Posted by: Elmer Brabante | February 12, 2010

2005 Bar Exams Questions in Remedial Law


2005 BAR EXAMS QUESTIONS IN REMEDIAL LAW

– I –

a) Under Article 1144 of the New Civil Code, an action upon a judgment must be brought within 10 years from the time the right of action accrues. Is this provision applicable to an action filed in the Philippines to enforce a foreign judgment? Explain.

b) May the aggrieved party file a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure instead of filing a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 thereof for the nullification of a decision of the Court of Appeals in the exercise either of its original or appellate jurisdiction? Explain.

c) May a private document be offered and admitted in evidence both as documentary evidence and as object evidence? Explain.

d) Distinguish a derivative suit from a class suit.

e) When may the trial court order that the testimony of a child be taken by live-link television? Explain. (10%)

– II –

(1.) While Marietta was in her place of work in Makati City, her estranged husband Carlo barged into her house in Parañaque City, abducted their six-year old son, Percival, and brought the child to his hometown in Baguio City. Despite Marietta’s pleas, Carlo refused to return their child. Marietta, through counsel, filed a petition for habeas corpus against Carlo in the Court of Appeals in Manila to compel him to produce their son before the court and for her to regain custody. She alleged in the petition that despite her efforts, she could no longer locate her son.

In his comment, Carlo alleged that the petition was erroneously filed in the Court of Appeals as the same should have been filed in the Family Court in Baguio City which, under Republic Act No. 8369, has exclusive jurisdiction over the petition. Marietta replied that under Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, as amended, the petition may be filed in the Court of Appeals and if granted, the writ of habeas corpus shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.

Whose contention is correct? Explain. (5%)

(2.) Under Republic Act No. 8353, one may be charged with and found guilty of qualified rape if he knew on or before the commission of the crime that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim.

Under Section 17(a) of Republic Act No. 8504 the court may compel the accused to submit himself to a blood test where blood samples would be extracted from his veins to determine whether he has HIV.

a) Are the rights of the accused to be presumed innocent of the crime charged, to privacy, and against self-incrimination violated by such compulsory testing? Explain.

b) If the result of such test shows that he is HIV positive, and the prosecution offers such result in evidence to prove the qualifying circumstance under the Information for qualified rape, should the court reject such result on the ground that it is the fruit of a poisonous tree? Explain. (8%)

– III –

Perry is a resident of Manila, while Ricky and Marvin are residents of Batangas City. They are the co-owners of a parcel of residential land located in Pasay City with an assessed value of P100,000.00. Perry borrowed P100,000.00 from Ricky which he promised to pay on or before December 1, 2004. However, Perry failed to pay his loan. Perry also rejected Ricky and Marvin’s proposal to partition the property.

Ricky filed a complaint against Perry and Marvin in the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City for the partition of the property. He also incorporated in his complaint his action against Perry for the collection of the latter’s P100,000.00 loan, plus interests and attorney’s fees.

State with reasons whether it was proper for Ricky to join his causes of action in his complaint for partition against Perry and Marvin in the Regional Trial Court of Pasay City. (5%)

– IV –

Raphael, a warehouseman, filed a complaint against V Corporation, X Corporation and Y Corporation to compel them to interplead. He alleged therein that the three corporations claimed title and right of possession over the goods deposited in his warehouse and that he was uncertain which of them was entitled to the goods. After due proceedings, judgment was rendered by the court declaring that X Corporation was entitled to the goods. The decision became final and executory.

Raphael filed a complaint against X Corporation for the payment of P100,000.00 for storage charges and other advances for the goods. X Corporation filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of res judicata. X Corporation alleged that Raphael should have incorporated in his complaint for interpleader his claim for storage fees and advances and that for his failure he was barred from interposing his claim. Raphael replied that he could not have claimed storage fees and other advances in his complaint for interpleader because he was not yet certain as to who was liable therefor.

Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)

– V –

(1.) After Lulu’s death, her heirs brought her last will to a lawyer to obtain their respective shares in the estate. The lawyer prepared a deed of partition distributing Lulu’s estate in accordance with the terms of her will. Is the act of the lawyer correct? Why? (2%)

(2.) Nestor died intestate in 2003, leaving no debts. How may his estate be settled by his heirs who are of legal age and have legal capacity? Explain. (2%)

(3.) State the rule on venue in judicial settlement of estate of deceased persons. (2%)

– VI –

While cruising on a highway, a taxicab driven by Mans hit an electric post. As a result thereof, its passenger, Jovy, suffered serious injuries. Mans was subsequently charged before the Municipal Trial Court with reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries.

