2024 BAR EXAMINATIONSCIVIL LAWSEPTEMBER 8, 20248:00 AM – 12 NOON
1.
Carlos and Chloe scheduled their intimate wedding on September 4, 204 at 7:00 p.m. in Manila. Chloe purchased from Angelica a gold wedding ring with engraving “Love, Carlos” for PHP 1,000,000. Angelica promised to deliver the ring on or before the wedding day. On September 1, 2024, a weather bulletin warned that super typhoon Enteng will enter the country within three days. On September 4, 2024 at 6:00 a.m., typhoon Enteng and the enhanced southwest monsoon caused massive flooding that rendered major roads in Manila impassable to all kinds of vehicles. Angelica failed to deliver the ring in time for Carlos and Chloe’s wedding which pushed through despite the typhoon. Angelica delivered the ring the following day after the flood subsided. Chloe filed against Angelica a complaint for damages. Angelica denied liability and argued that typhoon is a fortuitous event. Chloe replied that typhoon is not a fortuitous event because its arrival was earlier announced. In any event, the typhoon will not exempt Angelica because of her negligence and default. Angelica was negligent when she failed to pay attention to the forecast and was in default when she delivered the ring after the wedding. Is Angelica liable for damages due to default complying with her obligation? Explain.
2.
Viada and Blanco are best friends. In July 2024, Blanco sold to Castan a parcel of land registered in Viada’s name. Blanco signed the deed of absolute sale in behalf of Viada and pretended as his agent. In August 2024, Viada executed a special power of attorney (SPA) authorizing Blanco to sell the identical parcel of land. Blanco executed a deed of absolute sale in favor of Sanchez Roman who was aware of the prior conveyance of the same land to Castan. Thereafter, Castan learned of the subsequent transaction between Blanco and Sanchez Roman. Castan then filed against Sanchez Roman an action for annulment of sale. Castan argued that Sanchez Roman is in bad faith becuase of his knowledge of the prior sale. Sanchez Roman countered that the sale between Blanco and Castan is void for lack of Viada’s consent. Castan replied that the subsequent issuance of the SPA of Blanco ratified any defect in their transaction. Who between Castan and Sanchez Roman has a better right over the parcel of land? Explain.
3.
Alice and Shiela occupied a parcel of land which they inherited from their parents. In 2003, Alice executed an affidavit of self-adjudication over the property and was issued a certificate of title solely under her name. In August 2024, Sheila discovered that she was excluded from the certificate of title. Shiela filed against Alice an action to reconvey the land based on implied trust. Shiela alleged continuous actual possession of the property and deprivation of share as compulsory heir. Alice countered that the prescriptive period to reconvey real property based on an implied trust is 10 years reckoned when she repudiated the trust in 2003 upon the issuance of certificate of title in her name. Thus, Shiela’s action for reconveyance filed only in 2024 had already prescribed. Is Sheila’s cause of action to recover her share in property from Alice already prescribed? Explain.
4.
In 2017, Maloi leased her real property to Sheena for a period of 10 years with rental escalation clause which reads: “For the first five years, the rental rate shall be PHP 10,000.00 per month subject to 10% increase for the succeeding years.”. In 2020 Sheena assigned to Colet her rights through postdated checks but were dishonored for having been drawn against a closed account. Maloi charged Colet with the crime of estafa. On the other hand, Maloi demanded from Sheena the unpaid rentals and stipulated increase in rent but was refused. Sheena denied liability and argued that her obligation was already extinguished when Colet substituted her as lessee. Sheena added that Maloi accepted rental payments from Colet. Did novation extinguish Sheena’s obligation under the contract of lease? Explain.
5.
Primo, a French national and permanent resident of Canada, executed in the Philippines a holographic will which he entirely wrote, dated and signed. Primo enumerated in the will various real and personal properties situated in the Philippines, France, and Canada. Primo bequeathed the properties in the Philippines to his parents, the properties in France to his siblings, and the properties in Canda to his wife and children. In 2024, Primo suffered a heart attack and died in Australia while attending a conference. Primos was survived by his wife, two children, parents, and three siblings. What laws shall govern the formalities of Primo’s holographic will, the distribution of his estate, and the qualifications of his heirs? Explain.
6.
In 2021, Jesse and Celeste got married. After a year, Jesse took all their savings and abandoned Celeste for his paramour Diana. Jesse asked Diana to quit her job. Diana hesitated because she has no money and is drowning in debts. Yet, Jesse promised to provide for all of Diana’s needs. Jesse and Diana then lived together. The following day, Jesse and Diana bought a brand-new car. The vehicle was exclusively registered under Diana’s name. Celeste learned of the purchase and filed an action to recover the vehicle from Diana. Celeste claimed that Jesse is still her lawful husband, and that the car is part of their community property. Diana countered that she and Jesse are co-owners of the vehicle. Can Celeste recover the vehicle from Diana? Explain.
7.
Lloyd had a long-time crush with his childhood friend Miggy. Lloyd always dreamed of building a family with Miggy but Philippine laws disapprove of same-sex marriages. Lloyd then migrated and established a career in Sweeden. After several years, Lloyd applied for naturalization and was granted Swedish citizenship. Lloyd underwent gender-affirming surgery to resemble the woman gender identity. Lloyd also changed his sex from “male” to “female” and his name from “Lloyd” to “Laida” pursuant to Swedish law. Thereafter, Laida returned to the Philippines and married Miggy. Is the marriage between Miggy and Laida valid? Explain.
8.
