[Solved] X and Y are married. They were leasing a parcel of land in 2007; they constructed a house on the leased lot valued at P1M and resided thereon. While in business, they incurred liability from Z who sued them for failure to pay. Judgment was rendered and it became final and executory. Can the house be levied upon?

Q.	X and Y are married. They were leasing a parcel of land in 2007; they constructed a house on the leased lot valued at P1M and resided thereon. While in business, they incurred liability from Z who sued them for failure to pay. Judgment was rendered and it became final and executory. Can the house be levied upon?
A.	The house can be levied upon to answer for the obligation because it is not a family home.
B.	The house is exempt from execution because it is a family home.
C.	The house can be levied upon and sold, but the first P200,000.00 or P300,000.00 shall be given to X and Y.
D.	The house can be sold after levy because X and Y did not file a motion to quash the levy contending that the house is a family home, hence, waived the right to invoke the exemption from levy.
Answer» A. The house can be levied upon to answer for the obligation because it is not a family home.

1.9k

Do you find this helpful?

View all MCQs in

Philippines Civil Law Society

Discussion

No comments yet

Related MCQs

A borrowed money from B. As security for the payment of the loan, he executed a chattel mortgage on the building erected on his land and the machinery stored therein. For failure to pay the loan, he was sued and a judgment was rendered against him, where the building and the machinery were levied upon. Is the chattel mortgage binding upon C, the plaintiff?
A, B & C are the co-owners of a parcel of land. They leased it to D. For failure to pay the rents, A alone sued D. Will the action prosper?
A is the owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 123 located in a subdivision property being developed by XYZ Corporation. He did not know the exact location of the lot, hence, he consulted the developer who pointed to a lot, hence, he constructed his house. It turned out that it was another lot covered by TCT No. 124. Is A a builder in good faith?
A is the owner of a parcel of land adjoining B’s lot. B, knowing that the lot did not belong to him constructed his house on the lot belonging to A. Which of the following is the not correct?
A and B are married. They are governed by the conjugal partnership of gains. A, the Executive Vice-President of ABC Corp. signed as a surety in a loan secured by the company from Metrobank for the rehabilitation of the company. As business was good after rehabilitation, A was given a house and lot, a brand new caw and raise in his salary. The company was sued due to its failure to pay the loan. Are the properties of A and B liable?
A leased a parcel of land from B. With the consent of B, A constructed his house. If B will file an application for registration of the land, what will happen to the house?
Wendy, single, bought a parcel of land in Dagupan City from Amante for P600,000.00. A contract was executed between them which already vested upon Wendy full ownership of the property, although payable in monthly installments for a period of 4 years. One year after the execution of the contract, Wendy got married to Lorenzo. They executed a marriage settlement whereby they agreed that their properties shall be governed by the regime of conjugal partnership of gains. Thereafter, subsequent installments were paid from the conjugal partnership funds. Is the land conjugal or paraphernal?
A and B are married. They have a daughter C who has a 5-year old child. C went to Hongkong to work for 2 years and left the child to the custody of X and Y who are not related to them. When A and B learned about the departure of their daughter, they demanded the surrender of the custody of their granddaughter, D to them, but X and Y refused, hence A and B sued X & Y for habeas corpus. When the order was served upon them, they produced the body of the child. The court dismissed the petition immediately. Is the dismissal correct?
Spouses Reynaldo and Ana decided to separate and to voluntary dissolve their conjugal partnership. Hence, they executed a public document wherein they declare that they had no debts, that they were voluntarily dissolving their conjugal partnership, and that each of them would thereafter be free to acquire or dispose of any property independently of the other. Thereafter, they lived apart. Ana engaged in business which unfortunately failed. Reynaldo, on the other hand, continued to be gainfully employed and was able to acquire properties through his own efforts. The creditors of Ana obtained a judgment against the latter which they could not satisfy because Ana was insolvent. Could the creditors of Ana obtain satisfaction of the judgment out of the properties of Reynaldo?
A is the owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 1. He leased it to B. When sued for ejectment, B contended that A’s title is void. Is he correct?