Thereafter, Jovy filed a civil action against Lourdes, the owner of the taxicab, for breach of contract, and Mans for quasi-delict. Lourdes and Mans filed a motion to dismiss the civil action on the ground of litis pendentia, that is, the pendency of the civil action impliedly instituted in the criminal action for reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries.

Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)

– VII –

Katy filed an action against Tyrone for collection of the sum of P1 Million in the Regional Trial Court, with an ex-parte application for a writ of preliminary attachment. Upon posting of an attachment bond, the court granted the application and issued a writ of preliminary attachment.

Apprehensive that Tyrone might withdraw his savings deposit with the bank, the sheriff immediately served a notice of garnishment on the bank to implement the writ of preliminary attachment. The following day, the sheriff proceeded to Tyrone’s house and served him the summons, with copies of the complaint containing the application for writ of preliminary attachment, Katy’s affidavit, order of attachment, writ of preliminary attachment and attachment bond.

Within fifteen (15) days from service of the summons, Tyrone filed a motion to dismiss and to dissolve the writ of preliminary attachment on the following grounds: (i) the court did not acquire jurisdiction over his person because the writ was served ahead of the summons; (ii) the writ was improperly implemented; and (iii) said writ was improvidently issued because the obligation in question was already fully paid.

Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)

– VIII –

In a complaint for recovery of real property, the plaintiff averred, among others, that he is the owner of the said property by virtue of a deed of sale executed by the defendant in his favor. Copy of the deed of sale was appended to the complaint as Annex “A” thereof.

In his unverified answer, the defendant denied the allegation concerning the sale of the property in question, as well as the appended deed of sale, for lack of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof.

Is it proper for the court to render judgment without trial? Explain. (4%)

– IX –

On May 12, 2005, the plaintiff filed a complaint in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City for the collection of P250,000.00. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction over the action since the claimed amount of P250,000.00 is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City.

Before the court could resolve the motion, the plaintiff, without leave of court, amended his complaint to allege a new cause of action consisting in the inclusion of an additional amount of P200,000.00, thereby increasing his total claim to P450,000.00. The plaintiff thereafter filed his opposition to the motion to dismiss, claiming that the Regional Trial Court had jurisdiction over his action.

Rule on the motion of the defendant with reasons. (4%)

– X –

A obtained a money judgment against B. After the finality of the decision, the court issued a writ of execution for the enforcement thereof. Conformably with the said writ, the sheriff levied upon certain properties under B’s name. C filed a third-party claim over said properties claiming that B had already transferred the same to him.

A moved to deny the third-party claim and to hold B and C jointly and severally liable to him for the money judgment alleging that B had transferred said properties to C to defraud him (A).

After due hearing, the court denied the third-party claim and rendered an amended decision declaring B and C jointly and severally liable to A for the money judgment.

Is the ruling of the court correct? Explain. (4%)

– XI –

Helen is the daughter of Eliza, a Filipina, and Tony, a Chinese, who is married to another woman living in China. Her birth certificate indicates that Helen is the legitimate child of Tony and Eliza and that she is a Chinese citizen.

Helen wants her birth certificate corrected by changing her filiation from “legitimate” to “illegitimate” and her citizenship from “Chinese” to “Filipino” because her parents were not married.

What petition should Helen file and what procedural requirements must be observed? Explain. (5%)

– XII –

Mariano was convicted by the Regional Trial Court for raping Victoria and meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua. While serving sentence at the National Penitentiary, Mariano and Victoria were married. Mariano filed a motion in said court for his release from the penitentiary on his claim that under Republic Act No. 8353, his marriage to Victoria extinguished the criminal action against him for rape, as well as the penalty imposed on him. However, the court denied the motion on the ground that it had lost jurisdiction over the case after its decision had become final and executory.

a) Is the ruling of the court correct? Explain.

b) What remedy/remedies should the counsel of Mariano take to secure his proper and most expeditious release from the National Penitentiary? Explain. (7%)

– XIII –

Rodolfo is charged with possession of unlicensed firearms in an Information filed in the Regional Trial Court. It was alleged therein that Rodolfo was in possession of two unlicensed firearms: a .45 caliber and a .32 caliber.

