2013 POLITICAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS I.

In the last quarter of 2012, about 5,000 container vans of imported goods intended for the Christmas Season were seized by agents of the Bureau of Customs. The imported goods were released only on January 10,2013. A group of importers got together and filed an action for damages before the Regional Trial Court of Manila against the Department of Finance and the Bureau of Customs. The Bureau of Customs raised the defense of immunity from suit and, alternatively, that liability should lie with XYZ Corp. which the Bureau had contracted for the lease of ten (10) high powered van cranes but delivered only five (5) of these cranes, thus causing the delay in its cargo-handling operations. It appears that the Bureau, despite demand, did not pay XYZ Corp. the Php 1.0 Million deposit and advance rental required under their contract. (A) Will the action by the group of importers prosper? (5%) (B) Can XYZ Corp. sue the Bureau of Customs to collect rentals for the delivered cranes? (5%) II. While Congress was in session, the President appointed eight acting Secretaries. A group of Senators from the minority bloc questioned the validity of the appointments in a petition before the Supreme Court on the ground that while Congress is in session, no appointment that requires confirmation by the Commission on Appointments, can be made without the latters consent, and that an undersecretary should instead be designated as Acting Secretary. Should the petition be granted? (5%) III. A robbery with homicide had taken place and Lito, Badong and Rolliewere invited for questioning based on the information furnished by a neighbor that he saw them come out of the victims house at about the time of the robbery/killing. The police confronted the three with this and other information they had gathered, and pointedly accused them of committing the crime. Lito initially resisted, but eventually broke down and admitted his participation in the crime. Elated by this break and desirous of securing a written confession soonest, the police called City Attorney Juan Buan to serve as the trios counsel and to advise them about their rights during the investigation. Badong and Rollie, weakened in spirit by Litos early admission, likewise admitted their particip ation. The trio thus signed a joint extra-judicial confession which served as the main evidence against them at their trial. They were convicted based on their confession. Should the judgment of conviction be affirmed or reversed on appeal? (5%) IV.

Congress enacted a law providing for trial by jury for those charged with crimes or offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. The law provides for the qualifications of members of the jury, the guidelines for the bar and bench for their selection, the manner a trial by jury shall operate, and the procedures to be followed. Is the law constitutional? (6%) V. As a leading member of the Lapiang Mandirigma in the House of Representatives, you were tasked by the party to initiate the moves to impeach the President because he entered into an executive agreement with the US Ambassador for the use of the former Subic Naval Base by the US Navy, for free, i.e., without need to pay rent nor any kind of fees as a show of goodwill to the U.S. because of the continuing harmonious RP-US relations. Cite at least two (2) grounds for impeachment and explain why you chose them. (6%) VI. Congress passed Republic Act No. 7711 to comply with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Anak Ti Ilocos, an association of Ilocano professionals, argued that Republic Act No. 7711discarded the definition of the Philippine territory under the Treaty of Paris and in related treaties; excluded the Kalayaan Islands and the Scarborough Shoals from the Philippine Archipelagic baselines; and converted internal waters into archipelagic waters. Is the petition meritorious? (6%) VII. As he was entering a bar, Arnold -who was holding an unlit cigarette in his right hand -was handed a match box by someone standing near the doorway. Arnold unthinkingly opened the matchbox to light his cigarette and as he did so, a sprinkle of dried leaves fell out, which the guard noticed. The guard immediately frisked Arnold, grabbed the matchbox, and sniffed its contents. After confirming that the matchbox contained marijuana, he immediately arrested Arnold and called in the police. At the police station, the guard narrated to the police that he personally caught Arnold in possession of dried marijuana leaves. Arnold did not contest the guards statement; he steadfastly remained silent and refused to give any written statement. Later in court, the guard testified and narrated the statements he gave the police over Arnolds counsels objections. While Arnold presented his own witnesses to prove that his possession and apprehension had been set-up, he himself did not testify. The court convicted Arnold, relying largely on his admission of the charge by silence at the police investigation and during trial. From the constitutional law perspective, was the court correct in its ruling? (6%)

