &B% had fi ed for ega separationfrom NJO since ast year.

ay the court admit the testimony andaffida!its of the $ife# &B%# against herhusband# NJO# in the crimina casein!o !ing chi d prostitution: eason. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4Jes. ,he court may admit the testimonyand affida!its of the $ife against her husband

in the crimina case $here it in!o !es chi d prostitution of the $ifeGs daughter. -t is notco!ered by the marita pri!i ege ru e. *nee=ception thereof is $here the crime iscommitted by one against the other or the

atterGs direct descendants or ascendants.130' . & crime by the husband against thedaughter is a crime against the $ife anddirect y attac s or !ita yimpairs the conjuga re ation.

SC ) 270 D&97* !.

Privilege Communication" :arital Privilege (' +)eticia $as estranged from her husband Pau for

more than a year due to his suspicion that she $asha!ing an affair $ith anue their neighbor. (he $astemporari y i!ing $ith her sister in Pasig %ity. +orun no$n reasons# the house of eticiaGs sister $as

burned# i ing the atter. eticia sur!i!ed. (he sa$ herhusband in the !icinity during the incident. ater he $as

charged $ith arson in an -nformation fi ed $ith theegiona ,ria %ourt# Pasig %ity. During the tria # the prosecutor ca ed eticia to the $itness stand andoffered her testimony to pro!e that her husbandcommitted arson. %an eticia testify o!er theobjection of her husband on the ground of marita

pri!i ege: ;5 <

ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4 o# eticia cannot testify o!er the objection of herhusband# not under marita pri!i ege $hich isinapp icab e and $hich can be $ai!ed# but she $ou d be

barred under (ec. 22 of u e 13 # $hich prohibits her

from testifying and $hich cannot be $ai!ed()lvareA v. a ireA, ". . %o. &' ' 9, cto3er &', 200*!.ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4Jes# eticia may testify o!er the objection of herhusband. ,he dis@ua ification of a $itness by reason ofmarriage under (ec. 22# u e 13 of the e!ised

u es of %ourt has its e=ceptions as $here the maritare ations are so strained that there is no moreharmony to be preser!ed. ,he acts of Pau eradicate amajor aspects of marita ife. *n the other hand# the(tate has an interest in punishing the gui ty and






to be uti iEed as a state $itness is to as theProsecutor to recommend that the accused be

made a state $itness.





-t is the Prosecutor $ho must recommend and mo!efor the acceptance of the accused as a state $itness.,he accused may a so app y under the8itness Protection Program.

SPECIAL PROCEEDINGSCancellation or Correction" ntries Civil egistry (' )?e en is the daughter of ) iEa# a +i ipina# and ,ony# a%hinese# $ho is married to another $oman i!ing in%hina. ?er birth certificate indicates that ?e en is the

egitimate chi d of ,ony and ) iEa and that she is a%hinese citiEen. ?e en $ants her birth certificatecorrected by changing her fi iation from L egitimateL toLi egitimateL and her citiEenship from L%hineseL toL+i ipinoL because her parents $ere not married.8hat petition shou d ?e en fi e and $hat procedurare@uirements must be obser!ed: )=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

& petition to change the record of birth by changing

the fi iation from L egitimateL to Li egitimateL and petitionerGs citiEenship from L%hineseL to L+i ipinoL because her parents $ere not married# doesnot in!o !e a simp e summary correction# $hichcou d other$ise be done under the authority of

.&. o. A 4>. & petition has to be fi ed in a proceeding under u e 1 > of the u es of %ourt#$hich has no$ been interpreted to be ad!ersaria innature. ( e$u3lic v. =alencia, ". . %o. 8 2&/&, March*, &9/6! Procedura re@uirements inc udeK ;a< fi ing a!erified petitionF ;b< naming as parties a persons$ho ha!e or c aim any interest $hich $ou d beaffectedF ;c< issuance of an order fi=ing the timeand p ace of hearingF ;d< gi!ing reasonab e notice tothe parties named in the petitionF and ;e< pub icationof the order once a $ee for three consecuti!e see sin a ne$spaper of genera circu ation. ("#le108% "#les o! )o#r '

sc,eat Proceedings (' ')(uppose the property of D $as dec ared escheatedon /u y 1# 1AA in escheat proceedings brought

by the (o icitor enera . o$# N# $ho c aims to be an heir of D# fi ed an action to reco!erthe escheated property. -s the action !iab e: 8hy:;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the action is not !iab e. ,he action to reco!erescheated property must be fi ed $ithin fi!e yearsfrom /u y 1# 1AA or be fore!er barred. ("#le 91% sec. 4'.

;tra$/udicial Settlement of state (' ) estor died intestate in 2 3# ea!ing no debts.?o$ may his estate be sett ed by his heirs $ho areof ega age and ha!e ega capacity: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4-f the decedent eft no $i and no debts# and theheirs are a of age# the parties may# $ithout securing

etters of administration# di!ide the estate among

themse !es by means of a pub ic instrument or by






2. o. ,he petition is not tenab e because the$arrant of arrest $as issued by a court $hich had/urisdiction to issue it (Sec. 4% "#le 102 "#les o! )o#r '

6abeas Cor us (' )8ido$ & and her t$o chi dren# both gir s# aged > and 12years o d# reside in &nge es %ity# Pampanga. &

ea!es her t$o daughters in their house at night

because she $or s in a brothe as a prostitute.ea iEing the danger to the mora s of these t$o gir s# B#

the father of the deceased husband of &# fi es a petition for habeas corpus against & for the custody ofthe gir s in the +ami y %ourt in &nge es %ity. -nsaid petition# B a eges that he is entit ed to thecustody of the t$o gir s because their mother is i!ing adisgracefu ife. ,he court issues the $rit of habeascorpus. 8hen & earns of the petition and the $rit#she brings her t$o chi dren to %ebu %ity. &t thee=pense of B the sheriff of the said +ami y %ourtgoes to %ebu %ity and ser!es the $rit on &. & fi es hercomment on the petition raising the fo o$ingdefensesK

a< ,he enforcement of the $rit of habeas corpus in%ebu %ity is i ega F and

b< B has no persona ity to institute the petition.6 eso !e the petition in the ight of the abo!edefensesof &. ;6 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4;a< ,he $rit of habeas corpus issued by the+ami y %ourt in &nge es %ity may not be ega yenforced in %ebu %ity# because the $rit is enforceab eon y $ithin the judicia region to $hich the +ami y%ourt be ongs# un i e the $rit granted by the(upreme %ourt or %ourt of &ppea s $hich isenforceab e any$here in the Phi ippines. (Sec. 20 of

ule on Custo# of Minors an# Irit of <a3eas Cor$us in elation to Custo# of Minors. ().M. %o. 0 0' 0' SC; see also Sec. ' of ule &02, ules of Court.!

;b< B# the father of the deceased husband of &# hasthe persona ity to institute the petition for habeas corpusof the t$o minor gir s# because thegrandparent has the right of custody as against themother & $ho is a prostitute. (Sec ioins 2 and 13% d.'

ntestate Proceedings (' ')N fi ed a c aim in the intestate proceedings of D.DHs administrator denied iabi ity and fi ed acounterc aim against N. NHs c aim $as disa o$ed.;1< Does the probate court sti ha!e

jurisdiction to a o$ the c aim of DHsadministrator by $ay of offset: 8hy: ;2 <;2< (uppose DHs administrator did not a egeany c aim against N by $ay of offset#can DHs administrator prosecute the c aim inan independent proceedingC $hyC ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

by : [email protected] Page 62 of 66;1< o# because since the c aim of N $as

disa o$ed# there is no amount against $hich tooffset the c aim of DHs administrator.

;2< Jes# DHs administrator can prosecute the c aimin an independent proceeding since the c aim of N$as disa o$ed. -f N had a !a id c aim andDHs administrator did not a ege any c aim

against N by $ay of offset# his fai ure to do so$ou d bar his c aim fore!er. ("#le 86% sec. 10'.

