Juris Bar Review

“Know the enemy and know yourself, and you can fight battles with no danger of defeat.” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War Preparing for the 2017 Bar Examination requires that bar reviewees should be cognizant of the recent trends and developments in the bar examination, to wit: 1. The continuance of the essay question’s lead role and the phase-out of MCQs. 2. Importance of a logic-driven or argument-driven approach to bar preparation. 3. Use of issue-spotter and remedy-focused questions. 4. Setting back the cut-off date for laws and jurisprudence to 30 June of the prior year (2016). 5. Increased use of objective-type questions. 6. Salient changes made in the bar exam coverage. 7. Return of legal forms or practical exercises Continuance of essay question’s lead role in bar exam and phase-out of MCQs The 2013 bar examination was notable for the revival of the essay question’s preeminent role. The examination comprised 80% essay questions and 20% multiple-choice questions (MCQs). This was a turn-around from the 2012 bar exam’s format of 60% MCQs and 40% essay questions and the 2011 bar where the use of problem-type essay questions was entirely discontinued in favor of MCQs and performance tests. The lead role of the essay question was further entrenched in the 2014 bar examination. For instance in Remedial Law, there were only 8 MCQs having a weight of 1% each or a total weight of only 8%. This allocation was substantially the same in the other bar subjects. In the 2015 bar examination, the use of MCQs was discontinued altogether. Importance of a logic-driven or argument-driven approach to bar preparation The restoration of the essay question’s leading role and the jettisoning of the MCQs is a clear indication of the importance given by the High Tribunal to testing the examinee’s ability to think and argue like a lawyer. In December 2012, the Supreme Court issued Bar Bulletin No. 1 for the guidance of the bar reviewees. The bulletin enumerates the basic elements of problemsolving or what we may call as competencies that the examiners shall particularly look for: 1. Proper understanding and appreciation of the facts, particularly of the components or details that can be material in resolving the given problem. 2. Appreciation of the applicable law or laws that may come into play. 3. Recognition of the issue or issues posed. 4. Resolution of the issues through the analysis and application of the law to the given facts. The bulletin states that the examinee’s presentation and articulation of his or her answer shall also be given weight. The guidelines for the 2013 to 2016 bars provide “that in a 5-point essay exam, the examiner can give credit even if the answer is not exactly correct but the answer is well-written and logical.” These statements in the bulletins and guidelines indicate that the examination will be argument-driven or logic-driven rather than conclusion-driven. This

information is important since most law students have been taught in law school to be conclusion-driven rather than argument-driven and little if any time has been devoted to the proper presentation and articulation of one’s answers. The examinee thus has to be trained in presenting his answer in such a way as to display to the examiner his familiarity with the basic elements of problemsolving. Issue-spotting and issue-responsiveness One of the competencies the examiners are looking out for is the “recognition of the issue or issues posed.” Issue-recognition is a core competency which may be developed by a rigorous mock-bar and coaching program. The bar examinee must be trained to distinguish between the call or immediate issue and the core or underlying issue of a bar exam question. Let us look at Question No. 4 of the 2016 remedial law bar exam: IV Eduardo, a resident of the City of Manila, filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila a complaint for the annulment of a Deed of Real Estate Mortgage he signed in favor of Galaxy Bank (Galaxy), and the consequent foreclosure and auction sale of his mortgaged Makati property. Galaxy filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of improper venue alleging that the complaint should be filed with the RTC of Makati since the complaint involves the ownership and possession of Eduardo's lot. Resolve the motion with reasons. The call (or the immediate issue) is the issue which is apparent from the text of the problem. In the above question the call or immediate issue, rephrased, is: Should the motion to dismiss the complaint for annulment of REM on the ground of improper venue be granted or denied? On the other hand, the core issue or the underlying issue is that which is not apparent from the text of the problem but whose resolution is essential in reaching the correct conclusion to the problem. In the problem above, the core or underlying issue may be stated as follows: Is the action for annulment of the REM a personal or a real action? If it is a personal action, then the motion to dismiss should be denied since the venue may be laid in the place where the plaintiff resides. On the other hand, if the action is a real one, then the motion to dismiss should be granted since the venue should be laid in the place where the real property is situated. Let us look at Subquestion No. 4(a) of the 2015 remedial law bar exam: IV. Strauss filed a complaint against Wagner for cancellation of title. Wagner moved to dismiss the complaint because Grieg, to whom he mortgaged the property as duly annotated in the TCT, was not impleaded as defendant. a.) Should the complaint be dismissed? The cursory reading of the question readily shows the immediate issue: Should the complaint for cancellation of title be dismissed for failure to implead the mortgagee? A perusal of the question then leads to the unraveling of the core or underlying issue: Should the complaint be dismissed for failure to implead an indispensable party? Identifying the core or underlying issue requires a familiarity with the legal rules and proper training and coaching in issue-spotting under a certified bar exam coach.