In 1990, Monica was born during the marriage of her parents Anton and Steph. In 2024, Monica discovered that a certain Patrick signed as the father in her birth certificate. Monica looked for Patrick and was informed that he passed away a year earlier. Monica learned that Patrick was Steph’s last boyfriend before she married Anton. Thereafter, Monica filed a complaint for partition of Patrick’s estate. Monica claimed that she is the non-marital child of Patric and Steph. Monica submitted her birth certificate where Patrick recognized her as his daughter. The heirs of Patrick opposed the complaint and argued that Monica is presumed the legitimate child of Anton and Steph pursuant to Article 164 of the Family Code which states that “children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate.” The heirs of Patrick also invoked the rule that only the father can impugn the legitimacy of the child. May Monica impugn her own legitimacy in an action for partition? Explain.
9.
Zion purchased a condominium unit from Hammered Homes Realty (HHR) for PHP 10,000,000.00. Zion paid a down payment of PHP 2,000,000.00 while the balance of PHP 8,000,000.00 is payable for a period of 80 months at PHP 100,000.00 monthly installments. Zion started paying the monthly installments on April 15, 2022. Due to financial difficulties, Zion started to default on his payments from June 15, 2924. Zion paid PHP 1,800,000.00 total monthly installments. On August 15, 2024, Zion received a notarized letter cancelling the contract to sell. Zion then went to the office of HHR to claim the cash surrendered value of his payments pursuant to Republic Act No. 6552 entitled “Ready Installment Buyer Act” or the Maceda Law. Is Zion entitled to cash surrender value? Explain.
10.
Caloy died with a net estate of PHP 240 million, survived by his:
(1) father – Cesar;
(2) spouse – Grace;
(3) legitimate children – Teddy and Bobbie;
(4) illegitimate child – Rebreb; and
(5) sisters – Alex and Gabbie.
In his will, Caloy instituted Rebreb as the sole heir. How much can Rebreb receive from Caloy’s estate? Explain.
11.
Rico mortgaged a parcel of land to Maris as security for a loan. In the mortgage contract, Rico appointed Maris as attorney-in-fact for the purpose of selling the land in case of default in the payment of loan. Rico failed to pay his obligation. Maris then purchased the land from Rico through a deed of absolute sale. Later, Rico questioned the mortgage contract because it violates the prohibition against pactum commisorium. As such, the subsequent sale is also void. Is the sale between Rico and Maris valid? Explain.
12.
Kiko leased a parcel of land to Jackie from January to December 2024 or for a period of one year. In July 2024, Kiko sent to Jackie a letter which reads: “I am giving you the first opportunity to buy the leased property for PHP 1,000,000.00. You have until the expiration of the lease contract within which to decide.” Immediately, Jackie informed Kiko that she will buy the leased property for PHP 800,000.00. Kiko did not reply to Jackie. In August 2024, Jackie learned that Kiko sold the leased property to Bogs for PHP 800,000.00. Aggrieved, Jackie filed an action against Kiko and Bogs to rescind their contract of sale. Jackie claimed that the sale transaction violated her right of first refusal, and that she must be allowed to buy the property at a similar price of PHP 800,000.00. Can Jackie rescind the contract of sale between Kiko and Bogs for the alleged violation of her right of first refusal? Explain.
13.
Klyde and his predecessors-in-interest had been in open, continuous, exclusive and notorious possession and occupation of a 10-hectare agricultural land of the public domain under a bona fide claim of ownership since 1995. In 2015, the property had been declared alienable and disposable. In 2020, Klyde applied for registration of the lot. The Register of Deeds denied the application because Klyde did not occupy the property since time immemorial or before June 12, 1945. Is the Register of Deeds justified in denying the registration of the property in favor of Klyde based on lack of occupation since time immemorial? Explain.
14.
In 2015, Sergio and Calista got married. In 2019, Sergio started complaining about his recurring and severe migraines. Sergio then left without informing Calista his whereabouts. Eventually, Calista fell in love with her best friend Albert. In 2024, Calista filed a summary proceeding to declare Sergio presumptively dead so she can marry Albert. Calista alleged that Sergio’s only known relative is his brother, Robert, who lives in Cotabato City. Calista wrote to Robert and asked him about Sergio. Robert replied that he does not have any idea where to find Sergio. Calista also tried to inquire from Sergio’s friends but to no avail. Thus, Calista honestly believed that Sergio is already dead. Is Calista’s petition for declaration of presumptive death meritorious? Explain.
15.
Ginny arrived at Star Viva Hotel (SVH) and entrusted the ignition key of her vehicle to parking attendant Marco, who in turn, issued a valet parking customer claim stub. After parking the vehicle, Marco placed the ignition key inside a safety box. Ginny proceeded to the hotel lobby to check in. At midnight, the hotel security officer informed Ginney that her vehicle was carnapped. Ginny filed against SVH an action for damages for the loss of the vehicle. In its answer, SVH denied responsibility for any loss or damage to vehicles in the parking area since the valet parking service is a special privilege given for the convenience of the hotel guests. Is SVH liable for the loss of Ginny’s vehicle? Explain.
16.
In 2021, Kynan was born to live-in parents Popoy and Basha. After a year, Popoy and Basha parted ways due to irreconcilable differences. Basha worked as a market vendor to support Kynan and often left him in the care of his maternal grandmother. Popoy occasionally sent money for Kynan’s needs. Later, Basha had a discreet romantic affair with her best friend Helen. In 2024, Popoy filed a case for the sole custody of Kynan and alleged that Basha is an unfit mother. Popoy argued that Basha’s lesbian relationship is not conducive to the proper moral development of Kynan. Basha countered that she is able to take care of and provide for Kynan despite her meager income. Are there compelling reasons to deprive Basha of Kynan’s custody? Explain.
17.
