Reconstituted some of the questions in my Civil Procedure Finals under Atty. HMB. 17 October 2009.
1. What is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction?
2. Dante purchased a condominium unit from Mystica Corporation at P11 million. He paid 50% of the price on the condition that on or before 10 January 2009, the condominium shall be fit for occupancy. When Dante came to the Philippines on 15 January 2009, he found that the place has not even been started yet. He filed a case for specific performance and damages against Mystica Corporation before the Regional Trial Court, which rendered judgment in favor of Dante On Appeal, Mystica Corporation contend that the RTC had no jurisdiction because P.D. 957 has specifically vested the same with the HLURB.
(a) Rule on the contention of Dante.
(b) Suppose the appeal was denied, will a certiorari lie?
(c) [another question which I forgot]
3. When is LEAVE OF COURT necessary, and what are the effects if not obtained?
(a) Amendment
(b) Bill of Particulars
(c) Demurrer
(d) Intervention
(e) Deposition pending action
4. Q filed a case for collection of sum of money against "X', "Y" and "Z" for P250,000, P300,000 and P400,000 respectively, at RTC Quezon City. X is an incompetent living with his mother at San Fernando, La Union. Y is a partnership, whose partners have different offices at Makati City. And Z is a foreign corporation doing business in the Philippines without license.
(a) Can there be joinder of parties?
(b) To whom can summonses be served on "X", "Y" and "Z"?
(c) When should they file their respective answers?
5. [forgot the bloody question]
6. KKK attached a parcel of land owned by XXX to answer for his debt. Upon favorable judgment, KKK moved to execute on the attached properties.
(a) In case the property is insufficient, what can XXX do?
(b) [forgot the bloody question]
(c) What are the other remedies of XXX?
7. Distinguish quo warranto under Rule 66 and under the Omnibus Election Code.
8. Defendant filed a motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to the evidence but was denied. The defendant nevertheless filed a demurrer which was granted. On appeal, the demurrer was dismissed by the appellate court and remanded the case to the court a quo for further proceedings. Defendant presented evidence. The court ruled in favor of the defendant, which became final and executory. The plaintiff moved for new trial on the ground of mistake and excusable negligence. Rule on the contention of the plaintiff.
9. A foreclosed the property of B. The court issued the Order of Confirmation, which B questioned in his motion for reconsideration. C, the second mortgagee, sought to redeem the property. The court granted the same based on equity of redemption. Is the court correct?
10. Plaintiff filed a case of unlawful detainer against the defendants. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. However, the appeal was perfected and a supersedeas bond was posted. On appeal, the plaintiff sought the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in possession of the property. Defendants opposed on the grounds that the appellate court has no jurisdiction to issue injunctive reliefs.
(a) Does the appellate court have the power to issue injunctive reliefs?
(b) Suppose the judgment was in favor of the defendant, would your answer be the same?
(c) Suppose the defendant refuses to vacate the property, can he be held liable for contempt?
11. Distinguish direct from indirect contempt.
1. What is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction?
2. Dante purchased a condominium unit from Mystica Corporation at P11 million. He paid 50% of the price on the condition that on or before 10 January 2009, the condominium shall be fit for occupancy. When Dante came to the Philippines on 15 January 2009, he found that the place has not even been started yet. He filed a case for specific performance and damages against Mystica Corporation before the Regional Trial Court, which rendered judgment in favor of Dante On Appeal, Mystica Corporation contend that the RTC had no jurisdiction because P.D. 957 has specifically vested the same with the HLURB.
(a) Rule on the contention of Dante.
(b) Suppose the appeal was denied, will a certiorari lie?
(c) [another question which I forgot]
3. When is LEAVE OF COURT necessary, and what are the effects if not obtained?
(a) Amendment
(b) Bill of Particulars
(c) Demurrer
(d) Intervention
(e) Deposition pending action
4. Q filed a case for collection of sum of money against "X', "Y" and "Z" for P250,000, P300,000 and P400,000 respectively, at RTC Quezon City. X is an incompetent living with his mother at San Fernando, La Union. Y is a partnership, whose partners have different offices at Makati City. And Z is a foreign corporation doing business in the Philippines without license.
(a) Can there be joinder of parties?
(b) To whom can summonses be served on "X", "Y" and "Z"?
(c) When should they file their respective answers?
5. [forgot the bloody question]
6. KKK attached a parcel of land owned by XXX to answer for his debt. Upon favorable judgment, KKK moved to execute on the attached properties.
(a) In case the property is insufficient, what can XXX do?
(b) [forgot the bloody question]
(c) What are the other remedies of XXX?
7. Distinguish quo warranto under Rule 66 and under the Omnibus Election Code.
8. Defendant filed a motion for leave of court to file a demurrer to the evidence but was denied. The defendant nevertheless filed a demurrer which was granted. On appeal, the demurrer was dismissed by the appellate court and remanded the case to the court a quo for further proceedings. Defendant presented evidence. The court ruled in favor of the defendant, which became final and executory. The plaintiff moved for new trial on the ground of mistake and excusable negligence. Rule on the contention of the plaintiff.
9. A foreclosed the property of B. The court issued the Order of Confirmation, which B questioned in his motion for reconsideration. C, the second mortgagee, sought to redeem the property. The court granted the same based on equity of redemption. Is the court correct?
10. Plaintiff filed a case of unlawful detainer against the defendants. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. However, the appeal was perfected and a supersedeas bond was posted. On appeal, the plaintiff sought the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in possession of the property. Defendants opposed on the grounds that the appellate court has no jurisdiction to issue injunctive reliefs.
(a) Does the appellate court have the power to issue injunctive reliefs?
(b) Suppose the judgment was in favor of the defendant, would your answer be the same?
(c) Suppose the defendant refuses to vacate the property, can he be held liable for contempt?
11. Distinguish direct from indirect contempt.
No comments:
Post a Comment