VIII. Bobby, an incoming third year college student, was denied admission by his university, a premiere educational institution in Manila, after he failed in three (3) major subjects in his sophomore year. The denial of admission was based on the universitys rules and admission policies. Unable to cope with the depression that his non-admission triggered, Bobby committed suicide. His family sued the school for damages, citing the schools grossly unreasonable rules that resulted in the denial of admission. They argued that these rules violated Bobbys human rights and the priority consideration that the Constitution gives to the education of the youth. You are counsel for the university. Explain your arguments in support of the universitys case. (6%) IX. Conrad is widely known in the neighborhood as a drug addict. He is also suspected of being a member of the notorious Akyat-Condo Gang that has previously broken into and looted condominium units in the area. Retired Army Colonel Sangre who is known as an anti-terrorism fighter who disdained human and constitutional rights and has been nicknamed terror of Mindanao is now the Head of Security of Capricorn Land Corporation, the owner and developer of Sagittarius Estates where a series of robberies has recently taken place. On March l, 2013, Conrad informed his mother, Vannie, that uniformed security guards had invited him for a talk in their office but he refused to come. Later that day, however, Conrad appeared to have relented; he was seen walking into the security office flanked by two security guards. Nobody saw him leave the office afterwards. Conrad did not go home that night and was never seen again. The following week and after a week-long search, Vannie feared the worst because of Col. Sangres reputation. She thus reported Conrads disappearance to the police. When nothing concrete resulted from the police investigation, Vannie at the advice of counsel f1led a petition for a writ of amparo to compel Col. Sangre and the Sagittarius Security Office to produce Conrad and to hold them liable and responsible for Conrads disappearance. (A) Did Vannies counsel give the correct legal advice? (6%) (B) If the petition would prosper, can Col. Sangre be held liable and/or responsible for Conrads disappearance? (6%) X. The Ambassador of the Republic of Kafiristan referred to you for handling, the case of the Embassys Maintenance Agreement with CBM, a private domestic company engaged in maintenance work. The Agreement binds CBM, for a defined fee, to maintain the Embassys elevators, air -conditioning units and electrical facilities. Section 10 of the Agreement provides that the Agreement shall be governed by Philippine laws and that any legal action shall be brought before the proper court of Makati. Kafiristan

terminated the Agreement because CBM allegedly did not comply with their agreed maintenance standards. CBM contested the tennination and filed a complaint againstKafiristan before the Regional Trial Court of Makati. The Ambassador wants you to file a motion to dismiss on the ground of state immunity from suit and to oppose the position that under Section 10 of the Agreement, Kafiristan expressly waives its immunity from suit. Under these facts, can the Embassy successfully invoke immunity from suit? (6%) XI. In her interview before the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC),Commissioner Annie Amorsolo of the National Labor Relations Commission claims that she should be given credit for judicial service because as NLRC Commissioner, she has the rank of a Justice of the Court of Appeals; she adjudicates cases that are appealable to the Court of Appeals; she is assigned car plate No. 10; and she is, by law, entitled to the rank, benefits and privileges of a Court of Appeals Justice. If you are a member of the JBC, would you give credit to this explanation? (6%) XII. In the May 2013 elections, the Allied Workers Group of the Philippines (AWGP), representing land -based and sea-based workers in the Philippines and overseas, won in the party list congressional elections. Atty. Abling, a labor lawyer, is its nominee. As part of the partys advocacy and services, Congressman Abling engages in labor counseling, particularly for local workers with claims against their employers and for those who need representation in collective bargaining negotiations with employers. When labor cases arise, AWGP enters its appearance in representation of the workers and the Congressman makes it a point to be there to accompany the workers, although a retained counsel also formally enters his appearance and is invariably there. Congressman Abling largely takes a passive role in the proceedings although he occasionally speaks to supplement the retained counsels statements. It is otherwise in CBA negotiations where he actively participates. Management lawyers, feeling that a congressman should not actively participate in cases before labor tribunals and before employers because of the influence a congressman can wield, filed a disbarment case against the Congressman before the Supreme Court for his violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and for breach of trust, in relation particularly with the prohibitions on legislators under the Constitution. Is the cited ground for disbarment meritorious? (6%)