Process or remedy-focused questions In the 2013 bar, open-ended questions, which asked the examinee to give the appropriate legal steps, process, or remedy that is available to one of the parties, were widely used. Examples of such type of questions are questions IV(C) and IV(D) in Remedial Law: IV(C) Still in another case, this time for illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the prosecution has rested but you saw from the records that the illegal substance allegedly involved has not been identified by any of the prosecution witnesses nor has it been the subject of any stipulation. Should you now proceed posthaste to the presentation of defense evidence or consider some other remedy? Explain the remedial steps you propose to undertake. IV(D) In one other case, an indigent mother seeks assistance for her 14-year old son who has been arrested and detained for malicious mischief. Would an application for bail be the appropriate remedy or is there another remedy available? Justify your chosen remedy and outline the appropriate steps to take. Open-ended, practical, and elucidative questions are not new. They have been used on occasions in previous bar examinations and were the norm in the 1983 bar examination where the examinee was placed in the position of a lawyer acting for or advising a client. Their extensive use in the 2013 bar examinations indicates an exigent need to train bar reviewees on how to analyze and answer these types of questions. An example of a remedy-focused question in the 2014 remedial law bar exam is Question No. 20. Tom Wallis filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of his marriage with Debi Wallis on the ground of psychological incapacity of the latter. Before filing the petition, Tom Wallis had told Debi Wallis that he wanted the annulment of their marriage because he was already fed up with her irrational and eccentric behaviour. However, in the petition for declaration of nullity of marriage, the correct residential address of Debi Wallis was deliberately not alleged and instead, the residential address of their married son was stated. Summons was served by substituted service at the address stated in the petition. For failure to file an answer, Debi Wallis was declared in default and Tom Wallis presented evidence ex-parte. The RTC rendered judgment declaring the marriage null and void on the ground of psychological incapacity of Debi Wallis. Three (3) years after the RTC judgment was rendered, Debi Wallis got hold of a copy thereof and wanted to have the RTC judgment reversed and set aside. If you are the lawyer of Debi Wallis, what judicial remedy or remedies will you take? Discuss and specify the ground or grounds for said remedy or remedies. While another example of such a question is subquestion 4(b) in the 2015 remedial law bar: IV. Strauss filed a complaint against Wagner for cancellation of title. Wagner moved to dismiss the complaint because Grieg, to whom he mortgaged the property as duly annotated in the TCT, was not impleaded as defendant. a.) xxx

b.) If the case should proceed to trial without Grieg being impleaded as a party to the case, what is his remedy to protect his interest? as well as Question No. 15 of the 2016 remedial law bar: XV Chika sued Gringo, a Venezuelan, for a sum of money. The Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila (MeTC) rendered a decision ordering Gringo to pay Chika P50,000.00 plus legal interest. During its pendency of the appeal before the RTC, Gringo died of acute hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Atty. Perfecto, counsel of Gringo, filed a manifestation attaching the death certificate of Gringo and informing the RTC that he cannot substitute the heirs since Gringo did not disclose any information on his family. As counsel for Chika, what remedy can you recommend to your client so the case can move forward and she can eventually recover her money? Explain. (5%) It cannot be gainsaid that these types of questions are quite challenging for a bar examinee who after all has yet to practice law. Special attention should therefore be paid to training and coaching the bar candidate to field these types of questions. Gradual phase-out of MCQs The 2015 bar examination was notable for the elimination of the MCQ’s role. In the 2011 and 2012 bar exams, the MCQ portion was allocated a weight of 60% of the examinee’s grade. In 2013, however the weight of the MCQ portion was substantially reduced to 20%. In 2013, the number of MCQs was drastically cut from 100 MCQs in the 2011 and 2012 bar exams to only 10 to 20 MCQs, albeit the number of options was increased to five from four. In the 2014 bar, only 7-8 MCQs were asked with a total weight of only 7%-8% and the standard fouroption MCQ was reverted to. The table below illustrates the vicissitudes of the bar exam format from 2010 to 2016. YEAR 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

