Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
LEGAL EDGE
Action in Rem Verso (ARV) is the action for recovery provided for
under art 22 ncc. The concept is not similar with solutio in debiti.
Both are actions for recovery for something lost without just cause.
In both, there is an obligation to return that what is unduly paid or
delivered to him. In both the basis of the obligation, the objective
is to prevent unjust enrichment. They differ in the following. As to
the source, in solution in debiti the source is quasi-contract, in ARV,
the source is the law. ARV cannot prosper if the obligation is based
on delict, quasi-delict, contract or quasi-contract. In solution in
debiti, there is mistake. IF the there is mistake, an action in rem
verso cannot prosper.
The law only grants civil personality on the conceived child ONLY
FOR THE PURPOSE BENEFICIAL TO HIM. The conceived child can
thus receive donations or become a beneficiary in an insurance
contract. But at the same time that civil personality is
PROVISIONAL only as it is required to comply with art. 41 of the
NCC.
Page 1 of 20
successional rights and the two persons are heirs of each other.
Otherwise, ROC applies. Read Art. 43 NCC.
Art. 26, Par. 2 FC. Republic vs Manalo Landmark Ruling Answer this
case. In case of a mixed marriage. Answer this if the question
refers to the filipino spouse who obtained the decree of absolute
divorce abroad. Regardless of whether the Filipino spouse or
foreigner spouse obtained the divorce decree, the said decree is
valid here in the Philippines. If obtained by the foreigner spouse,
Art. 26, Par.2 FC applies. If obtained jointly by the spouse, the case
of Median applies. If obtained by the filipino spouse, the case of
Manalo applies. Provided that the divorce decree is valid and the
decree allows the spouse to remarry. If both spouses are filipino
citizens, if any of them obtained a divorce abroad, the same is null
and void for being contrary to law and public policy. Rep vs
Orbecido, for purposes of citizenship, the reckoning point is their
citizenship is the time when the divorce decree is obtained, not at
the time of the celebration of their marriage.
Page 2 of 20
2nd marriage cannot be used as a defense in a criminal offense for
bigamy.
If it can be proven that the 2nd marriage is celebrated without a
marriage license, a charge for bigamy will not prosper. The second
marriage must be valid for a charge of bigamy to prosper.
Therefore, a marriage without a marriage license or authority of a
solemnizing officer is valid defense against bigamy.
Void Marriage. GR: Void marriage does not exist. The parties are
not spouses. Therefore, the nullity of marriage is a valid defense
against support.
Page 3 of 20
Cancellation or Correction in the Civil registry is not a proper
remedy in case of void marriage. The remedy is a petition for
declaration of absolute nullity of marriage. HOWEVER, if there is
no marriage that took place which can be declared void ab initio,
cancellation or correction in the civil registry is the proper remedy
eg. Marriage in jest, theatrical marriage or no marriage at all. Rep
vs. Olaibar, in this case, Olaibar never contracted a marriage only
his identity was used to contract marriage with a Korean national.
Morigo vs People, in this case, the parties only signed a marriage
contract without a solemnizing officer. In our law that is not a
marriage but only a private contract.
Art. 147 and 148 FC is not co-ownership. Just simply refer to them
as a property regime.
Page 4 of 20
to bigamy. The parties in the 2nd marriage are not in really spouses
in the eyes of the law.
Art 147 and 148 FC these are property regimes. Applicable in case
of void marriage except art. 40 FC. But if the ground is absence of
legal capacity the prop regime is art. 148. (Art 35, 37, 38, 35 par.
4 FC) Other void marriage, art 147 applies.
Art. 147 and 148 FC does not apply in case of same sex union as
it is not recognized by philippine laws.
Art 130 FC does not apply if at the time of the effectivity of the FC
the marriage is already terminated because one of the spouses has
already died. Otherwise, there will be impairment of rights. But if
the prop regime still subsists because the marriage still subsists at
the time of the effectivity of the FC, Art. 130 FC applies in the event
the marriage terminates.
Page 5 of 20
In Art. 155, the Family Home is not protected, it can be levied or
attached. The FH will lose its protection if the value exceeds
300k/200k and the reason for the increase is VOLUNTARY
IMPROVEMENT!. If the reason for the increase is involuntary
improvement, the Family home may be protected despite
exceeding the value set by law. Involuntary improvement is an
increase in value of the property without the voluntary action of
the owner.
If the birth cert of the child is not signed by the father, that bc is
not competent proof of filiation. However, so long as the father
participated in the preparation of the bc, his participation will take
the place of the signature. Hence, he is deemed to have voluntarily
acknowledged the child as his own.
Bartolome vs SSS. When the adopted child does not have blood
relations with the adopters and both adopters died during the
minority of the adopted child. Are the relatives of the adopters
bound to provide legal support to the adopted child? No. They are
Page 6 of 20
not related. The relations created by the decree of adoption is
merely personal between the adopter and the adopted child.
