1999 Bar Question 12

In 1950, the Bureau of Lands issued a Homestead patent

to A. Three years later, A sold the homestead to B. A died in
1990, and his heirs filed an action to recover the homestead
from B on the ground that its sale by their father to the latter
is void under Section 118 of the Public Land Law. B contends,
however, that the heirs of A cannot recover the homestead
from him anymore because their action has prescribed and
that furthermore, A was in pari delicto. Decide.

Answer
The sale of the land by A to B, 3 years after the issuance of the homestead patent,
being in violation of Section 118 of the Public Land Act, is void from its inception.
The action filed by the heirs of B to declare the nullity or inexistence of the
contract and to recover the land should be given due course.
Bs defense of prescription is untenable because an action which seeks to declare
the nullity of inexistence of a contract does not prescribe. (Article 1410 of the Civil
Code.)
The Defense of Pari Delicto in not applicable, since the law itself allows the
homesteader to reacquire the land even if it has been sold.

1991 Bar Question No. 12b

Maria Enriquez failed to pay the realty taxes on her unregistered agricultural land
located in Magdugo, Toledo City. In 1989, to satisfy the taxes due, the City sold it at public
auction to Juan Miranda, an employee at the Treasurers Office of said City, whose bid at
P10,000.00 was the highest. In due time, a final bill of sale was executed in his favor.
Maria refused to turn-over the possession of the property to Juan alleging that (1) she
had been, in the meantime, granted free patent and on the basis thereof an Original
Certificate of Title was issued to her, and (2) the sale in favor of Juan is void from the
beginning in view of the provision in the Administrative Code of 1987 which prohibits
officers and employees of the government from purchasing directly or indirectly any
property sold by the government for non payment of any tax, free or other public charge.
(b) If the sale is void, may Juan recover the P10,000.00? If not, why not?

Answer
Juan may recover. Under Article 1416 of the civil code, when the
agreement is not illegal per se but is merely prohibited, and the
prohibition by the law is designated for the protection of the
plaintiff, he may, if public policy is thereby enhanced, recover what
he has paid or delivered.

2004 Bar Question No. 2a3

Distinguish briefly but clearly between:
1. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
2. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
3. Civil Obligation and natural obligation?

Answer
Civil Obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do and not to
do. It gives the creditor the legal right to compel by an action in
court the performance of such obligation.
A natural obligation is based on equity and natural law. There
is no legal right to compel performance thereof but if the debtor
voluntarily pays it, he cannot recover what was paid.

2002 Bar Question No. 7a

Way back in 1948, Windas husband sold in favor of Verde Sports Center Corp. a 10-hectare
property belonging to their conjugal partnership. The sale was made without Windas
knowledge, much less consent. In 1950, Winda learned of the sale, when she discovered the
deed of sale among the documents in her husbands vault after his demise. Soon after, she
noticed that the construction of the sports complex had started. Upon completion of the
construction in 1952, she tried but failed to get free membership privileges in Verde.
Winda now files a suit against Verde for the annulment of the sale on the grounds that she
did not consent to the sale. In answer, Verde contends that, in accordance with the Spanish
Civil Code which was in force, the sale in 1948 of the property did not need her concurrence.
Verde contends that in any case the action has prescribed or is barred by laches. Winda
rejoins that her Torrens title covering the property is indefeasible and imprescriptible.
(a) Define or explain the term laches
(b) Decide the case, stating for your decision.

Answer
(a) Laches means failure or neglect, for an unreasonable and
unexplained length of time, to do what, by exercising due diligence,
could or should have been done earlier. It is negligence or omission
to assert a right within a reasonable time.
(b) Windas claim that her Torrens Title covering the property is
indefeasible and Imprescriptible is not tenable. The rule of
indefeasibility of a Torrens Title means that after one year from the
date of issue of the decree of registration or if the land has fallen
into the hands of an innocent purchaser for value, the title
becomes inconstestable and incontrovertible.

IMPRESCRIPTIBILITY, on the other hand, means that no title

to the land in derogation of that of the registered owner may be
acquired by adverse possession or acquisitive prescription or that
registered owner does not lose by extinctive prescription his right
to
recover
ownership
and
possession
of
the
land.
The action in this case is for annulment of the sale executed by
the husband over a conjugal partnership property covered by a
Torrens Title. Actions on contracts are subject to prescription.
Hence, the action to set aside the sale, nonetheless, is already
barred by prescription.

2000 Bar Question No. 16a

In an action brought to collect a sum of money based on a
surety agreement, the defense of laches was raised as the claim
was filed more than seven years from the maturity of the
obligation. However, the action was brought within the ten-year
prescriptive period provided by law wherein actions based on
written contracts can be instituted.
(a) Will the defense prosper? Reason.

Answer
No. the defense will not prosper. The problem did not give facts
from which laches may be inferred. Mere delay in filing an action,
standing alone, does not constitute laches.

2000 Bar Question No. 16b

In an action brought to collect a sum of money based on a
surety agreement, the defense of laches was raised as the claim
was filed more than seven years from the maturity of the
obligation. However, the action was brought within the ten-year
prescriptive period provided by law wherein actions based on
written contracts can be instituted.
(b) What are the essential elements of laches?

Answer
(b) The four basic elements of laches are:
1. Conduct on the part of the defendant or of one under whom he claims,
giving rise to the situation of which complainant seeks a remedy;
2. Delay in asserting the complainants rights, the complainant having
had knowledge or notice of the defendants conduct and having been
afforded an opportunity to institute suit;
3. Lack of knowledge on the part of the defendant that the complainant
would assert the right on which he bases his suit;
4. Injury or Prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to
the complainant, or the suit is not held to be barred.

2000 Bar Question No. 17

In 1955, Ramon and his sister Rosario inherited a parcel of
land in Albay from their parents. Since Rosario was gainfully
employed in Manila, she left Ramon alone to possess and cultivate
the land. However, Ramon never shared the harvest with Rosario
and was even able to sell one-half of the land in 1985 by claiming
to be the sole heir of his parents. Having reached retirement age in
1990 Rosario returned to the province and upon learning what
had transpired, demanded that the remaining half of the land be
given to her as her share. Ramon opposed, asserting that he has
already acquired ownership of the land by prescription, and that
Rosario is barred by laches from demanding partition and
reconveyance. Decide the conflicting claims.