(3) Can future inheritance be the subject of a contract of sale? (A) No, since it will put the predecessor at the risk of harm from a tempted buyer, contrary To public policy. (B) Yes, since the death of the decedent is certain to occur. (C) No, since the seller owns no inheritance while his predecessor lives. (D) Yes, but on the condition that the amount of the inheritance can only be ascertained after the obligations of the estate have been paid.
(7) X and Y were to marry in 3 months. Meantime, to express his affection, X donated a house and lot to Y, which donation X wrote in a letter to Y. Y wrote back, accepting the donation and took possession of the Y’ss heirs get the property? property. Before the wedding, however, Y suddenly died of heart attack. Can Y’ (A) No, since the marriage did not take place. (B) Yes, since all the requisites of a donation of an immovable are present. (C) No, since the donation and its acceptance are not in a public instrument. (D) Yes, since X freely donated the property to Y who became its owner.
(10) Raul, Ester, and Rufus inherited a 10-hectare land from their father. Before the land could be partitioned, however, Raul sold his hereditary right to Raffy, a stranger to the family, for P5million. Do Ester and Rufus have a remedy for keeping the land within their family? (A) Yes, they may be subrogated to Raffy’s right by reimbursing to him within the required time what he paid Raul. (B) Yes, they may be subrogated to Raffy’s right provided they buy him out before he registersthe sale. (C) No, they can be subrogated to Raffy’s right only with his conformity. (D) No, since there was no impediment to Raul selling his inheritance to a stranger.
(12) Which of the following is NOT a basis for rendering disinheritance defective or imperfect? (A) Its cause comes from the guilt of a spouse in a legal separation case, the innocent-spouse having died. (B) The truth of its cause is denied and not sufficiently proved by evidence. (C) Its cause is not authorized by the law. (D) Its cause is not specified.
(32) The decedent died intestate leaving an estate of P10 million. He left the following heirs: a) Marlon, a legitimate child and b) Cecilia, the legal spouse. Divide the estate. (A) Marlon gets 1/4 and Cecilia gets 3/4. (B) Marlon gets 2/3 and Cecilia 1/3. (C) Marlon gets 1/2 and Cecilia gets 1/2. (D) Marlon gets 3/4 and Cecilia 1/4.
(40) In gratitude, the groom’s parents made a donation of a property in writing to the bride’s parents shortly before their children’s wedding. The donation was accepted. What is the nature of the donation? (A) It is an ordinary donation since it was not given to the bride or groom. (B) It is donation propter nuptias since it was given with the marriage in mind. (C) It is an indirect donation propter nuptias since the bride would eventually inherit the pro propert perty y from her pare parents nts.. (D) It is a remunatory donation.
(53) The testator executed a will following the formalities required by the law on succession without designating any heir. The only testamentary disposition in the will is the recognition of the testator's illegitimate child with a popular actress. Is the will valid? (A) Yes, since in recognizing his illegitimate child, the testator has made him his heir. (B) No, because the non-designation of heirs defeats the purpose of a will. (C) No, the will comes to life only when the proper heirs are instituted. (D) Yes, the recognition of an illegitimate heir is an ample reason for a will.
(60) An Australian living in the Philippines acquired shares of stock worth P10 million in food manufacturing companies. He died in Manila, leaving a legal wife and a child in Australia and alive-in partner with whom he had two children in Manila. He also left a will, done according to Philippine laws, leaving all his properties to his live-in partner and their children. What law will govern the validity of the disposition in the will? (A) Australia law since his legal wife and legitimate child are Australians and domiciled in Australia. (B) Australian law since the intrinsic validity of the provisions of a will is governed by the decedent’s national law. (C) Philippine law since the decedent died in Manila and he executed his will according to such law. (D) Philippine law since the decedent’s properties are in the Philippines.
(65) In the order of intestate succession where the decedent is legitimate, who is the last intestate heirs or heir who will inherit if all heirs in the higher level are disqualified or unable to inherit? (A) Nephews and nieces. (B) Brothers and sisters. (C) State. (D) Other collateral relatives up to the 5th degree of consanguinity. (67) Joanne married James, a person with no known relatives. Through James' hard work, he and his wife Joane prospered. When James died, his estate alone amounted to P100 million. If, in his will, James designates Joanne as his only heir, what will be the free portion of his estate? (A) Joanne gets all; estate has no free portion left. (B) Joanne gets 1/2; the other half is free portion. (C) Joanne gets 1/3; the remaining 2/3 is free portion. (D) Joanne gets 1/4; the remaining 3/4 is free portion.