ntestate Proceedings" 8ebts of t,e state (' ')&# B and %# the on y heirs in DHs intestate

proceedings# submitted a project of partition to the partition# t$o ots $ere assigned to %# $hoimmediate y entered into the possession of the ots.,hereafter# % died and proceedings for the sett ement ofhis estate $ere fi ed in the ,%"IueEon %ity. DHsadministrator then fi ed a motion in the probate court; ,%" ani a<# praying that one of the ots assigned to %in the project of partition be turned o!er to him to satisfy

debts corresponding to %Hs portion. ,he motion$as opposed by the administrator of %Hs estate.?o$ shou d the ,%" ani a reso !e the motionof DHs administrator: )=p ain. ;3 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he motion of DHs administrator shou d be granted. ,heassignment of the t$o ots to % $as premature becausethe debts of the estate had not been fu y paid. D ule90, sec. &; e es v. Barreto atu, &9 SC ) /*(&967! .Judicial Settlement of state (' )(tate the ru e on !enue in judicia sett ement ofestate of deceased persons. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4-f the decedent is an inhabitant of the Phi ippines at thetime ofG his death# $hether a citiEen or an a ien# the!enue sha be in the ,% in the pro!ince in $hichhe resides at the time of his death# not in the p ace $herehe used to i!e. (-ao v. Court of )$$eals,". . %o. &2/ &', Ma 29, 2002!

-f he is an inhabitant# of a foreign country# the ,% ofany pro!ince or city in $hich he had estate sha be the!enue. ,he court first ta ing cogniEance of the casesha e=ercise jurisdiction to the e=c usion of a othercourts. 8hen the marriage is disso !ed by the death

of the husband or $ife# the community propertysha be in!entoried# administered and i@uidated#and the debts thereof paid# in the testate or intestate

proceedings of the deceased spouse. -f both spousesha!e died# the conjuga partnership sha be

i@uidated in the testate or intestate proceedings ofeither. (Sees. & an# 2, ule 7 , ules of Court!

Probate of 0ost ills (1999)8hat are the re@uisites in order that a ost

or destroyed 8i may be a o$ed: ;2 <







&Gs 8i $as a o$ed by the %ourt. o appea$as ta en from its a o$ance. ,hereafter# J#$ho $as interested in the estate of &#disco!ered that the 8i $as not genuine

because &Gs signature $as forged by N. &crimina action for forgery $as institutedagainst N. ay the due e=ecution of the8i be !a id y @uestioned in such crimina

action: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

a. -n order that a ost or destroyed $i may be a o$ed# the fo o$ing must be comp ied $ithK

1. the e=ecution and !a idity of thesame shou d be estab ishedF

2. the $i must ha!e been in e=istence atthe time of the death of the testator# orsho$n to ha!e been fraudu ent y oraccidenta y destroyed in the ifetimeof the testator $ithout his no$ edgeFand

3. its pro!isions are c ear y and

distinct y pro!ed by at east t$o credib e $itnesses.(Sec. 6% "#le 76 o! e "#les o! )o#r '

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

b. o. ,he a o$ance of the $i from $hichno appea $as ta en is conc usi!e as to its duee=ecution. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 75.' Due e=ecution inc udes afinding that the $i is genuine and not a forgery.&ccording y# the due e=ecution of the $icannot again be @uestioned in a subse@uent

proceeding# not e!en in a crimina action for forgeryof the $i .

Probate of ill (' )&# a resident of a o os# Bu acan# died ea!ing anestate ocated in ani a# $orth P2 # . . -n $hatcourt# ta ing into consideration the nature of

jurisdiction and of !enue# shou d the probate proceeding on the estate of & be instituted: ;4 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4,he probate proceeding on the estate of & shou d beinstituted in the unicipa ,ria %ourt of a o os#Bu acan $hich has jurisdiction# because the estate is!a ued at P2 # . # and is the court of proper!enue because & $as a resident of a o os at the

time of his death. (Sec. of BP &29 as a en#e# 3 )769&; Sec. & of ule 7 !.

Probate of ill (' )&fter u uGs death# her heirs brought her ast $i to a

a$yer to obtain their respecti!e shares in the estate. ,hea$yer prepared a deed of partition distributingu uGs estate in accordance $ith the terms of her $i . -s

the act of the a$yer correct: 8hy: ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o. o $i # sha pass either rea or persona estateun ess it is pro!ed and a o$ed in the proper court.(Sec. 1% "#le 75% "#les o! )o#r '

Probate of ill (' +)(ergio PunEa an# +i ipino# 5 years o d# married# andresiding at &ya a & abang i age# untin upa %ity# of



by : [email protected] Page 63 of 66sound and disposing mind# e=ecuted a ast $i andtestament in )ng ish# a anguage spo en and $ritten

by him proficient y. ?e disposed of hisestate

consisting of a parce of and in a ati %ityand cash deposit at the %ity Ban in the sumof P 3 i ion. ?e be@ueathed P 5 i ioneach to his 3 sons and P 15 i ion to his