2013 COMMERCIAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS I. Antonio issued the following instrument: August 10, 2013 Makati City P100,000.00 Sixty days after date, I promise to pay Bobby or his designated representative the sum of ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00) from my BPI Acct. No. 1234 if, by this due date, the sun still sets in the west to usher in the evening and rises in the east the following morning to welcome the day. (Sgd.) Antonio Reyes Explain each requirement of negotiability present or absent in the instrument. (8%) II. Benny applied for life insurance for Php1.5 Million. The insurance company approved his application and issued an insurance policy effective Nov. 6, 2008. Benny named his children as his beneficiaries. On April 6, 2010, Benny died of hepatoma, a liver ailment. The insurance company denied the childrens claim for the proceeds of the insurance policy on the ground that Benny failed to disclose in his application two previous consultations with his doctors for diabetes and hypertension, and that he had been diagnosed to be suffering from hepatoma. The insurance company also rescinded the policy and refunded the premiums paid. Was the insurance company correct? (8%) III. From his first term in 2007, Congressman Abner has been endorsing his pork barrel allocations to Twin Rivers in exchange for a commission of 40% of the face value of the allocation. Twin Rivers is a nongovernmental organization whose supporting papers, after audit, were found by the Commission on Audit to be fictitious. Other than to prepare and submit falsified papers to support the encashment of the pork barrel checks, Twin Rivers does not appear to have done anything on the endorsed projects and Congressman Abner likewise does not appear to have bothered to monitor the progress of the projects he endorsed. The congressman converted most of the commissions he generated into US dollars, and deposited these in a foreign currency account with Banco de Plata (BDP). Based on amply-supported tips given by a congressman from another political party, the Anti-Money Laundering Council sent BDP an order: (1) to confirm Cong. Abners deposits with the bank and to provide details of these deposits; and (2) to hold all withdrawals and other transactions involving the congressmans bank accounts.

As counsel for BDP, would you advise the bank to comply with the order? (8%) IV. Rudy is a fine arts student in a university. He stays in a boarding house with Bernie as his roommate. During his free time, Rudy would paint and leave his finished works lying around the boarding house. One day, Rudy saw one of his works an abstract painting entitled Manila Traffic Jam - on display at the university cafeteria. The cafeteria operator said he purchased the painting from Bernie who represented himself as its painter and owner. Rudy and the cafeteria operator immediately confronted Bernie. While admitting that he did not do the painting, Bernie claimed ownership of its copyright since he had already registered it in his name with the National Library as provided in the Intellectual Property Code. Who owns the copyright to the painting? Explain. (8%) V. You are a member of the legal staff of a law firm doing corporate and securities work for Coco Products Inc., a company with unique products derived from coconuts and whose shares are traded in the Philippine Stock Exchange. A partner in the law firm, Atty. Buenexito, to whom you report, is the Corporate Secretary of Coco Products. You have long been investing in Coco Products stocks even before you became a lawyer. While working with Atty. Buenexito on another file, he accidentally gave you the Coco Products file containing the companys planned corporate financial rehabilitation. While you knew you had the wrong file, your curiosity prevailed and you browsed through the file before returning it. Thus, you learned that a petition for financial rehabilitation is imminent, as the company could no longer meet its obligations as they fell due. Soon after, your mother is rushed to the hospital for an emergency operation, and you have to raise money for her hospital bills. An immediate option for you is to sell your Coco Products shares. The sale would be very timely because the price of the companys stocks are still high. Would you sell the shares to raise the needed funds for your mothers hospitalization? Take into account legal (5%) and ethical (3%)considerations.(8% total points) VI. Delano Cruz is in default in the payment of his existing loan from BDP Bank. To extend and restructure this loan, Delano agreed to execute a trust receipt in the banks favor covering the iron pellets Delano imported from China one year earlier. Delano subsequently succeeded in selling the iron pellets to a smelting plant, but the proceeds went to the payment of the separation benefits of his employees who were laid off as he reduced his operations. When the extended loan period expired without any significant payment from Delano (not even to the extent of the proceeds of the sale of the iron pellets),BDP Bank consulted you on how to proceed against

