1.

6pts

Yes, there is no absence or lack of consent in the marriage of Adrian Paul and Ghelyn Zhane as they met through the marriage
willfully and knowledgeable of the contract they are entering into. Article 2 of the Family Code which provides that consent
freely given by the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer is an essential requirement and the absence of which
would render the marriage void ab initio. Article 2 refers not to the motive of marriage, In the case at bar, for purpose of
obtaining foreign citizenship, and therefore immaterial to the case.

2. 2pts

Motion to dismiss should be granted following the doctrine laid down in the Molina case regarding Psychological Incapacity,
among which are: a)plaintiff must prove allegations of psychological incapacity; b) the root cause must be medically or
psychologically identified, c) Juridical antecedence; d) gravity; and e) incurability.

In the case at bar, Louise Jean failed to prove that Keith is indeed psychologically incapacitated to perform essential marital
obligations for failure of expert witness to examine Keith and therefore cannot prove existence of psychological incapacity.

3. 4pts

The motion to dismiss is hereby denied as foreign divorce contemplated under article 26 of the Family Code also means or
pertains to Filipinos having bean naturalized in a foreign country. Therefore, the divorce decree is valid for all intents and
purposes and as to nationality, what is contemplated under Article 26 is not the nationality of the spouse who obtained the
divorce at the time of marriage but the nationality of the spouse when such divorce decree is obtained.

4. 4pts

Yes, the judge should grant the motion of the respondents on grounds that no party can be declared in default to prevent
collusion or one-sided decision as to the merits of the case. In case of doubt, set by precedent decisions by the Supreme Court,
all doubts shall be resolved favoring the validity of the marriage and under AM NO. 02-11-10-SC, parties must be required to
adduce to their evidence. However, respondent can face penalty or fine for such non-appearance or failure to answer several
times.

5. 5pts

The RTC ruling shall be affirmed and appeal shall be dismissed. Under the Family Code and in a case decided by the Supreme
Court, judgement on summary proceedings declaring a person presumptively dead is final and executory and thus, not
appealable.

Furthermore, the family Code provides that a person can be presumed dead if the present spouse has a well-founded belief
that the absent spouse is dead, within 4 yrs. of lack of communication or knowledge as to his whereabouts.

The civil code extended this provision when it provides such circumstances like when the person is on board a vessel lost in a
sea voyage or an aero plane that went missing, person is a member of the AFP and took part in a war or a person is danger of
death for other circumstances, absence of two years would suffice.

In the case at bar, Fatima had well-founded belief that Paolo is presumptively dead on grounds of relatives lack of knowledge to
Paolos whereabouts and the four-year absence would suffice for declaring Paolo presumptively dead.
6. 7pts

A) Yes, it should be granted pursuant to Article 35 of the Family Code which provides that subsequent marriage not falling
under Article 41 (Presumptive Death) of this code shall be rendered void ab initio.

B) Yes, under the Civil Code, a civil action intimately related to a criminal action must be decided first when this two actions are
pending on different courts as judgement on civil case may be determinative of criminal liability or guild of the person also
charged with a criminal case.

C) Sharee may file complaint for legal separation on grounds of sexual infidelity after Gian entered into a bigamous marriage
with Tiffany while their marriage is subsisting pursuant to Article 55 of the Family Code. Sharee may also file for moral and
exemplary damages or actual damages if the case allow pursuant to provisions of Article 21 of the Civil Code.

7 9.5pts

A) Sheila can file a summary proceeding declaring Martin Khol presumptively dead and having it recognized in order for Sheilas
marriage to Martin Khol is dissolved by reason of death. Sheila has strong legal grounds anchored under Article 41 of the family
code in relations to Article 391 of the Civil Code which provides that a person who boarded a vessel lost in a sea voyage or an
airplane that went missing can be presumed dead with the absence of 2 years as sufficient time.

B) Sheila and Napoleon have limited legal remedies. One of which is for Sheila to file a legal separation on grounds of
abandonment without just cause pursuant to Article 55 of the Family Code or she may file a petition for declaration of nullity on
grounds of psychological incapacity by reason of Martin Khols protracted and willful refusal to perform his obligation as a
husband when he knowingly and intentionally slipped out of the airport and went somewhere else without informing his wife
of his whereabouts of that he is not among those on board the MH370/MAS370. His willful, intentional and knowledgeable
instance of not informing his wife has caused emotional distress, pain and anguish on the part of Sheila.

7. 3pts

Krishas action for annulment cannot prosper on grounds of Eli Golds physical incapacity to act or perform essential marital
obligations; and he being afflicted with a serious and incurable disease has been known to Krishta from the beginning and yet
married him. Her act of marrying him has ratified such grounds for annulment of their marriage to the effect that she waived
her right to file an action to dissolve their marriage on account of Eli Golds condition.

9. 5

The motion to dismiss appeal shall be denied because under the Civil Code provisions governing periods, in counting period, the
first day shall be excluded and the last day shall include. When the last day fall on a non-working holiday or weekend, the last
day shall be presumed the next working day following the non-working holiday or weekend. Thus, Mary Grace is still on time on
having filed his appeal on the last day of the 15 day period receipt of the decision being appealed.
8. 9points

A) Yes, because in a case decided by the SC and under the family code a marriage license would not be required if the parties
have cohabited for not less than 5 years but the judge must ascertain the facts and truthfulness of such circumstance by
requiring the parties to file the affidavit.

In the case at bar, Judge Chaves failed to attest the validity and truthfulness of such affidavit as it would be absurd that Joel and
Christine have really cohabited together for 5 years before the marriage as they would be 13 and 15 respectively at the time
they started cohabiting.

B) Judge Chaves also violated a provision on the FC governing authority of the solemnizing officer under the Family Code, an
incumbent member of the judiciary may only solemnize marriage within their courts jurisdiction. Clearly, Judge Chaves is not
within his courts jurisdiction thereby he has no authority to solemnize the marriage. Also Judge Chaves failed to check the
parental consent required under the Family Code as both contracting parties are over the age of 18 but less than 21 years of
age.

9. 3 points

Gay Marriage in foreigin countries between 2 filipinos are valid under Philippine laws?