Lennon made a last will and testament which contained two simple dispositions, to wit: “First, I am leaving one-half of my estate in favor of the poor…. Second, I am leaving one-half of my estate in favor of my soul….” Lennon named Atty. Manresa as executor and instructed him to carry out the provisions of his will. In 2024, Lennon died single and childless. Thereafter, Lennon’s will was presented for probate. The siblings of Lennon opposed the probate of the will and claimed his entire estate through intestate succession. The siblings of Lennon argued that his testamentary dispositions are void because the first is in favor of an unknown person while the second is for a beneficiary without civil personality. Are the dispositions in Lennon’s will void? Explain.
18.
Sharon owned a parcel of land adjoining the sea with flat terrain at the center and elevated rocky northern part. Sharon executed a written instrument where she donated the portion with flat terrain to Nichloas who accepted it in the same instrument. After the survey, Nicholas discovered that the land described in the deed of donation refers to the rocky northern portion. However, Sharon already died without correcting the mistake. Nicholas asked the heirs of Sharon to execute an amended deed of donation over the flat terrain but was refused. Nicholas filed against the heirs of Sharon an action for reformation of instrument to reflect the real intention of the parties. May the trial court compel the heirs of Sharon to reform the instrument and execute an amended deed of donation? Explain.
19.
On July 5, 2024, Odrey and Jeboy executed a notarized agreement for the sale of real property which reads: “Odrey agrees to sell Lot 0416 to Jeboy for a total consideration of PHP 1,000,000.00. Upon full payment of the purchase price, Odrey will execute a deed of absolute sale in favor of Jeboy.” The following day, Jeboy recorded the instrument with the Register of Deeds. On August 5, 2024, Odrey and Lorenz executed a notarized document over the same parcel of land which reads: “for and in consideration of PHP 1,000,000.00, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Odrey hereby sells, transfers, and conveys and by these presents sold, transferred, and conveyed Lot 0416 to Lorenz.” The deed between Odrey and Lorenz was not registered. Later, Jeboy discovered the transaction between Odrey and Lorenz. Jeboy invoked the rules on double sale and argued that he has a better right because he is the first registrant in good faith. Will the rules on double sale apply? Explain.
20.
Alan, a mall security guard, negligently shot Kazuto, a customer who died on the spot. The heirs of Kazuto filed an action for damages against Alan, for his own negligence, and his employer, Ryota Security Agency (RSA), for failure to observe diligence in the selection and supervision of its employees. In due course, the trial court ruled that both Alan and RSA are negligent and ordered them to pay damages in favor of the heirs of Kazuto, to wit:
FOR THE REASONS, the complaint for quasi-delict is GRANTED. Alan is civilly liable to pay the heirs of Kazuto PHP 1,000,000.00 actual damages, PHP 500,000.00 moral damages, and PHP 500,000.00 exemplary damages. Ryota Security Agency, as employer, is subsidiarily liable to pay the award of damages in case of the employee’s insolvency.
The award of damages shall earn interest at the rate of 12% from filing of the complaint until finality of the decision.
SO ORDERED.
Did the trial court properly impose the civil liabilities of Alan and RSA? Explain.
2024 BAR EXAMINATIONSCOMMERCIAL AND TAXATIONS LAWSEPTEMBER 8, 20242:00 P.M. – 6:00 P.M.
Nympha, a famous author, collaborated with Tobias, a novice illustrator, to create a children’s book. Tobias offered his services for free. Nympha gave Tobias the manuscript and discussed with him the inspiration for the characters. Nympha envisioned a story about two best friends who had a huge fight but later realized the value of forgiveness. Tobias drew the characters based on Nympha’s specifications and instructions. Nympha then published the book and claimed sole copyright ownership. Nympha argued that she is the author not only of the text but also the images in the book since Tobias exactly adopted her idea. Is Nympha the copyright owner of the images or drawings in the book? Explain.
In 1984, the Nova Family established the North Nova, Inc. (NNI), a pharmaceutical company. On August 31, 1984, NNI was issued its certificate of incorporation with corporate term of 40 years. On August 31, 2024, the corporate term of NNI expired without the board of directors renewing its corporate existence. However, the Nova Family continued NNI’s business operations. South Moon, Inc. (SMI), a rival company, questioned the Nova Family’s action. SMI argued that the Nova Family cannot continue to operate NNI without reviving its corporate existence. Is the Nova Family’s continued operations of NNI valid? Explain.
Ernest Bicycle Corporation (EBC) and Max Speed Corporation (MSC) are the leading manufacturers and sellers of electric bicycles in the country. EBC and MSC offer their bestselling models at PHP 25,000.00 per unit. IN 2023, Gryffin Pedals, Inc. (GPI) entered the market and sold electric bicycles with features similar to EBC and MSC’s bestselling models for only PHP 20,000.00. GPI has no physical stores and offers its products in digital marketplaces. After a year, GPI had 75% share of the market leading EBC and MSC at 15% and 10% shares, respectively. EBC and MSC filed a complaint before the Philippine Competition Commission and alleged that GP is fast monopolizing the electric bicycles market because of its dominant position. Will the complaint against GPI for violation of the competition laws prosper? Explain.
Audrey read the 24-hour rush sale from Easy Shopping, a known digital marketplace, which offers free shipping plus 50% cash back for purchases worth at least PHP10,000.00. Audrey checked out several items and placed the orders pursuant to the promotion. Easy Shopping accepted the orders and marked them “pending payment”. However, Audrey’s digital wallet had insufficient funds and was reloaded only the following day. At that time, the cashback and free shipping promotions were no longer available. Audrey then demanded from Easy Shopping to honor their transaction based on the promotion and presented a screenshot of her orders as supporting evidence. On the other hand, Easy Shopping countered that the transaction is unenforceable absent a written contract and that Audrey must pay the regular price and normal shipping rate. Is the transaction enforceable on the basis of the screenshot of Audrey’s orders with Easy Shopping? Explain.