Delano. The bank is contemplating the filing of estafa pursuant to the provisions of Pres. Decree No. 115 (Trust Receipts Law) to force Delano to turn in at least the proceeds of the sale of the iron pellets. Would you, as bank counsel and as an officer of the court, advise the bank to proceed with its contemplated action? (8%) VII. Stable Insurance Co. (SIC) and St. Peter Manufacturing Co. (SPMC) have had a long-standing insurance relationship with each other; SPMC secures the comprehensive fire insurance on its plant and facilities from SIC. The standing business practice between them has been to allow SPMC a credit period of 90 days from the renewal of the policy within which to pay the premium. Soon after the new policy was issued and before premium payments could be made, a fire gutted the covered plant and facilities to the ground. The day after the fire, SPMC issued a managers check to SIC for the fire insurance premium, for which it was issued a receipt; a week later SPMC issued its notice of loss. SIC responded by issuing its own managers check for the amount of the premiums SPMC had paid, and denied SPMCs claim on the ground that under the cash and carry principle governing fire insurance, no coverage existed at the time the fire occurred because the insurance premium had not been paid. Is SPMC entitled to recover for the loss from SIC? (8%) VIII. In the November 2010 stockholders meeting of Greenville Corporation, eight (8) directors were elected to the board. The directors assumed their posts in January 2011. Since no stockholders meeting was held in November 2011, the eight directors served in a holdover capacity and thus continued discharging their powers. In June 2012, two (2) of Greenville Corporations directors- Director A and Director B -resigned from the board. Relying on Section 29 of the Corporation Code, the remaining six (6) directors elected two (2) new directors to fill in the vacancy caused by the resignation of Directors A and B. Stockholder X questioned the election of the new directors, initially, through a letter-complaint addressed to the board, and later (when his letter-complaint went unheeded), through a derivative suit filed with the court. He claimed that the vacancy in the board should be filled up by the vote of the stockholders of Greenville Corporation. Greenville Corporations directors defended the legality of their action, claiming as well that Stockholder Xs derivative suit was improper. Rule on the issues raised. (8%) IX. Fil-Asia Air Flight 916 was on a scheduled passenger flight from Manila when it crashed as it landed at the Cagayan de Oro airport: the pilot miscalculated the planes approach and undershot the runway. Of the 150 people on board, ten (10) passengers died at the crash scene.

Of the ten who died, one was a passenger who managed to leave the plane but was run over by an ambulance coming to the rescue. Another was an airline employee who hitched a free ride to Cagayan de Oro and who was not in the passenger manifest. It appears from the Civil Aeronautics Authority investigation that the co-pilot who had control of the planes landing had less than the required flying and landing time experience, and should not have been in control of the plane at the time. He was allowed to fly as a co-pilot because of the scarcity of pilots Philippine pilots have been recruited by foreign airlines under vastly improved flying terms and wages so that newer and less trained pilots are being locally deployed. The main pilot, on the other hand, had a very high level of blood alcohol at the time of the crash. You are part of the team that the victims hired to handle the case for them as a group. In your case conference, the following questions came up: A. Explain the causes of action legally possible under the given facts against the airline and the pilots; whom will you specifically implead in these causes of action? (5%) B. How will you handle the cases of the passenger run over by the ambulance and the airline employee allowed to hitch a free ride to Cagayan de Oro? (3%) X. Bell Philippines, Inc. (BelPhil) is a public utility company, duly incorporated and registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Its authorized capital stock consists of voting common shares and non-voting preferred shares, with equal par values of Php100.00/share. Currently, the issued and outstanding capital stock of BelPhil consists only of common shares shared between Bayani Cruz, a Filipino with 60% of the issued common shares, and Bernard Fleet, a Canadian, with 40%. To secure additional working fund, BelPhil issued preferred shares to Bernard Fleet equivalent to the currently outstanding common shares. A suit was filed questioning the corporate action on the ground that the foreign equity holdings in the company would now exceed the 40% foreign equity limit allowed under the Constitution for public utilities. Rule on the legality of Bernard Fleets current holdings. (8%)