[Solved] Noel and Liza were sweethearts. Liza became pregnant. Knowing that Noel was preparing for the bar examinations, Miguel, a lawyer and cousin of Liza threatened Noel with the filing of a complaint for immorality in the Supreme Court, thus, preventing him from taking the examinations unless he marries Liza. As a consequence of the threat, Noel married Liza. Can the marriage be annulled on the ground of intimidation under Article 45 of the Family Code?

Q.	Noel and Liza were sweethearts. Liza became pregnant. Knowing that Noel was preparing for the bar examinations, Miguel, a lawyer and cousin of Liza threatened Noel with the filing of a complaint for immorality in the Supreme Court, thus, preventing him from taking the examinations unless he marries Liza. As a consequence of the threat, Noel married Liza. Can the marriage be annulled on the ground of intimidation under Article 45 of the Family Code?
A.	Yes, because without the threat, Noel would not marry Liza.
B.	Yes, because the threat, to enforce the claim of Liza, vitiates the consent of Noel in contracting the marriage.
C.	No, because the threat made by Miguel is just and legal.
D.	No, because Miguel is not a party to the contract of marriage between Liza and Noel.
Answer» C. No, because the threat made by Miguel is just and legal.

1.1k

Do you find this helpful?

View all MCQs in

Philippines Civil Law Society

Discussion

No comments yet

Related MCQs

Bruce was pronounced by his physician to be suffering from an incurable disease and that he is going to die at anytime. Bruce was engaged to Margarita. In view of the pronouncement of Bruce’s doctor, the two got married without a marriage license. Six (6) months thereafter, Bruce died. The validity of their marriage was attacked on the ground that the marriage was not a marriage in articulo mortis. What is the status of the marriage between Bruce and Margarita.
In 1986, A, a married woman file a petition for adoption of C which was granted. In 2011, A filed a petition to rescind or nullify the decree invoking Article 185 of the Family Code requiring that the husband and wife must jointly adopt and the retroactive provision of the Family Code under Article 256. How do you think the court will decide?
A and B are married. A filed an action for declaration of nullity of their marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity. In its judgment, the court decreed that a final decree of nullity shall be issued only after there is partition, distribution of the properties in accordance with Article 147 of the Family Code.
A & B lived together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. For a few months before his death, A was writing his autobiography and stated that he loved B so much and because of that, they decided to live together as husband and wife, but planned to marry. At the time he was writing his autobiography, B was pregnant and he stated in his autobiography that he was the father of the child inside the womb of B. He died without finishing it and failed to sign the same. Two (2) months thereafter, the child C, was born, hence, B sought to register the child under the name of A but the Local Civil Registrar refused, hence, she filed a suit for mandamus to compel the registrar to register the child under A’s name. She testified as narrated above; D, the father of A testified that during the lifetime of A he lived with B and she was pregnant at that time. E the brother of A likewise testified along the same line. Is the action of B correct?
Clark Kent, an American national, married Darna dela Cruz, a Filipino Citizen last March 8, 1992 with a valid marriage license. It appears that Clark Kent was issued a certificate of legal capacity to contract marriage after the celebration of the marriage. The U.S. embassy claims that such marriage is void from the beginning. Is the contention of the U.S. embassy tenable?
Marvin was married to Charina on February 14, 1990. Charina gave birth to a baby girl she named Noreen. Due to irreconcilable differences, Marvin left the conjugal dwelling. Charina, on the other hand fell in love with David and they decided to live together as husband and wife on May 12, 1992. Six (6) years after or on September 8, 1998, Marvin died in an accident. Free at last, Charina and David decided to get married on February 14, 2000 executing an affidavit that they have been living together as husband and wife for more than five (5) years. The marriage took place but the solemnizing officer failed to execute an affidavit that he ascertained the qualifications of the contracting parties. Two (2) years later, Charina died living a considerable amount of properties. Noreen, assisted by her grandparents, filed a petition questioning the validity of her marriage to David. If you were the judge, how will you decide on the petition?
A lent money to B in 1950 payable in 1951. Despite demand, B failed to pay. In 2011, his daughter who recently became a lawyer sent a demand for payment to B who sent a letter acknowledging the debt and asked for one (1) year to pay but failed to pay within the extended period. A filed a complaint for sum of money. How do you think the court will decide?
A and B both Filipinos are married, but at the time of the marriage, B was 16 years old. The marriage was celebrated in Hongkong and valid there as such. A wants to get married again and came to you for advice. Give your advice to A.
A and B got married without the benefit of a license. During the marriage, A left B and got married to C, hence, B sued A for bigamy. In the meantime A sued B for declaration of nullity of their marriage and moved for the suspension of the criminal case. Will the action prosper?
Glenda, a Filipino citizen and John Riel, an Australian citizen, got married in the consular office of the Philippines in Australia. According to the laws of Australia, a marriage solemnized by a consular official is valid, provided that such marriage is celebrated in accordance with the laws of such consular official. What is the status of the marriage of Glenda and John Riel?