In 2022, Annie, Brenda, Clara, Donna, and Enola formed Nurturing Family Organization (NFO), a corporation with the principal purpose of helping single parents. Gregory, a wealthy philanthropist, donated to NFO a parcel of land through a public document. Clara accepted the donation in the same public instrument because NFO was not yet registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In 2023, the SEC issued a certificate of incorporation in favor of NFO. In 2024, Clara died and her heirs included the donated land in the settlement of her estate. The heirs of Clara argued that she owned the real property and not NFO which lacked legal personality at the time of donation. Is the donation of real property in favor BFO valid despite its lack of legal personality? Explain.
Pierre and Fonzi derived money from the illegal trade of Philippine wildlife like pangolins, tarziers, and palm civets. Pierre and Fonzi collected PHP 2,000,000.00 each month which they delivered to Phoebe, an art collector. Phoebe used the funds to buy high-value paintings which she auctioned off in art galleries. The police officers tracked down the unlawful wildlife trading and arrested Phoebe. The operatives charged Phoebe with money laundering. At the trial, Phoebe argued that she should be acquitted of the charge because she did not participate in the wildlife trading. Is Phoebe criminally liable for money laundering? Explain.
Nina and Roxanne are shareholders of Essean & Essaiah Corporation (EEC) engaged in the pet supplies business. In 2023, the Board of Directors declared surplus profits and distributed dividends to the shareholders. The Board of Directors likewise released the shareholders with unpaid subscriptions from their obligations. Accordingly, Nina and Roxanne no longer settled the unpaid balance of their subscriptions. Upon inspection of corporate books, however, it was revealed the EEC has been experiencing insolvency for the last three years. In 2024, the directors and shareholders dissolved EEC during their annual meeting and divided corporate properties and assets among themselves. Aggrieved, the creditors of EEC filed an action against Nina and Roxanne to collect the corporate debts. In their answer, Nina and Roxanne invoked the distinct personality of EEC from its shareholders. Nina and Roxanne added that they are not privy to be transactions between EEC and its creditors. May the creditors of EEC run after Nina and Roxanne to satisfy their claims? Explain.
Felix, Ivan and Ruth formed a partnership to operate a coffee shop. Felix and Ivan provided the capital while Ruth contributed her labor and industry. Within the coffee shop, Felix opened his own plant kiosk and Ruth put up her own souvenir shop. Whereas Ivan set up a coffee stall two blocks away from the coffee shop. May the partners Felix, Ivan, and Ruth lawfully engage in their separate businesses? Explain.
Dory is a video bolgger with 500,000 subscribers. Dory documented her life in law school and uploaded the videos in social media platforms. Dory earned PHP 100,000.00 for each video that gets a hundred thousand views. In one video, Dory shared her difficulties in reading hundreds of cases and the application of penalties in Criminal Law. Byrom, a law student, uploaded a 10-minute video in social media using a 30-second clip from Dory’s vlog showing the case list in Criminal Law. Byron shared his study habits and discussed how a law student like Dory can easily memorize the doctrine on the list. Byron’s video got 1,000,000 views and earned more than what Dory gained. Dory envied Byron and sued him for copyright infringement and argued that he used her content for monetary gain. Is Byron liable for copyright infringement? Explain.
Express Innovation Corporation (EIC) applied for registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The EIC submitted its proposed Articles of Incorporation which reads:
First: That the name of the corporation shall be, “Express Innovation Corporation”
…..
Third: That the principal office of the corporation is located in Sakurajima, Konohana Ward, Osaka, Japan.
Ninth: That Haru Nikko, a resident of Japan, has been elected by the subscribers as the Treasurer of the Corporation to act as such until after the successor is duly elected and qualified in accordance with the by-laws, That as Treasurer, authority has been given to receive in the name and for the benefit of the corporation, all subscriptions, contributions or donations paid or given by the subscribers or members, who certified the information set forth in the seventh and eighth clauses above, and that the paid-up portion of the subscription in cash and/or property for the benefit and credit of the corporation has been duly received.
If you are the SEC Examiner, will you recommend the approval of the Articles of Incorporation? Explain.
Duke is a resident of an exclusive subdivision. Duke always heard loud cars and motorcycles passing through the neighborhood at night. Duke then set up a closed-circuit television (CCTV) at his gate and recorded the rowdy vehicles and their plate numbers. Thereafter, Duke requested from the Land Transportation Office (LTO) the names and addresses of the registered owners of the vehicles. Duke explained that he will use the CCTC footage as supporting evidence in his complaint for damages against the vehicle owners. However, the LTO denied the request on the ground that personal information of vehicle owners can be disclosed without their consent. Is the LTO correct in denying Duke’s request for information? Explain.
Blaine Builders Corporation (BBC) has a total of 200,000 outstanding shares which are all entitled to vote. However, 10,000 of the shares are under dispute of subject matter of pending litigations. Harold and Joaquin are BBC’s major stockholders. Harold called a meeting where stockholders representing 98,400 shares attended and voted for new members of the board of directors. Joaquin filed an election protest and claimed that there was no quorum in the meeting which shall consist of the stockholders representing a majority of the outstanding capital stock. Harold insisted that there is a quorum after excluding the 10,000 disputed shares. Is there a required quorum in the stockholders’ meeting that elected the new members of the board of directors? Explain.