Under Republic Act No. 8294, possession of an unlicensed .45 caliber gun is punishable by prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine of P30,000.00, while possession of an unlicensed .32 caliber gun is punishable by prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not less than P15,000.00.

As counsel of the accused, you intend to file a motion to quash the Information. What ground or grounds should you invoke? Explain. (4%)

– XIV –

Police operatives of the Western Police District, Philippine National Police, applied for a search warrant in the Regional Trial Court for the search of the house of Juan Santos and the seizure of an undetermined amount of shabu.

The team arrived at the house of Santos but failed to find him there. Instead, the team found Roberto Co. The team conducted a search in the house of Santos in the presence of Roberto Co and barangay officials and found ten (10) grams of shabu. Roberto Co was charged in court with illegal possession of ten grams of shabu.

Before his arraignment, Roberto Co filed a motion to quash the search warrant on the following grounds:

(a) he was not the accused named in the search warrant; and

(b) the warrant does not describe the article to be seized with sufficient particularity. Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)

– XV –

For the multiple stab wounds sustained by the victim, Noel was charged with frustrated homicide in the Regional Trial Court. Upon arraignment, he entered a plea of guilty to said crime. Neither the court nor the prosecution was aware that the victim had died two days earlier on account of his stab wounds.

Because of his guilty plea, Noel was convicted of frustrated homicide and meted the corresponding penalty. When the prosecution learned of the victim’s death, it filed within fifteen (15) days therefrom a motion to amend the Information to upgrade the charge from frustrated homicide to consummated homicide. Noel opposed the motion claiming that the admission of the amended Information would place him in double jeopardy.

Resolve the motion with reasons. (4%)

– XVI –

Dencio barged into the house of Marcela, tied her to a chair and robbed her of assorted pieces of jewelry and money. Dencio then brought Candida, Marcela’s maid, to a bedroom where he raped her. Marcela could hear Candida crying and pleading: “Huwag! Maawa ka sa akin!” After raping Candida, Dencio fled from the house with the loot. Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to the police station about a kilometer away and told Police Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio had barged into the house of Marcela, tied the latter to a chair and robbed her of her jewelry and money. Candida also related to the police officer that despite her pleas, Dencio had raped her. The policeman noticed that Candida was hysterical and on the verge of collapse. Dencio was charged with robbery with rape. During the trial, Candida can no longer be located.

a) If the prosecution presents Police Officer Roberto Maawa to testify on what Candida had told him, would such testimony of the policeman be hearsay? Explain.

b) If the police officer will testify that he noticed Candida to be hysterical and on the verge of collapse, would such testimony be considered as opinion, hence, inadmissible? Explain. (8%)

– XVII –

Explain briefly whether the Regional Trial Court may, motu proprio, take judicial notice of the following:

a) The street name of methamphetamine hydrochloride is shabu;

b) Ordinances approved by municipalities under its territorial jurisdiction;

c) Foreign laws;

d) Rules and Regulations issued by quasi-judicial bodies implementing statutes;

e) Rape may be committed even in public places. (5%)

– XVIII –

Regional Director AG of the Department of Public Works and Highways was charged with violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 in the Office of the Ombudsman. An administrative charge for gross misconduct arising from the transaction subject matter of said criminal case was filed against him in the same office. The Ombudsman assigned a team composed of investigators from the Office of the Special Prosecutor and from the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military to conduct a joint investigation of the criminal case and the administrative case. The team of investigators recommended to the Ombudsman that AG be preventively suspended for a period not exceeding six (6) months on its finding that the evidence of guilt is strong. The Ombudsman issued the said order as recommended by the investigators.

AG moved to reconsider the order on the following grounds: (a) the Office of the Special Prosecutor had exclusive authority to conduct a preliminary investigation of the criminal case; (b) the order for his preventive suspension was premature because he had yet to file his answer to the administrative complaint and submit countervailing evidence; and (c) he was a career executive service officer and under Presidential Decree No. 807 (Civil Service Law), his preventive suspension shall be for a maximum period of three months.

Resolve with reasons the motion of respondent AG. (5%)

NOTHING FOLLOWS.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Great job po! Congrats

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: