(b) No, a foreign divorce decree between a foreign spouse and a Filipino spouse that is not contested by both parties is not in itself sufficient to annul the registration in the civil registry. Before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our courts, the party claiming it must prove the divorce as a fact and prove its compliance with the foreign law that allows it (Republic v. Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018). Criminal Law Bar Exam 2018 Suggested Answers I Roberto and Ricardo have a long-standing dispute over disputes in ATTY. SALVADOR N. MOYA II, LL.M. Managing Partner, Moya Ablola Ebarle Life Member of the Law Firm, IBP, Board of Directors of the Bulacan Chapter, Phil. Trial Lawyers, Inc. & Vanguard of the Phil.
Constitution Inc. Advanced Bar Examiner, Pre-Bar, Pre-Week and Dummy Bar Examiner in Restructuring Law, UP Law Center Shadow Bar Examiner in Restructuring Law, UP College of Law Bar Examiner in Restructuring Law and in The Case of chair (Criminal Law), EDGE Legal Review Center Bar Examiner in Restructuring Law and Criminal Law, Villasis Law Center Bar Examiner in Restructuring Law, Powerhaus Review Center Bar Examiner in Criminal Law, Recoletos Law Center (2018) Professor of Bar, Restorative Law Forecasts, Magnificus Juris Reviews and Seminars Inc. Danielle`s property, located in Digos City, Davao del Sur, has an estimated value of PhP 25,000. The complaint was accompanied by Danielle`s certificate of non-forum shopping, which was made in Davao City and duly notarized by Atty. Dane Danoza, a notary. 3 x-x-x (b) Was the action properly initiated before the RTC in davao City? (2,5%) NOTES À 4 BARRES ET AFFAIRES EN DROIT RÉ REPARATIONATEUR (P. 359 & P. 19-20) PAR ATTY. S.
N. MOYA II, LL.M. Answer: No. SECTION 3. Summary procedure.— Except in cases covered by the Land Leases Act or where the law expressly provides otherwise, all actions relating to forced entry and unlawful detention, regardless of the amount of damages or unpaid rent claimed for recovery, shall be subject to the summary procedure provided for herein. (n) [Rule 3, Rule 70, Rules of Procedure]. 5 F. What is the jurisdiction of the Regional Court of First Instance (CTT) in civil matters? What is the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) and the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) in civil matters? One.
In accordance with Article 19 of BP 129, as amended by RA 7691, TCs exercise exclusive jurisdiction in civil matters: 6 x-x-x (2) In all civil actions involving the ownership or possession of immovable property or its participation, when the estimated value of the property in question exceeds twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000.00), or in civil actions in Metro Manila, if this value exceeds fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000.00), with the exception of claims for violent trespassing and illegal possession of land or buildings for which initial jurisdiction has been transferred to metropolitan courts of first instance, municipal courts of first instance and courts of first instance of municipal circuit; (Cabrera v. Francisco, 704 SCRA 103, August 28, 2013.) 7 x-x-x (c) Does the complaint need to be verified or is the certification sufficient? (2.5%) 8 BAR NOTES AND RESTORATIVE LAW CASES (P. 627 AND 76) BY ATTY. S. N. MOYA II, LL.M. REPLY: § 3(b), Rules of Summary Procedure II. Civil cases § 3. Procedural documents.— x-x-x B. Examinations. — All procedural documents must be examined.
9 F. Is non-examination of a procedural act inherently? A. No. Consideration of a pleading is a formal requirement, not a judicial requirement. The goal is to ensure that the allegations in a brief are true and correct. As such, the court may order or respond to the correction of unverified pleadings and waive strict compliance with the rules. (Bacolor vs VL Makabali Memorial Hospital, Inc., above.) 10 2018 BAR QUESTION II II Dendenees Inc. and David, both shareholders who jointly own 25% of Darwinkle Inc., filed a lawsuit with Makati`s RTC to force its Board of Directors (CA) to hold the Annual Meeting of Shareholders (ASM) on June 21, 2017, as set forth in Darwinkle Inc.`s Articles of Association. with the prayer that a temporary injunction be used as a deadline of April 30, 2017. 11 The complaint alleged, inter alia, that the refusal to convene the DSO on 21 June 2017 was based on the Board`s plan to allow Databank Inc.
(which allegedly owned 50% of Darwinkle Inc. after 15 July 2017) to participate in the DSO in order to effectively dilute the complainants` assets and remove them from BSB. Dendenees Inc. and David paid the amount of PhP 7,565 as a filing fee based on the Clerk`s assessment. The Board filed an application for rejection for lack of jurisdiction. They argued that the filing fee should have been based on the actual value of the shares of Dendenees Inc. and David, which together were worth PhP 450 million. 12 If you were the judge, would you grant the application for dismissal? (5%) 13 NOTES AND CASES OF LAWYERS IN RESTRUCTURING LAW (see.