Justin opened a peso savings account with the Ozzy Pay Bank (OPB) where he deposited his earnings. In 2024, Justin went to OPB to verify his account. The OPB showed to Justin the transaction history and informed that he had only PHP 100.00 remaining balance after a series of withdrawals. Justin denied the transactions and claimed that his signatures appearing on the withdrawal slips in the sum of PHP 3,000,000.00 were forged. The investigation revealed that an impostor forged the signature on the withdrawal slip sand delivered the amounts to his conspirator who opened a peso savings account with OPB using the funds as initial deposit. Aggrieved, Justin filed a complain for sum of money against OPB and alleged that it was negligent in allowing the unauthorized withdrawals. Meantime, the trial court directed the OPB to produce the bank records of the conspirotr. The OPB refused contending that the conspirator’s bank account is not the subject of litigation. Did the OPB validly refuse to disclose the conspirator’s bank records? Explain.
Flavio obtained from Safe Assurance Corporation (SAC) through its agent Laureen, a fire insurance policy over his residential house for a period of one year from August 25, 2024 to August 24, 2025. Flavio delivered on August 26, 2024 a check representing premium payment to Laureen who then issued an acknowledgement receipt. On August 27, 2024, a fire completely razed Flavio’s house. Oblivious of the incident, Laureen deposited the check on August 28, 2024 to SAC’s bank account and was credited on the same day. Thereafter, Flavio filed against SAC an insurance claim. However, SAC denied the claim and argued that there was no payment of premium yet to make the insurance policy effective at the time of loss. SAC explained that it received the premium payment only on August 28, 2024 or after the fire occurred on August 27, 2024. Is there a valid and binding insurance contract between SAC and Flavio? Explain.
Sierra Electronics Inc. (SEI) has an outstanding capital stock consisting of 100 common shares and 100 non-voting preferred shares. The common shares are held by Filipino citizens while the preferred shares are held by foreigners. SEI planned to buy real property and establish manufacturing plant in the Philippines. May the SEI own land in the Philippines? Explain.
The City Treasurer served to Luminous Star Corporation (LSC) a Notice of Assessment (NOA) for basic local business taxes (LBT) in the amount of PHP900,000.00 exclusive of interest and penalties. LSC filed a protest before the City Treasurer but was denied. LSC appealed tot he Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) and prayed for a writ of preliminary injuction to prevent the collection of assessed taxes. The City Treasurer opposed the application for injunctive relief and contended that the courts cannot enjoin the collection of taxes. May the MeTC issue an injunctive relief against the City Treasurer from collecting local taxes?
On August 23, 2024, Topaz Gems Industries (TGI) filed witht he Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) an administrative claim for refund of overpaid final withholding tax on dividends paid in 2023. On August 28, 2024, TGI field a judicial claim for refund before the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA). The BIR opposed the judicial claim for refund and contended that the CTA lacks jurisdiction over the case. The BIR added that the judicial claim was premature having been filed without prior resolution of the administrative claim. Does the CTA have jurisdiction over the judicial claim for refund? Explain.
Fritzie Presley Inc. (FPI) is a domestic corporation engaged in Value Added Tax (VAT) zero0rated transactons. In the second quarter of 2022, the input taxes of FPI from zero-rated sales amounted to PHP 9,811,152.02. The accountant of FPI advised to refund the input taxes and not to offset it with output taxes. On Jully 10, 2023, FPI filed a claim to refund the input taxes before the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) but was denied. FPI elevated the case to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA). Meantime, the BIR’s assessment against FPI for deficiency output VAT for the second quarter of 2022 in the amount of PHP8,501,355.53 became final and executory. After trial, the CTA granted FPI’s claim for refund but only for PHP 1,309,796.49 representing the difference between the excess nput taxes and deficiency output taxes. The CTA held that since FPI has deficiency taxes, and only the balance should be allowed for refund. On the other hand, FPI argues that the taxpayer-claimant has the option to charge the input taxes from zero-rated sales against the output taxes. May the CTA offset the input taxes against deficiency output taxes even without the taxpayer-claimant choosing this option? Explain.
The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) acquitted Stephen in a criminal case for non-filing of Annual Income Tax Return (ITR) under Section 255 of the Tax Code. The CTA ruled that the prosecution filed to prove Stephen’s guilt. However, the CTA imposed upon Stephen civil liability for deficiency income tax arising from the non-filing of ITR. Stephen questioned the civil aspect of the case and argued that his acquittal in the criminal case exonerated him from any civil liability arising from the offense. May the CTA impose civil liability to pay taxes upon Stephen despite his acquittal in the criminal case? Explain.
On June 30, 2023, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) served a Letter of Authority (LOA) to Waldolf Weston Corporation (WWC). The LOA authorized Revenue Officer (RO) Arjun and Group Supervisor (GS) Simone to examine WWC’s accounting books and records for the taxable year 2021. Thereafter, WWC received a Memorandum-Referral Letter signed by Revenue District Officer (RDO) Desmond authorizing RO Valerie and GS Warren to continue the audit investigation. The memorandum noted that RO Arjun and GS Simone were already reassigned to another district office. After proper issuance of the Notice of Discrepancy and Preliminary Assessment Notice, RO Valerie and GS Warren jointly recommended that the CIR issue a Final Assessment Notice (FAN) against WWC because it had unreported gain subject to income tax for 2021. The CIR adopted the recommendation and served a FAN upon WWC. Aggrieved, WWC challenged the validity of the Memorandum-Referral Letter on the ground that it is not equivalent to a LOA. Is the Memorandum-Referral Letter valid to examine WWC’s accounting books and records? Explain.
I
[This item has five questions.] Assume that you received an adverse decision and filed a motion for reconsideration which was denied.
