PROPERTY MIDTERM

1. A. IMMOVABLE PROPERTIES BEING SUBJECT OF CHATTEL MORTGAGES. Abacus Inc., a BPO company, to secure its loan contracted with Citibank, executed a Chattel Mortgage on its building which it rents from another party. Upon Abacus' failure to pay the loan, Citibank foreclosed on the mortgage. Citibank opposed the foreclosure, claiming that it is void since immovable properties, like the building herein, cannot be proper subjects of chattel mortgages which is designed for personal properties only. Decide.

1. B. IMMOVABLE OR MOVABLE PROPERTIES. (Ito ay kaduktong ng facts ng 1A). The Government of Quezon City filed a case for collection of real property taxes against Abacus Inc. for its computers, servers and modems in the building that it mortgaged to Citibank. Abacus Inc. contends that the said properties are clearly movable as they can be transferred from one place to another. Is the collection of taxes correct?

1. C. IMMOVABLE OR MOVABLE PROPERTIES. (Kaduktong na ulit ng mga naunang items). The Goverment of Quezon City filed another cases for collection of unpaid real property taxes on the building itself. Abacus Inc. asserted that the taxes should not be collected for the land where the property is erected is not owned by the company. Should Abacus Inc. be liable to pay the taxes? Would your answer be different considering the fact that Abacus Inc. and Citibank both treated the property as personal property by virtue of the chattel mortgage?

1. D. TRANSFER OF RIGHTS; APPLICABILITY OF ESTOPPEL. (super kaduktong ulit). Citibank decided to drop its claim on the chattel mortgage and transferred all its rights to Devbank, one of its sister company. Devbank then decided to foreclose on the property. Abacus Inc. said that Devbank, not being a party to a the case, is not bound by the agreement on the mortgage to treat the building as personal property, hence, the alleged invalidity of the mortgage. Rule on the matter.

2. SCOPE OF PUBLIC DOMINION. IFPC is a private party connected with the PPA, whose main branch is erected on a reclaimed parcel of land. IFPC faces a foreclosure threat from its creditor, upon its failure to pay a loan secured by its building. If the creditor would be sustained by the court, the building will be foreclosed and sold on a public auction. Is the credito correct on the probable foreclosure?

3. ACCRETION/ALLUVION/PUBLIC DOMINION. Sir Chief owns Lot 3A. Lot 3B is inexistent as it is occupied by a river. Lot 3C however, is pretty much existent. During one hot summer (parang fairy tale lang HAHA), the river in Lot 3B dried up, thereby exposing the lot itself. Sir Chief filed an application for registration of land claiming that under property law, the dried up land, as it is adjacent to his own, is now under his ownership. Is Sir Chief's contention correct?

4. BPS. C contracted the services of A, a mason, to construct an improvement in C's lot. C expressly showed and delineated the boundary of the space where A should undertake construction. After some time, when the construction was well under way, B, the owner of the lot adjacent to that of C, notified A that the a portion of the boundary where A is constructing is already part of his land. A continued the project under the instructions of C. What kind of builder is A? What are his liabilities if there are any?

5. Hindi ko na itatype basta ito ay saktong saktong situations and ruling sa BACHRACH vs SEIFERT na case.

PROPERTY FINALS1. PRESCRIPTION. Johnny and Noy were co-owners of a lot. On August 21, 1968, Johnny repudiated the co-ownership. Noy only found out the repudiation on November 23, 1980, when which he filed a civil case for partition. Johnny invokes that Noy's silence for approximately 12 years amounts to a qualified or presumable tolerance, and argues that the civil case filed by Noy should not prosper by reason of prescription. Is Noy justified in this case?

2. DONATION. James and Jean are siblings and were the receivers of a donation of a parcel of land from her mother WITH THE consideration that they take care of her until she dies and have her remains cremated. Upon her death, Jean and James were about to assume ownership of the subject land until the other siblings contested that the donation is not valid because the donation, concerning a real property, was not executed through a public instrument. Is the donation valid in this case?

3. EASEMENT. Jinggoy owns a lot situated in between other lots. To reach his lot, he has been using the same way through the same lot for years. It happened that a hotel was raised on the lot where he passes through. He now filed a civil case for recognition of easement of right of way, requesting the court to order the demolition of the hotel as he has been using the right of way for years now and there is no other defined way of reaching his lot. Shall the case prosper?

4. MOVABLE / IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. A hotel erected by a lessee in the land was using generators for the running of the business. The City of Lipa filed a case against this hotel for collection of unpaid taxes, arguing that the generator is a real property. Should the City of Lipa be sustained in this case?

5. CO-OWNERSHIP. James and Jeane are co-owners of a lot. James loaned and encumbered his land to BPI. As James failed to pay his loan, BPI then sought to foreclose the said land. Jeane now filed a case against James and BPI, claiming that the loan is not valid, and in turn so is the foreclosure, as her consent as a co-owner was never secured.

6. LEASE. (Continuation of situation in #5). Bong happened to be a lessee in the land owned by James and Jeane. Based on your answers in item 5, who has the right between James, Jeane and BPI to collect the rents from Bong?

7. EJECTMENT. (Continuation of situation in #6). Based on your answer in item 6, consider that Jeane dies. Bong's leasing agreement with James in Jeane is only valid for ten years. Given that the time has already elapsed, who between James and BPI can eject Bong out of the lot? Is Bong allowed to be reimbursed of his expenses in the building? Should James / BPI reimburse Bong of all the things he put in the building, considering the fact the was just a lessee and not the owner of the lot/building? Decide.

8. BPS IN GOOD/BAD FAITH. (Continuation of situation in #7). Bong now demands in court that he be reimbursed for the expenses of upkeep of the building, and the construction of an access road and a fountain. Should he be reimbursed of these? If yes, who among James and BPI should do the reimbursement?

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW FINALS

1. A company has been engaging in the business of transporting petrol products. The Bureau of Internal Revenue demanded this company to pay an amount for unpaid taxes on the delivery trucks it uses to transport petrol products. The company then filed a case against BIR, alleging that under the delivery trucks qualify as common carrier within the meaning of the law, and that as such, are exempted from taxes. The RTC dismissed the case citing that the trucks cannot be considered as common carrier for the company serves for a limited clientele. Is the dismissal valid?

2. A.Enumerate the SCOPE and JURISDICTION of the Pollution Adjudication Board.

2. B. The City Government of Caloocan has undergone fishing activities which, in the eyes of the LLDA, were detrimental to the Laguna Lake. Following this, LLDA issued a cease and desist order against the City Government of Caloocan. The CGC filed a case against LLDA, contesting that LLDA does not have the power to issue the cease and desist order. Decide on this matter.

3. A. Bail is a constitutionally-guaranteed right. This applies also to those detained for violation of an environmental law or mandate. What are the factors that the Court should consider in determining the bail to be paid by an environmental offender?

3. B. For violating an environmental law, Diaz is facing a trial. On a certain date, he was required by the Court to appear for the pre-trial stage. Without notifying the Court, Diaz did not appear. The Judge dismissed the case. The Prosecutor moved for reconsideration but was denied. Is the dismissal proper?

4. What are the requisites that must be met before a national project affecting the environmental and ecological balance of local communities can be implemented?

5. Pacifico is the owner of the lot. While digging to plant some underground crops, Pacifico suddenly discovered minerals deposited in his lot. Immediately, he dug deep and exploited all minerals he can find. The State now filed a case against Pacifico arguing that the minerals are the right of the State, irrespective of Pacifico's ownership of the lot. Decide on this case.

6. Rights to fish in a body of water is being contested between municipal/resident fisherfolks and foreign fisherfolks hailing from other provinces. Discuss who should have the preferential right and the cases in which this preferential right may be regulated and which arm of the State should undertake the regulation.

7. Water permit is a very important aspect of environmental law. It represents the government's agreement or permission over a body of water or source of utility. There are some situations however, where activities over bodies/utilities of water may be undertaken even without a valid water permit. What are these instances?

8. Give ten (10) significant features of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases that make the said rules a good campaign for the protection of the environment.

AGRARIAN LAW FINALS

1. Discuss the procedure laid down in RA 6657 to procure private agricultural lands for purposes of redistribution.

2. Name the rules that are made to protect the interest of the beneficiaries under the Stock Distribution Option.

3. A. Juan and Pedro are owners of adjacent lots expanding to a total of 6 hectares. Juan has filed for land conversion pending approval. Pedro filed his request for land conversion to the Secretary of DENR. Give the three instances where requests for land conversion can be filed directly to the Secretary of DENR and rule whether Pedro should file his request to the DENR Secretary or to the Regional Director.

3. B. (Continuation of 3.A.RBM Development became the representative of Juan and Pedro for a total of 5 hectares of their 6 hectares. Where should RBM file the case for land conversion, DENR Secretary or Regional Director?

4. A. What is an Affidavit of Seller/Transferor and what are the facts that need to be stipulated in said Affidavit?

4. B. What is an Affidavit of Buyer/Transferee and what are the facts that need to be stipulated in said Affidavit?

5. What are the grounds for protest for land use conversion filed before the Regional Director/DENR Secretary?

6. A. Discuss the importance of "disturbance compensation" and what would be the effects of nonpayment of the same to entitled parties.

6. B. When shall disturbance compensation be granted to entitled parties?

7. A. Discuss the production sharing scheme.

7. B. Discuss the profit sharing scheme.

8. A. Differentiate PD 27 and RA 6657 with respect to agricultural lands covered.

8. B. Differentiate PD 27 and RA 6657 with respect to retention rights.