(70) Ric and Josie, Filipinos, have been sweethearts for 5 years. While working in a European country where the execution of joint wills are allowed, the two of them executed a joint holographic will where they named each other as sole heir of the other in case either of them dies. Unfortunately, Ric died a year later. Can Josie have the joint will successfully probated in the Philippines? (A) Yes, in the highest interest of comity of nations and to honor the wishes of the deceased. (B) No, since Philippine law prohibits the execution of joint wills and such law is binding on Ric and Josie even abroad. (C) Yes, since they executed their joint will out of mutual love and care, values that the generally accepted principles of (D) Yes, since it is valid in the country where it was executed, applying the principle of "lex loci celebrationis."
(71) ML inherited from his father P5 million in legitime but he waived it in a public instrument infavor of his sister QY who accepted the waiver in writing. But as it happened, ML borrowed P6million from PF before the waiver. PF objected to the waiver and filed an action for its rescission on the ground that he had the right to ML’s P5 million legitime as partial settlement of what MLowed him since ML has proved to be insolvent. Does PF, as creditor, have the right to rescind the waiver? (A) No, because the waiver in favor of his sister QY amounts to a donation and she already accepted it. (B) yes, because the waiver is prejudicial to the interest of a third person whose interest is recognized by law. (C) No, PF must wait for ML to become solvent and, thereafter, sue him for the unpaid loan. (D) Yes, because a legitime cannot be waived in favor of a specific heir; it must be divided among all the other heirs.
(74) T died intestate, leaving an estate of P9, 000,000. He left as heirs three legitimate children, namely, A, B, and C. A has two children, D and E. Before he died, A irrevocably repudiated his inheritance from T in a public instrument filed with the court. How much, if any, will D and E, as A’s children, get from T’s estate? (A) Each of D and E will get P1, 500,000 by right of representation since their father repudiated his inheritance. (B) Each of D and E will get P2, 225,000 because they will inherit from the estate equally with Band C. (C) D and E will get none because of the repudiation; "B" and "C" will get A’s share by right of accretion. (D) Each of D and E will get P2, 000,000 because the law gives them some advantage due tithe demise of "A". (99) Before Karen married Karl, she inherited P5 million from her deceased mother which amount she brought into the marriage. She later used part of the money to buy a new Mercedes Benz in her name, which Karen and her husband used as a family car. Is the car a conjugal or Karen’s exclusive property? (A) It is conjugal property since the spouses use it as a family car. (B) It is Karen’s exclusive property since it is in her name. (C) It is conjugal property having been bought during the marriage. (D) It is Karen’s exclusive property since she bought it with her own money.
ESSAY I. X, a widower, died leaving a will stating that the house and lot where he lived cannot be partitioned for as long as the youngest of his four children desires to stay there. As coheirs and co-owners, the other three may demand partition anytime. (1%) XI
The spouses Peter and Paula had three (3) children. Paula later obtained a judgment of nullityof marriage. Their absolute community of property having been dissolved, they delivered P1million to each of their 3 children as their presumptive legitimes .Peter later re-married and had two (2) children by his second wife Marie. Peter and Marie,having successfully engaged in business, acquired real properties. Peter later died intestate. 1.Who are Peter’s legal heirs and how will his estate be divided among them? (5%) 2.What is the effect of the receipt by Peter’s 3 children by his first marriage of their presumptive legitimes on their right to inherit following Peter’s death? (5%)
2009 1.Can the holographic will of Dr. Fuentes be admitted to probate in the Philippines? Why or why not?
PART II (3%)
TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE if the statement is false. Explain your answer in not more than two (2) sentences. (5%)
2. Assuming that the will is probated in the Philippines, canJay validly insist that he begiven legitime? Why or why not? (3%)
his
VII
Ramon Mayaman died intestate, leaving a net estate of P10,000,000.00. Determine how much each heir will receive from the estate: 1.The doctrine of "processual presumption" allows the court of the forum to presume that the foreign law applicable to the case is the same as the local or domestic law. 2.In reserva troncal, all reservatarios (reservees) inherit as a class and in equal shares regardless of their proximity in degree to the prepositus. 3. An oral partnership is valid.
1.If Ramon is survived by his wife, three full-blood brothers, two half-brothers, and one nephew (the son of a deceased full-blood brother)? Explain. (3%) 2.If Ramon is survived by his wife, a half-sister, and three nephews (sons of a deceasedfull-blood brother)? Explain. (3%)
4. An oral promise of guaranty is valid and binding. 2008 5. A dead child can be legitimated.
VIII.
V
Four children, namely: Alberto, Baldomero, Caridad, and Dioscoro, were born to the spouses Conrado and Clarita de la Costa. The children’s birth certificates were duly signed by Conrado, showing them to be the couple’s legitimate children. Later, one Edilberto de la Cruz executed a notarial document acknowledging Alberto and Baldomero as his illegitimate children >with Clarita. Edilberto died leaving substantial properties. In the settlement ofhis estate,Alberto and Baldomero intervened claiming shares as the deceased’s illegitimate children. The legitimate family of Edilberto opposed the claim. Are Alberto and Baldomero entitled to share in the estate of Edilberto? Explain. (4%)
VI
On December 1,2000, Dr. Juanito Fuentesexecuted a holographic will, wherein he gave nothing to his recognized illegitimate son, Jay. Dr. Fuentes left for the United States, passed the New York medical licensure examinations, resided therein, and became a naturalized American citizen. He died in New York in 2007. The laws of New York do not recognize holographic wills or compulsory heirs.
In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In 1989, because a certain Picasso paintingreminded Brad of her, Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While Brad was mending his broken heart, he met Angie and fell in love. Because the Picasso painting reminded Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the painting to Angie. Brad died in 1995. Saddened by Brad's death, Jennifer asked for the Picasso painting a sa remembrance of him. Angie refused and claimed that Brad, in his will, bequeathed thepainting to her. Is Angie correct? Why or why not?
X
Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for running off with a married man, and (ii) a provision disposing of his share in the family house and lot in favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He did not make any provisions in favor of his wife Erica, because as the will stated, she would anyway get ½ of the house and lot as her conjugal share. The will was very brief and straightforward and both the above provisions were contained in page 1, which Arthur and his instrumental witness, signed at the bottom. Page 2 contained the attestation clause and the signatures, at the bottom thereof, of the 3instrumental witnesses which included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly, the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer who prepared the will.
There was a 3rd page, but this only contained the notarial acknowledgement. The attestation clause stated the will was signed on the same occasion by Arthur and his instrumental witnesses who all signed in the presence of each other, and the notary public who notarized the will. There are no marginal signatures or pagination appearing on any of the 3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered that apart from the house and lot, he had a P 1 million account deposited with ABC bank. 1.Was Erica preterited? (1%) 2.What other defects of the will, if any, can cause denial of probate? (2%) 3.Was the disinheritance valid? (1%) 4.How should the house and lot, and the cash be distributed? (1%)
XI
John and Paula, British citizens at birth, acquired Philippine citizenship by naturalization after their marriage. During their marriage the couple acquired substantial landholdings in London and in Makati. Paula bore John three children, Peter, Paul and Mary. In one of their trips to London, the couple executed a joint will appointing each other as their heirs and providing that upon the death of the survivor between them the entire estate would go to Peter and Paul only but thetwo could not dispose of nor divide the London estate as long as they live. John and Paul diedtragically in the London Subway terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and Paul filed a petition for probate of their parent's will before a Makati Regional Trial Court. 1.Should the will be admitted to probate? (2%) 2. Are the testamentary dispositions valid? (2%) 3.Is the testamentary prohibition against the division of the London estate valid? (2%) XIII
Raymond, single, named his sister Ruffa in his will as a devisee of a parcel of land which he owned. The will imposed upon Ruffa the obligation of preserving the land and transferring it upon her death, to her illegitimate daughter Scarlet who was then only one year old. Raymond later died, leaving behind his widowed mother, Ruffa and Scarlet. 1.Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to preserve the property and to transmit it upon her death to Scarlet, valid? (1%) 2.If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who inherits the property? (2%) 3.If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can Scarlet inherit the property directly from Raymond?(2%)
2007 X
(10%)For purpose of this question, assume all formalities and procedural requirements have beencomplied with. In 1970, Ramon and Dessa got married. Prior to their marriage, Ramon had a child, Anna. In1971 and 1972, Ramon and Dessa legally adopted Cherry and Michelle respectively. In 1973,Dessa died while giving birth to Larry Anna had a child, Lia. Anna never married. Cherry, on the other hand, legally adopted Shelly. Larry had twins, Hans and Gretel, with his girlfriend, Fiona. In 2005, Anna, Larry and Cherry died in a car accident. In 2007, Ramon died. Who may inherit from Ramon and who may not? Give your reason brieftly;
2006X
-Don died after executing a Last Will and Testament leaving his estate valued at P12 Million to his common-Iaw wife Roshelle. He is survived by his brother Ronie and his half-sister Michelle. 1.Was Don's testamentary disposition of his estate in accordance with the law onsuccession? Whether you agree or not, explain your answer. 2.5% 2.If Don failed to execute a will during his lifetime, as his lawyer, how will you distribute hisestate? Explain. 2.5% 3. Assuming he died intestate survived by his brother Ronie, his half-sister Michelle, andhis legitimate son Jayson, how will you. distribute his estate? Explain. 2.5%