Give the reglementary periods for filing the following:
(a) Notice to appeal to the Court of Appeals(b) Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65(c) Petition for Review to the Court of Appeals under Rule 42(d) Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court under Rule 45(e) Petition for Cetiorari under Rule 64
II
[This item has two questions.] Fides filed a case before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) questioning the authority of the local government unit (LGU) to assess real property taxes (RPT) on a certain property she owns. She also prayed for a writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) to restrain the LGU from collecting the RPT. The LGU moved to dismiss Fide’s case arguing that since the matter involves RPT, her remedy was to file an appeal to the Local Board of Assessment Appeals.
(a) Is the LGU correct? Explain briefly.(b) IF the RTC issued an order denying the application for WPI, and thereafter denies Fide’s subsequent motion for reconsideration, what is her remedy? Explain briefly.
III
Gail Giled a forcible entry complaint against Marianina before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC). The MeTC ruled in favor of Marianina. Gail appealed the MeTC decision to the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The RTC denied Gail’s appeal and sustained the MeTC. Gail then filed a notice of appeal with the RTC indicating that it is appealing the RTC’s decision to the Court of Appeals (CA). In her Notice of appeal, Gail also requested the RTC to transmit the records of the case to the CA.
Did Gail take the correct of mode of appeal? Explain briefly.
IV
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a decision against Kat. She received a copy of the decision on December 26, 2021. Kat’s counsel filed with the Supreme court a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 by registered main on January 10, 2022. The petition was dismissed for failure to pay the docket fees within the reglementary period, Kat’s counsel challenged the dismissal arguing that (i) the intention was to pay the docket fees after same is assessed upon the court’s receipt of the petition by registered mail; and (ii) the dismissal of the petition effectively rendered nugatory a party’s statutory right to appeal by registered mail under the rules. Kat’s counsel also added that she did not want to include cash money in the mail.
Is Kat’s counsel correct? Explain briefly.
V
In December of 2021, Matibag Realty Corp. Kasanga Construction Co. submitted their construction dispute to arbitration before the Construction Industry Commission (CIAC). In March 2022, the CIAC arbitral tribunal rendered an award in favor of Kasangga Construction Co.
What is Matibag Realty Corp. remedy? Explain briefly.
VI
Naysa was defrauded by Jackie resulting in damages to the former. Naysa filed a civil suit before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The RTC dismissed her complaint. Within four years from Naysa’s discovery of the complaint, she filed, through her counsel, a petition for annulment of judgment under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court before the Court of appeals (CA) on the ground of fraud.
Should the CA give due course to Naysa’s petition? Explain briefly.
VII
Alex, Bobbie, and Gabbie were charged with the crime of Murder. Finding them to have acted in conspiracy, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted them of Homicide. Only Bobbie appealed the conviction with the Court of Appeals (CA) Consequently, an entry of judgment was issued as against Alex and Gabbie.
Subsequently, the CA modified Bobbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder in the same judgment, the CA likewise modified Alex and Gabbie’s conviction from Homicide to Murder.
Upon learning of the CA’s decision, Alex and Gabbie confronted Bobbie, saying “Bakit ka pa ba nag appeal? Tumaas tuloy and sentensya namin, Madadamay pa kami!” Bobbie snapped back: “Bakit parang galit kayo? Pero bakit kasalanan ko? Parang kasalanan ko?”
Was the CA correct in modifying the judgment as to Alex and Gabbie? Explain briefly.
VIII
Mayor Dalupan, who was notorious for being involved in rigged public biddings, was convicted by the Sandiganbayan, in the exercise of its original jurisdiction for violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Seeking to overturn his conviction, Mayor Dalupan filed a Rule 65 petition for Certiorari before the Supreme Court on the 59th dat from notice of the assailed Sandiganbayan ruling.
Is the remedy availed of by Mayor Dalupan correct? Explain briefly.
IX
Police officers Miggy and Laida were involved in an alleged buy-bust operation against Mr. Magtalas, a suspected drug dealer. Mr. Magtalas maintained his innocence, asserting that the drugs were merely planted. He further claimed that he was unjustifiably beaten up by the police officers. Mr. Magtalas filed before the Officer of the Deputy Ombudsman for Military and Other Law Enforcement Officer (OMB-MOLEO) a criminal complaint for planting evidence which is punishable under Section 29 of the Dangerous Drug Act (R.A. No. 9165). Mr. Magtalas also filed an administrative complaint for grave misconduct against Miggy and Laida in light of the unwarranted physical assault against him.
The Officer of the Ombudsman (OMB) rendered a decision holding Miggy and Laida administratively liable for grave misconduct and accordingly imposed the penalty of dismissal from service. A few weeks later, the OMB issued a separate resolution finding probable cause against them for violation of Section 29 of R.A. No. 9165.
Aggrieved, Miggy and Laida filed before the Supreme Court the following: (i) a Rule 65 petition for Certiorari assailing the OMB’s decision finding them administratively liable for grave misconduct; and (ii)a Rule 45 petition for review for Certiorari assailing the OMB’s resolution finding probable cause against them.
Were the remedies availed of by Miggy and Laida proper? Explain briefly.
X
After due Proceedings, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) issued a Final Notice and Assessment with Final Letter of Demand assessing Kotse Corp. for deficiency income taxes covering calendar year 2021, which Kotse Corp. duly protested. A month after receipt of the protest, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue issued a notice of garnishment against Kotse Corp’s deposit accounts in GENZ Bank.