$ife. ?e de!ised a piece of and $orthP1 i ion to (usan# his fa!orite daughter"in" a$. ?e named his best friend# %ancio

ida # as e=ecutor of the $i $ithout bond. +s Cancio =i#al, after learning of SergioKs#eath, o3lige# to file with the $ro$er court a

$etition of $ro3ate of the latterKs last will an#testa ent (2F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

%ancio ida is ob iged to fi e a petition for probate and for accepting or refusing thetrust $ithin the statutory period of 2days under (ec. 3# u e 75# u es of

%ourt.

Su$$osing the original co$ of the last will an#tes ta ent was lost, can Cancio co $el Susanto $ro #uce a co$ in her $ossession to 3esu3 itte# to the $ro3ate court. (2F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# %ancio can compe (usan to produce thecopy in her possession. & person ha!ingcustody of the $i is bound to de i!er thesame to the court of competent jurisdiction or

to the e=ecutor# as pro!ided in (ec. 2# u e 75#u es of %ourt.

Can the $ro3ate court a$$oint the wi#ow ase ecutor of the will (2F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# the probate court can appoint the $ido$as e=ecutor of the $i if the e=ecutor does not@ua ify# as $hen he is incompetent# refuses thetrust# or fai s to gi!e bond (Sec. 6% "#le 78% "#les o!)o#r '.

Can the wi#ow an# her chil#ren settlee tra?u#iciall a ong the selves the estate ofthe #ecease# (2F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the $ido$ and her chi dren cannot sett e the es" tatee=trajudicia y because of the e=istence of the 8i .

o $i sha pass either rea or persona estate un ess itis pro!ed and a o$ed in the proper court(Sec. 1% "#le 75% "#les o! )o#r '.

Can the wi#ow an# her chil#ren initiate a se$arate

$etition for $artition of the estate $en#ing the $ro3ate of the last will an# testa ent 3 the court(2F!SUGGESTED ANSWER4

o# the $ido$ and her chi dren cannot fi e aseparate petition for partition pending the probateof the $i . Partition is a mode of sett ement of theestate (Sec. 1% "#le 75% "#les o! )o#r '.

Probate of ill" :andatory =ature (' ')





8hat shou d the court do if# in the course ofintestate proceedings# a $i is found and it issubmitted for probate: )=p ain. ;2 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4-f a $i is found in the course of intestate

proceedings and it is submitted for probate# theintestate proceedings $i be suspended unti the $i is

probated. 'pon the probate of the $i # the

intestate proceedings $i be terminated. ("#le 82% sec. 1'.

Settlement of state (' 1),he ru es on specia proceedings ordinari y re@uirethat the estate of the deceased shou d be judicia yadministered thru an administrator or e=ecutor.8hat are the t$o e=ceptions to saidre@uirements: ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he t$o e=ceptions to the re@uirement areK;a<8here the decedent eft no $i and no debts and theheirs are a of age# or the minors are represented bytheir judicia or ega representati!es du y

authoriEed for the purpose# the parties may $ithoutsecuring etters of administration# di!ide the estateamong themse !es by means of pub ic instrumentfi ed in the office of the register of deeds# or shou d theydisagree# they may do so in an ordinary action of

partition. -f there is on y one heir# he may adjudicate tohimse f the entire estate by means of an affida!it fi ed inthe office of the register of deeds. ,he parties or the so eheir sha fi e simu taneous y abound $ith the register ofdeeds# in an amount e@ui!a ent to the !a ue of the

persona property as certified to under oath by the parties and conditioned upon the payment of any just c aim that may be fi ed ater. ,he fact of thee=trajudicia sett ement or administration sha be

pub ished in a ne$spaper of genera circu ation inthe pro!ince once a $ee for three consecuti!e$ee s. (Sec. 1 o! "#le 74% "#les o! )o#r '

;b< 8hene!er the gross !a ue of the estate of adeceased person# $hether he died testate or intestate#does not e=ceed ten thousand pesos# and that fact ismade to appear to the ,% ha!ing jurisdiction or theestate by the petition of an interested person andupon hearing# $hich sha be he d not ess than one ;1<month nor more than three ;3< months from the date ofthe ast pub ication of a notice $hich sha be pub ishedonce a $ee for three consecuti!e $ee s in a ne$spaperof genera circu ation in the pro!ince# and after suchother notice to interested persons as the court maydirect# the court may proceed summari y# $ithoutthe appointment of an e=ecutoror administrator# to sett e the estate. (Sec. 2 o!