PROPERTY
Page 7 of 20
Communities Cagayan Inc. vs Nanol J. Del Castillo. Distinction
between the limited definition of a builder in good faith and
expanded definition of the such. Under the limited definition, a BGF
must have a claim of ownership. He believe himself as the owner
of the land with sufficient basis. The builder must believe that he
is the owner of the land at the time of building by means of a mode
of acquisition but he is not aware that there is defect in his title.
So if the builder was aware that he is not the owner at the time of
building he is a builder in bad faith. However, in the expanded
definition, if the builder is aware that he is not the owner of the
land but the owner expressly allows the building or construction
the builder is in good faith.
If both builder and owner acted in bad faith. That is not the
expanded definition but the result is the same. In expanded
definition, the owner must give his EXPRESS CONSENT!
Padilla Jr. vs Maliksi. The one who gave permission for the builders
to construct was not the owner of the land. SC said the builder is
in bad faith. The fact that the person who gave the consent to build
is not the owner of the land should have placed the builders on
guard.
Page 8 of 20
Aluvium. The water level must be more or less maintained. The
deposit must be by reason of the movement of the water. So if the
water level merely receded, that is not alluvium but only a dried
up river bed.
It is not necessary that the positive act may be in the form of a law
as it may come from the executive.
Page 9 of 20
Co-ownership. When a co-owner allows another person to build in
the co-owned property, the same is an alteration of co-ownership.
Hence, the consent of one co-owner is not sufficient to allow the
person to build in the co-owned property.
In the sale of the ideal shares of the other co-owner, art. 493
applies. He is exercising a case of absolute ownership with respect
to his ideal share. He cannot also be compelled to sell his ideal
share.
Repudiation of Co-ownership.
The act of the agent is the act of the principal. When an agent sells
the property of a principal the latter can no longer recover the
property from the buyer because the doctrine of irrevindicability
does not apply when there is a valid sale despite the presence of
abuse of confidence.
Page 10 of 20
Cruz vs Pandacan. A basketball court is not a nuisance per se which
can be subjected to summary abatement. There must be a judicial
termination that it is indeed a nuisance. The same rule applies even
when the abatement is in an ordinance.
Legitime. Acts of the testator that may validly affect the legitime.
Probate.
GR: Probate court cannot pass upon an issue regarding intrinsic
validity of the will.
XPN:
1. All the heirs agreed
2.Testamentary provision is patently invalid on the face of the will.
3. When practical consideration dictates that the probate court
pass upon that intrinsic issue otherwise the conduct of the probate
proceedings becomes a useless ceremony. eg. Will opposed
because the same is a donation inter vivos.
4. Preterition.
Page 11 of 20
Three Lines of Transmission
The reservatario inherits as a legal heir not from the reservist but
from the propositus.
The reservista can sell the property subject of the reserve troncal.
The transferee becomes absolute owner of the property if he is a
innocent purchaser for value or transferee in good faith.
Page 12 of 20
A substitution becomes fideicommissary substitution:
1. When the substitution is to be called a fideicommissary
substitution.
2. When it is provided that the fiduciary heir is expressly obligated
to preserve and transmit the property to the fideicommisary.
Limitations:
Barrier Rule Art 992 NCC. The illegitimate child is barred from
inheriting from the legitimate parent.
a. Up to 5th degree
b. Proximity Rule applies
c. No representation
d. FB and HB share
Page 13 of 20
e. Barrier Rule
Natural Obligations.
Art. 1956 Interest shall not be due unless it is in writing. Two kinds
of interest 1. Monetary and 2. Compensatory (a kind of penalty).
Art. 1956 applicable only to monetary interest.
If the debtor did all in his power to comply for the fulfillment of the
condition, the doctrine also applies.
Page 14 of 20
present. In an option what is lacking is consideration. An Option is
a contract in itself. It is a preparatory contract. The consideration
may be something of value (money, prop or service). An Option
contract is an onerous contract. If an option is supported by a
consideration of its own, then it becomes a valid contract. If the
option is w/o consideration, it is not a contract. It is not binding
and the offeror may withdraw it at anytime but he must withdraw
it prior to its acceptance.
Page 15 of 20
by law is a mere notice to the debtor. In CS the consent of the
debtor is necessary because CS is a new contract involving three
persons, the creditor, the new creditor and the debtor. W/o the
consent of the debtor there is no CS.
Page 16 of 20
The principle of constructive notice is not applicable in Art. 1381
because the provision is a remedy of last resort.
Page 17 of 20
also no long insane and ratified the contract, the same is now
VALID.
SALE
Nemo Dat Quod Non habet. If the seller is not the owner of the
thing sold, it cannot transfer title to the buyer. XPN innocent
purchaser for value.
Page 18 of 20
Double Sale. Requisites. Important! Both of the sale must be a
valid sale. Sale of a parcel of land to a foreigner void even if the
latter used a common law wife as a dummy.
Torts
Page 19 of 20
possession of the immovable and the debtor cannot compel the
return of the immovable.
Page 20 of 20