If you were counsel for Boni and Klyde, who are accused as a co-conspirators in a Murder case. During arraignment, they both pleaded not guilty. In the course of the trial, Klyde confessed to you that it was actually Boni who committed the Murder and that he merely helped Boni dispose of the body. Klyde tells you that he wants to plead guilty and directs you to inform the prosecutor and the judge that he wants to testify against Boni as a state witness.
Can you continue to represent Boni, or both? Explain briefly.
XII
Identify five duties of lawyer as stated in the Lawyer’s Oath.
[This item has two questions.] Pepe and Pilar are adjoining lot owners. Suppose Pepe’s lot is titled and without his knowledge, it was encroached upon by Pilar whose lot is untitled but who honestly believed that the encroacher portion, where she built a small bungalow house, is still within her property.
(a) Is Pilar a builder in good faith? Discuss Pepe’s right as against Pilar. Explain briefly.
(b) Suppose it is Pilar’s lot that is titled and Pepe’s lot is untitled, would Pilar be a builder in good faith? Discuss Pepe’s right as against Pilar. Explain briefly.
[This item has two questions.] Thea, Vanessa, and Sophia are siblings who are co-workers of a 600-sq. m. parcel of land covered by TCT No. 12345 situated along Bangkal Road, Makati City. Thea decided to sell her share, an undivided 200-sq. m. portion of the property, to Alyssa, a Filipina nurse who has been living in Canada for the last ten years. Alyssa, without the knowledge of Sophia and Vanessa, built a modest house on the 200-sq.m. portion abutting the road leased it to Stell for Php 15,000.00 per month.
(a) Could Thea legally transfer her share of the property to Alyssa without the consent of Vanessa and Sophia? Explain briefly.
(b) Can Vanessa and Sophia respectively legally demand from Alyssa a one-third share in the rentals? Explain briefly.
[This item has two questions] With the intent to develop a subdivision, Oliver bought a parcel of land adjacent to a subdivision owned by Phil. Oliver’s land had no direct access to the highway, as it was blocked by a kamote plantation owned by Josh. Phil’s subdivision, on the other hand, already had a direct access to the highway. To facilitate the release of the license form the Department of Human Settlement and Urban Development, Oliver presented a contract to sell between him and Josh over the kamote plantation, on the representation that he would construct an access road thereon.
Pending approval of the license, Oliver sought the consent of Phil to connect the road that would be built by him with the main road of Phil’s subdivision. Phil allowed him to do this pending their negotiation on the compensation to be paid. With the eventual grant of the license, Oliver began the development of his subdivision. To protect the right of way over Phil’s subdivision, Oliver was able to cause an annotation of adverse claim on Phil’s property.
However, when Oliver’s subdivision was already completed, and with the adverse claim annotated, Oliver believed that he no longer needed to buy the kamote plantation and accordingly rescinded the contract to sell with Josh.
When Oliver and Phil failed to arrive at an agreement on the consideration for the easement, Phil built a wall blocking the road constructed by Oliver that connected Oliver’s subdivision with his. Oliver filked a omplaint seeking the establishment of an easement of right of way through Phil’s subdivision which Oliver claimed to be the most adequate and convenient access to the highway. On the other hand, Phil filed a petition to have the adverse claim canceled.
(a) Is Oliver entitled to a right of way through Phil’s subdivision? Explain briefly.
(b) Is there basis to have the adverse claim canceled? Explain briefly.
The spouse Santos are the registered owners of Lot 2 located in umaga Subdivision, Caramoan, Camarines sur, covered by TCT No. 1369. Lot 2, which has been occupied by the spouse Santos for about 11 years, as a one-storey residential which was already erected thereon when Lot 2 was purchased by the, from the spouse Cruz in 2005. At the time of the acquisition of Lot 2, the adjoining lot, Lot 1, which was also owned by the spouses Cruz started the construction of a two-storey residential house. The spouses of Santos bemoaned how, prior to the construction on Lot 1, they received enough bright and natural light from their windows. The construction rendered their house dark such that they are unable to do their normal activities in their house without switching on their lights.
Have the spouse Santos acquired an easement of light and view with respect to Lot 1 owned by the spouses Cruz? Explain briefly.
In 2014, a wealthy young couple, Tan, moved by the spirit of generosity and love for their hometown in Siquijor, decided to donate a one-hectare lot in favor of the province of Siquijor. The Deed of donation Pertinently provides:
“The herein DONORS hereby voluntarily and freely give, transfer and convey, by way of unconditional donation, unto said DONEE, all of the rights, title and interest which the aforesaid DONORS have or which pertain to them and which they owned exclusively in the above-described real property over a one-hectare portion of the same, solely for hospital site only and for no other purpose, where a provincial government hospital shall be constructed.”
The donation was recorded i the Registry of Deeds, and a certificate of title to the property was transferred to the province of Siquijor. In accordance with the Deed of Donation, the construction of a hospital building was started in the following year.
However, for reasons unknown, only the foundation of the hospital building has, to this day, been completed.
Do the spouses Tan have valid grounds to revoke the donation? Explain briefly.
Being an overseas worker, Salvador issued to Ronaldo a duly notarized Special Power of attorney (SPA) authorizing the latter to enter into a contract of lease over Salvador’s property covered by TCT no. 122433 for a period of three years with SISI Corp. Salvador entrusted to Ronaldo the owner’s duplicate of the TCT in case SISI Corp. needed to verify the same.
Hearing rumors that the subject property was sold, Salvador went to the Register of Deeds and was shocked to find out that TCT No. 122433 had been canceled and TCT No. 334388 had been issued in Eduardo’s name. To Vindicate his property rights, Salvador filed a complaint for cancellation of title and reconveyance. Salvador was able to prove that he was out of the country when the purported sale as executed.