"#le 74% "#les o! )o#r '

Settlement of state" Administrator (199!)&# c aiming to be an i egitimate chi d of the deceased D#instituted an -ntestate proceeding to sett e the estate

of the atter. ?e a so prayed that he be

by : [email protected] Page 64 of 66appointed administrator of said estate. (# thesur!i!ing spouse# opposed the petition and &Gsapp ication to be appointed the administrator on theground that he $as not the chi d of herdeceased husband D. ,he court# ho$e!er#appointed & as the administrator of said estate.(ubse@uent y# (# c aiming to be the so e heir ofD# e=ecuted an &ffida!it of &djudication#

adjudicating unto herse f the entire estate ofher deceased husband D. ( then so d the entireestate to N.8as the appointment of & as administrator

proper: 028as the action of ( in adjudicating the entire estate

of her ate husband to herse f ega : 03SUGGESTED ANSWER41. Jes# un ess it is sho$n that the court gra!e y"abused its discretion in appointing the i egitimatechi d as administrator# instead of the spouse. 8hi ethe spouse enjoys preference# it appears that thespouse has neg ected to app y for etters of

administration $ithin thirty ;3 < days from the death ofthe decedent. (Sec. 6, ule 7/, ules of Court;"as$a , -r. vs. Court of )$$eals. 2 / SC ) &6 .!ALTERNATI3E ANSWER4

(# the sur!i!ing spouse# shou d ha!e beenappointed administratri= of the estate# in as muchas she enjoys first preference in such appointmentunder the ru es.(Sec. 6(a' o! "#le 78% "#les o! )o#r .'

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

2. o. &n affida!it of se f"adjudication isa o$ed on y if the affiant is the so e heir of the.deceased. (Sec. 1% "#le 74% "#les o! )o#r '. -n this case#& a so c aims to be an heir. oreo!er# it is not

ega because there is a ready a pending juridica proceeding for the sett ement of theestate.

5enue" S ecial Proceedings (1997)i!e the proper !enue for the fo o$ing specia

proceedingsKa< & petition to dec are as escheated a parce of

and o$ned by a resident of the Phi ippines$ho died intestate and $ithout heirs or personsentit ed to the property.

b< & petition for the appointment of anadministrator o!er the and and bui dingeft by an &merican citiEen residing in

%a ifornia# $ho had been dec ared anincompetent by an &merican court.

c< & petition for the adoption of a minor residing inPampanga.

SUGGESTED ANSWER4

;a<,he !enue of the escheat proceedings of a parceof and in this case is the p ace $here thedeceased ast resided. (Sec. 1. "#le 91% "#les o! )o#r '.

;b< ,he !enue for the appointment of an



administrator o!er and and bui ding of an

&merican citiEen residing in %a ifornia#

dec ared -ncompetent






by : [email protected] Page 65 of 66composed of in!estigators from the *ffice of the(pecia Prosecutor and from the *ffice of theDeputy *mbudsman for the i itary to conduct a

joint in!estigation of the crimina case andthe administrati!e case. ,he team ofin!estigators recommended to the*mbudsman that & be pre!enti!e ysuspended for a period not e=ceeding si= months

on its finding that the e!idence of gui t isstrong. ,he *mbudsman issued the said orderas recommended by the in!estigators.

& mo!ed to reconsider the order on thefo o$ing groundsK ;a< the *ffice of the(pecia Prosecutor had e=c usi!e authorityto conduct a pre iminary in!estigationof the crimina caseF ;b< the order for his

pre!enti!e suspension $as premature becausehe had yet to fi e his ans$er to theadministrati!e comp aint and submitcounter!ai ing e!idenceF and ;c< he $as acareer e=ecuti!e ser!ice officer and underPresidentia Decree o. > 7 ;%i!i (er!ice

a$<# his pre!enti!e suspension sha befor a ma=imum period of three months.

eso !e $ith reasons the motion ofrespondent & . ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

,he motion shou d be denied for thefo o$ing reasonsK1. ,he *ffice of the (pecia Prosecutor

does not ha!e e=c usi!e authority to conduct a pre iminary in!estigation of the criminacase but it participated in the in!estigationtogether $ith the Deputy *mbudsman forthe i itary $ho can hand e cases ofci!i ians and is not imited to the mi itary.

2. ,he order of pre!enti!e suspension need not $aitfor the ans$er to the administrati!e comp aintand the submission of counter!ai ing e!idence.

; arcia *. ;o ica% .". o. 13903% Se ember 10%1999'

-n Aas>#eE case% .". o. 110801% ril 6% 1995 #the court ru ed that pre!enti!e suspension

pursuant to (ec. 24 of .&. o. 677 ;*mbudsman&ct of 1A>A<# sha continue unti termination of thecase but sha not e=ceed si= ;6< months# e=ceptin re ation to .&. o# 3 1A and P.D. o. > 7. &s acareer e=ecuti!e officer# his pre!enti!esuspension under the %i!i (er!ice a$ may on y

be for a ma=imum period of three months. ,he period of the suspension under the &nti" raft

a$ sha be the same pursuant to the e@ua protection c ause. ("arcia v. Mo?ica, ". . %o.& 90 , Se$te 3er &0, &999; 8a no v. San#igan3a an,". . %o. 8 6*/'/, Ma 2&, &9/*!

Congress" 0a2 ; ro riating Pro erty (' +)ay %ongress enact a a$ pro!iding that a 5#

s@uare meter ot# a part of the '(, compound in(ampa oc ani a# be e=propriated for theconstruction of a par in honor of former %ity ayor&rsenic acson: &s compensation to '(,# the %ity




Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006 ) ofani a sha de i!er its 5"hectare ot in (ta.osa# aguna origina y intended as a residentia

subdi!ision for the ani a %ity ?a emp oyees.)=p ain. ;5 <SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes# %ongress may enact a a$ e=propriating property pro!ided that it is for pub ic use and$ith just compensation. -n this case# the

construction of a par is for pub ic use (See Sena v. Manila ailroa# Co., ". . %o. &*9&*, Se$te 3er 7, &92&; e es v. %<), " %o.&'7*&&, March 2', 200 !. ,he p anned compensation#ho$e!er# is not ega y tenab e as the determination of

just compensation is a judicia function. ostatute#

by : [email protected] Page 66 of 66decree or e=ecuti!e order can mandate that thedetermination of just compensation by thee=ecuti!eor egis ati!e departments can pre!ai o!er thecourtGsfindings (4 $ort Processing Eone )uthorit v. ula ,". . %o. 8 *960 , )$ril 29,&9/7; Sees. * to / ule 67,&997

ules of Civil Proce#ure!. -n addition# compensation

must be paid in money (4ste3an v. norio, ).M. %o.00 ' &66 5C, -une 29, 200&!.

.

A 19" :andatory Sus ension (' 1)o!ernor Pedro ario of ,ar ac $as charged $ith indirect bribery before the (andiganbayan for accepting a car

in e=change of the a$ard of a series of contracts for medica supp ies. ,he (andiganbayan# after going

o!er the information# found the same to be !a id and ordered the suspension of ario. ,he atter contested thesuspension c aiming that under the a$ ;(ec. 13 of .&. 3 1A< his suspension is not automatic upon the fi ing ofthe information and his suspension under (ec. 13# .&. 3 1A is in conf ict $ith (ec. 5 of the Decentra iEation&ct of 1A67 ; .&. 51>5<. ,he (andi ganbayan o!erru ed arioHs contention stating that arioHs suspensionunder the circumstances is mandatory.-s the courtHs ru ing correct: 8hy:SUGGESTED ANSWER4

Jes. arioHs suspension is mandatory# a though not automatic# (Sec. 13 o! ". . o. 3019 in rela ion o Sec. 5 o! e Decen raliEa ion c o! 1967 (". . o. 5185'. -t is mandatory after the determination of the !a idity of theinformation in a pre" suspension hearing. DSegovia v. San#igan3a an, 2// SC ) 2/ (&9//! . ,he purpose ofsuspension is to pre!ent the accused pub ic officer from frustrating or hampering his prosecution byintimidating or inf uencing $itnesses or tampering $ith e!idence or from committing further acts ofma feasance $hi e in office.


