In 1990, A, B & C purchased a real property but agreed that the same be registered under the name of A. In 2009, B & C asked for partition, but A contended that he was already the exclusive owner more than 20 years on the ground of laches having lapsed since the registration of the property under his name. Is A correct?

Related MCQs

• A is the owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. 1. Through an oral agreement between B & A. A agreed that the property be registered under the name of B so that he can use it in securing a loan with Metrobank. When A sought to recover the property from B, the latter refused contending that he was the owner of the same. Is the contention of B correct?
• A is the owner of a parcel of land covered by a TCT No. 1. B stole the title, forged his signature and transferred it under his name. TCT No. 2 was issued under his name. He sold it to C who registered under his name. When returned to the Philippine in 2010, he discovered that his title was transferred to another. Can he recover the same?
• A tolerated B to use his land, hence, B constructed a road where his trucks would pass through, going in and out of his land. Fifty (50) years thereafter, A asked B to pay rentals but B refused contending that he has already acquired ownership over the easement of right of way by prescription. Is B correct?
• 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?
• A & B are married with children C & D, but were living separately from one another. A got married to E and begot children, F & G. After his death, E, F & G filed a petition for settlement of his estate. B, C &D intervened to claim their share of the estate and contended that since F & G are illegitimate as the marriage of A & E is void, their share is only ½ of the share of the legitimates. Is the contention correct?
• A constituted B as his agent to sell his property. B found C as the buyer who was willing to buy under the terms agreed upon but suddenly A changed his mind and decided not to sell the property. One week later, A and C, entered into a contract of sale over the property. Is B entitled to commission?
• In 1986, Jennifer and Brad were madly in love. In 1989, because a certain Picasso painting reminded brad of her, Jennifer acquired it and placed it in his bedroom. In 1990, Brad and Jennifer broke up. While Brad was mending his broken hearth, he met Angie and fell in love. Because the Picasso painting reminded Angie of him, Brad in his will bequeathed the painting to Angie. Brad died 1995. Saddened by Brad’s death, Jennifer asked for the Picasso painting as a remembrance of him. Angie refused and claimed that Brad, in his will, bequeathed the painting to her is Angie correct? Why or why not?
• 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?
• Magdalene and Shantung Company entered into a contract of agency before the consul general of the Philippines in Singapore. They stipulated that Magdalene shall be the administrator of the real properties of Shantung Company in the said country. By virtue of the said contract, Magdalene sold the 1 hectare land of Shantung Company located in Singapore to Mayhem Real Estate Corporation without any special power of attorney. The said contract of sale was executed before the vice consul of the Philippines in Singapore. Under the laws of Singapore, the sale of a real property by an agent without a special power of attorney is valid. Shantung Company filed a suit for the annulment of the contract of sale on the ground that Magdalene has no authority to sell the property. If you were the judge, which of the following courses of action should you take?
• Nik sold to Paul a real property payable in monthly installments within a 5 year period, Paul was only able to pay 14 monthly installments, after the 60 day grace period and after 30 days of Paul’s receipt of the notice and letter calling for the rescission of the contract Nik rescinded the same. Paul contended that there was an automatic rescission done by Nik, hence, the same was void. Give the best answer.