Conspiracy; Avoidance of Greater Evil

CRIMINAL LAW QUESTION 2004

BB and CC, both armed with knives, attacked FT. The victim's son, ST, upon seeing the attack, drew his gun but was prevented from shooting the attackers by AA, who grappled with him for possession of the gun. FT died from knife wounds. AA, BB and CC were charged with murder.

In his defense, AA invoked the justifying circumstance of avoidance of greater evil or injury, contending that by preventing ST from shooting BB and CC, he merely avoided a greater evil. Will AA's defense prosper? Reason briefly. 

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No, AA's defense will not prosper because obviously there was a conspiracy among BB, CC and AA, such that the principle that when there is a conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all, shall govern. The act of ST, the victim's son, appears to be a legitimate defense of relatives; hence, justified as a defense of his father against the unlawful aggression by BB and CC. ST's act to defend his father's life, cannot be regarded as an evil inasmuch as it is, in the eyes of the law, a lawful act.

What AA did was to stop a lawful defense, not greater evil, to allow BB and CC achieve their criminal objective of stabbing FT. 

Death; Effects; Simultaneous Death

CIVIL LAW QUESTION 1999

Mr. and Mrs. Cruz, who are childless, met with a serious motor vehicle accident with Mr. Cruz at the wheel and Mrs. Cruz seated beside him, resulting in the instant death of Mr. Cruz. Mrs. Cruz was still alive when help came but she also died on the way to the hospital. The couple acquired properties worth One Million (P1 ,000,000.00) Pesos during their marriage, which are being claimed by the parents of both spouses in equal shares. Is the claim of both sets of parents valid and why? 

(b) Suppose in the preceding question, both Mr. and Mrs. Cruz were already dead when help came, so that no-body could say who died ahead of the other, would your answer be the same to the question as to who are entitled to the properties of the deceased couple? 

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

(a) No, the claim of both parents is not valid. When Mr. Cruz died, he was succeeded by his wife and his parents as his intestate heirs who will share his estate equally.   His estate was 0.5 Million pesos which is his half share in the wife, will, therefore, inherit 0.25 Million Pesos and his parents will inherit 0.25 Million Pesos. When Mrs. Cruz died, she was succeeded by her parents as her intestate heirs. They will inherit all of her estate consisting of her 0.5 Million half share in the absolute community and her 0.25 Million inheritance from her husband, or a total of 0.750 Million Pesos.

 In sum, the parents of Mr. Cruz will inherit 250,000 Pesos while the parents of Mrs. Cruz will inherit 750,000 Pesos.

(b) This being a case of succession, in the absence of proof as to the time of death of each of the spouses, it is presumed they died at the same time and no transmission of rights from one to the other is deemed to have taken place. Therefore, each of them is deemed to have an estate valued at P500,000,00, or one-half of their conjugal property of P1 million. Their respective parents will thus inherit the entire P1 Million in equal shares, of P500,000.00 per set of parents

Death; Effects; Simultaneous Death

CIVIL LAW QUESTION 1998

Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died in a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died first. Jaime's only surviving heir is his wife, Julia, who is also Willy's mother. Willy's surviving heirs are his mother, Julia and his wife, Wilma.

1. In the settlement of Jaime's estate, can Wilma successfully claim that her late husband, Willy had a hereditary share since he was much younger than his father and, therefore, should be presumed to have survived longer? 

2. Suppose Jaime had a life insurance policy with his wife, Julia, and his son, Willy, as the beneficiaries.  Can Wilma successfully claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy's estate? 

SUGGESTED ANSWERS:

1. No, Wilma cannot successfully claim that Willy had a hereditary share in his father's estate. Under Art. 43, Civil Code, two persons "who are called to succeed each other" are presumed to have died at the same time, in the absence of proof as to which of them died first. This presumption of simultaneous death applies in cases involving the question of succession as between the two who died, who in this case are mutual heirs, being father and son.

2. Yet, Wilma can invoke the presumption of survivorship and claim that one-half of the proceeds should belong to Willy's estate, under Sec. 3 (jj) par. 5 Rule 131, Rules of Court, as the dispute does not involve succession. Under this presumption, the person between the ages of 15 and 60 years is deemed to have survived one whose age was over 60 at the time of their deaths. The estate of Willy endowed with juridical personality stands in place and stead of Willy, as beneficiary.

What entries in the Civil Registry may be changed or corrected without a judicial order?

CIVIL LAW QUESTION 2006

SUGGESTED ANSWER:  

Only clerical or typographical errors and first or nick names may be changed or corrected without a judicial order under RA 9048.

Clerical or typographical errors refer to mistakes committed in the performance of clerical work in writing, copying, transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register. The mistake is harmless and innocuous, such as errors in spelling, visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding, absolute community amounting to 1 Million Pesos.  This and can be corrected or changed only by reference to other existing records. Provided, however, that no correction must involve the change of nationality, age, status or sex of the petitioner. 

Change of Name; Under RA 9048

CIVIL LAW QUESTION 2006

Zirxthoussous delos Santos filed a petition for change of name with the Office of the Civil Registrar of Mandaluyong City under the administrative proceeding provided in Republic Act No. 9048. He alleged that his first name sounds ridiculous and is extremely difficult to spell and pronounce. After complying with the requirements of the law, the Civil Registrar granted his petition and changed his first name Zirxthoussous to "Jesus." His full name now reads "Jesus delos Santos."

Jesus delos Santos moved to General Santos City to work in a multi-national company. There, he fell in love and married Mary Grace delos Santos. She requested him to have his first name changed because his new name "Jesus delos Santos" is the same name as that of her father who abandoned her family and became a notorious drug lord. She wanted to forget him. Hence, Jesus filed another petition with the Office of the Local Civil Registrar to change his first name to "Roberto." He claimed that the change is warranted because it will eradicate all vestiges of the infamy of Mary Grace's father.

Will the petition for change of name of Jesus delos Santos to Roberto delos Santos under Republic Act No. 9048 prosper? 

SUGGESTED ANSWER: 

No, under the law, Jesus may only change his name once. In addition, the petition for change of name may be denied on the following grounds:

(1)          Jesus is neither ridiculous, nor tainted with dishonor nor extremely difficult to write or pronounce.

(2)          There is no confusion to be avoided or created with the use of the registered first name or nickname of the petitioner.

(3)          The petition involves the same entry in the same docu¬ment, which was previously corrected or changed under this Order [Rules and Regulations Implementing RA 9048]. 

Prejudicial Questions

CIVIL LAW QUESTION 1997

In the context that the term is used in Civil Law, state the

(a) concept, (b) requisites and (c) consequences of a prejudicial question.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

 (a)  Concept 

A prejudicial question is one which must be decided first before a criminal action may be instituted or may proceed because a decision therein is vital to the judgment in the criminal case. In the case of People vs. Adelo Aragon (L-5930, Feb. 17, 1954), the Supreme Court defined it as one which arises in a case, the resolution of which question is a logical antecedent of the issues involved in said case and the cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal (Paras, Vol. 1, Civil. Code Annotation, 1989 ed. p, 194).

(b)    Requisites

 1 The prejudicial question must be determinative of the case before the court.

2 Jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged in another tribunal.

(c) Consequences 

The criminal case must be suspended. Thus, in a criminal case for damages to one's property, a civil action that involves the ownership of said property should first be resolved (De Leon vs. Mabanag. 38 Phil. 202) 

Direct Tax vs. Indirect Tax

TAXATION QUESTION 1994

Distinguish a direct from an indirect tax.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

A DIRECT TAX is one in which the taxpayer who pays the tax is directly liable therefor, that is, the burden of paying the tax falls directly on the person paying the tax.

An INDIRECT TAX is one paid by a person who is not directly liable therefor, and who may therefore shift or pass on the tax to another person or entity, which ultimately assumes the tax burden. (Maceda v. Macaraig, 197 SCRA 771)

Collection of Taxes: Prescription

TAXATION QUESTION 2001

May the collection of taxes be barred by prescription? Explain your answer.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:          

Yes. The collection of taxes may be barred by prescription. The prescriptive periods for collection of taxes are governed by the tax law imposing the tax. However, if the tax law does not provide for prescription, the right of the government to collect taxes becomes imprescriptible. 

Family Courts Act

REMEDIAL LAW QUESTION 2001

a) How should the records of child and family cases in the Family Courts or RTC designated by the Supreme Court to handle Family Court cases be treated and dealt with?

b) Under what conditions may the identity of parties in child and family cases be divulged?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

a) The records of child and family cases in the Family Code to handle Family Court cases shall be dealt with utmost confidentiality. (Sec. 12, Family Courts Act of 1997)

b) The identity of parties in child and family cases shall not be divulged unless necessary and with authority of the judge. 

Conciliation Proceedings; Katarungang Pambarangay vs. Pre-Trial Conference

REMEDIAL LAW QUESTION 1999

What is the difference, if any, between the conciliation proceedings under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law and the negotiations for an amicable settlement during the pre-trial conference under the Rules of Court?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The difference between the conciliation proceedings under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law and the negotiations for an amicable settlement during the pre-trial conference under the Rules of Court is that in the former, lawyers are prohibited from appearing for the parties. Parties must appear in person only except minors or incompetents who may be assisted by their next of kin who are not lawyers.  (Formerly Sec. 9, P.D. No. 1508; Sec. 415, Local Government Code of 1991, R.A. 7160.) No such prohibition exists in the pre-trial negotiations under the Rules of Court.