On the other hand, Eduardo claims to be an innocent purchase for value, stating that he paid the fair market value to Ronaldo and that he replied on her fact that Ronaldo and that he relied on the fact Ronaldo presented the original owner’s duplicate of Salvador’s TCT. He likewise inspected the property and determined that Salvador was indeed the owner.
If you were the judge, decide. Explain briefly.
Atory is one of the five children of Jawo. Jawo was registered owner of a four-hectare parcel of land in Sta. Cruz, Laguna covered by TCT No. 77347. When Jawo died, the owner’s duplicate of the TCT was kept by Jawo’s daughter, Akiko (sister of Atoy), who resided in the said property. wanting to have the said four-hectare property registered under his name, Atoy got in touch with Franz who had special connections with the Register of deeds of Sta. Cruz, Laguna. TCT No. 77347 was then cancelled and TCT No. 84660 was issued in Atoy’s name on January 29, 2013. Atoy immediately mortgaged the property to the Rural Bank of Sta. Cruz (RBSC). Upon default and after being declared the winning bidder in the extrajudicial foreclosure sale, RSBC consolidated ownership with the issuance of TCT No. 94477 in its name.
How will Akiko and the other heirs of Jawo be able to successfully argue that RBSC is not an innocent purchaser for value? Explain briefly.
How does the New Civil Code distinguish between immovable and movable properties? Explain briefly and give two examples for each.
[This item has two questions] This case involves two competing titles: TCT No. 23456 in the name of Flor and TCT No. 65432 in the name of de Luna. Flor’s title was derived from Rodrigo’s title was originally obtained through a judicial confirmation of the title in 1950 based on a survey plan approved in 1931. On the other hand, de Luna derived her TCT No. 65432 from Diaz who obtained an original title through judicial confirmatio of title at a much later date, i 1970, in the basis of a survey plan approved in 1921. It turned out that Flor’s TCT no. 23456, although titled prior in time, was based on a survey plan that was marred with numerous blatant, obvious ad serious defects, to the point that the trial court found it dubious, irregularly approved ad was therefore fake.
(a) Discuss the principle of “qui prior est tempore, potior est jure” in the torrens system of land registration.
(b) As between Flor and de Luna, whose title should be declared valid and whose title should be voided? Explain briefly.
In 20088, a fire razed the Register of Deeds of San Fernando, Pampanga (RD). Several titles on file were burned. Long before the fire, Tito, Vic, and Joey had been living in a 350-sq.m. lot covered by TCT No. 49933, which which they inherited from their parents. The original of TCT no. 49933 on file with the RD was among the titles which were bured. To effect the partition agreed among them, the siblings filed a verified petition for reconstitution of the TCT before your court.
To support the petition, the siblings presented: (i) a notarized affidavit of loss duly recorded and registered with the RD; (ii) a photograph of TCT no. 49933; (iii) real property tax declaration and receipts to evidence payment of real property taxes, together with the sketch and subdivision plan; (iv) a land Registration Authority (LRA) Report which state that the survey and subdivision plans and the techical description of the reconstituted property; (v) a microfilm copy of the plans ad technical description onn file with the LRA; and (vi) the Extrajudicial settlement of Estate executed amon them.
The public prosecutor, duly deputized by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), prays for the denial of the petition, and argues that the foregoing documents are insufficient for reconstitution of TCT No. 49933.
Should the petition for reconstitution be granted? Explain briefly.
XI
Ely borrows Php 2,000,000.00 from Mia and mortgages and a parcel of land to secure the loan. The mortgage provides for a 5% monthly interest, a five-years maturity period, a default provision in case of non-payment of interest of principal, and an extra judicial foreclosure provision. On the fourth year, Ely failed to pay interest for three consicutive months. After sending a demand letter, Mia declares Ely in default and extrajudicially forecloses the mortgage. Mia is the highest bidder in the foreclose sale, and consolidates ownership upon the lapse of the redemption period.
Can Ely have the foreclosure annulled and recover the property? Explain briefly.
Luz is the owner of a parcel of land consisting of 500 square meters located in San Miguel, Bulaccan annd covered by TCT No. R-248016. Luz agrees to sell to Minda the lad for Php 500,000.00, payable in te mothly installments, with the first installment payable upon execution of the contract to sell, to which Minda acceded. They also agreed that the title to the land shall only transfer to Minda full paymennt of the connsideration, and that any and all taxes, fees and expenses incidental to the sale will be paid by Minda.
Draft a notarized cotract to sell between Luz and Minda.
Live Webinar 1 & 2: BIR Tax Compliance for VAT Entity
Live Webinar: Returns and Reports Preparation under eBIR Forms and Online Submissions
Onsite Training: PEZA Registered Entities: Taxation and Basic Reports
Live Webinar on Ph Payroll Computations and Taxation
Live Webinar: Withholding Taxes, Subjects & Applications
Onsite Training: Basic Bookkeeping for Non-Accountants
Onsite Seminar: BIR Examination: Their Procedures and Our Defenses
Live Webinar: Winning BIR Tax Assessments Series: Process, Remedies & Writing Effective Protest
Onsite Training: Basic Business Accounting & BIR Compliance VAT Entity
Live Webinar: Value Added Tax: In and Out
Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 34-2025
Revenue Memorandum Circular No. 32-2025
Republic Act No. 12079
2025 Filing of Annual Financial Statements and General Information Sheet
Revenue Regulations No. 012-2025
Δ
Phone : (02) 5310-2239
Mobile : Smart: 0939-916-2952 Globe: 0967-497-4989
Email : info(@)taxacctgcenter.ph
© Tax and Accounting Center 2025. All Rights Reserved