ESSAY 100% 40% 40% 80% 92%-93% 100% 100%

MCQ 0% 60% 60% 20% 7%-8% 0% 0%

Importance of jurisprudence and statutory updates Traditionally the cut-off date for jurisprudence and law to be covered in the bar examination was 30 June of the previous year. The 2013 bar exam proved quite challenging in that the cut-off date was 31 January of the same year. It even became tougher in the 2014 and 2015 bars which provided that 31 March 2014 and 31 March 2015, respectively, were the cut-off dates. In the 2014 remedial law bar exam, Question No. 12 was based on a Supreme Court decision promulgated on 10 February 2014 (Republic v. Olaybar) while Question No. 15 was based on a decision promulgated on 25 March 2014 (People v. Go). Needless to state these two cases could not have been taken up in law school by the 2014 bar candidates. Yet it would be foolhardy for the bar reviewee to undertake a case survey during the bar review. More or less a hundred cases

are promulgated by the Supreme Court every month and a bar examinee would not have the time or experience to wade through all these decisions and choose the salient ones. It is thus imperative to attend a bar review program where seasoned bar reviewers are surveying recent cases and statutes in order to choose those which may form the basis of bar exam questions. A welcome relief for the 2016 bar examinees was the setting back of the cut-off date to 31 May 2015. In the 2017 bar, the cut-off date is 30 June 2016. These are laudatory measures. From the time a case is made publicly available, a time lapse of about six months is necessary for the academe to “digest” the case and turn it into “actionable information” that can be used by the bar examinee or law student. Salient changes made in the bar exam coverage Some salient changes were made on the coverage of the bar examination. For example in Criminal Law, the Anti-Money Laundering Act was deleted from the bar exam coverage. After having been jettisoned in the 2013 bar exam, legal forms or practical exercises makes a comeback in this year’s exam. The legal forms on which the examinee will be tested are however limited to the following, as per the bar exam coverage on Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises released by the SC: 1. Quitclaims in labor cases. 2. Simple contracts – lease, sale of realty or personal property. 3. Promissory note. 4. Verification and certification of non-forum shopping. 5. Notice of hearing and explanation (all levels). 6. Affidavits – loss, change of name. In Item No. 6, it appears that the “Affidavits – change of name” referred to are the petitions for change of name under R.A. No. 9048. The bar exam subject with the most changes appears to be Remedial Law. I have drawn up a comparative table between the 2016 and 2016 Remedial Law bar exams to highlight the changes:

2016 REM BAR Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction. ADR and Pretrial and Discovery Guidelines.

Appeal from CTA.

2017 REM BAR Deleted. Distinction between real-party-ininterest and locus standi added. Deleted. Memorandum decisions added. “Final Judgment Rule; exceptions” added. Participation of the Solicitor General during appeals added. Deleted. Dismissal, reinstatement, and

withdrawal of appeal added. Dual function of appellate courts added. Harmless Error Rule added. Extended coverage of Special Only Writs of Habeas Corpus, Proceedings, including Settlement of Amparo, and Habeas Data are Estate of Deceased Persons, Change covered in Special Proceedings. of Name, and Correction of Entries in Civil Registry. In Writ of Habeas Data, the persons who may file petitions for writ of habeas data is added to the coverage. Chain of Custody in drugs cases. Deleted. Rule on DNA Evidence. Deleted. Rule on Electronic Evidence. Deleted.

Importance of mock-bar and coaching program further underscored The new developments in the bar examination format underscore the need for a training and coaching program that involves not only a series of mock-bar examinations but also one-on-one coaching with a feedback mechanism. The mere taking of practice exams by a reviewee and the giving to him of the answers would be inadequate. The reviewee must have the benefit of feedback from an experienced and competent trainer and this can only be had under a program that provides for one-on-one interaction with a coach. Using a series of specially crafted mock bar exams, the coach would be able to diagnose the weaknesses and strengths of the reviewee and to monitor and guide his progress. Individualized coaching is especially important for training the bar reviewee for the essay examination. Since the essay question requires the subjective judgment of the examiner, the examinee must be trained and honed in the proper manner of presenting his answer. Each examinee has his own strengths and weaknesses in approaching and answering essay questions and a “one size fits all” lecture or training session is not the proper approach. The comprehensive training program should especially train the examinee in the basic elements of problem-solving that the examiner is looking out for. Practice is also very important. It is absurd to just lecture a bar examinee on bar methods and techniques and then expect the examinee to magically deploy these during the bar examination. That would be like lecturing a child on how to swim and then throwing him into a ten-foot-deep pool. The examinee should undergo a series of mock-bar exams where he can get the feel of applying the bar exam tactics and strategies with guidance from his coach. The Supreme Court itself recognized the salient role played by mock bars and bar exam coaching. The guidelines for the 2014, 2015, and 2016 Bar Exams recommend thus: Practice Exams

A good practice for law schools/review classes to observe is to hold practice examination sessions with the Bar candidates, both on the Essay and the MCQ formats. In evaluating these practice exams, attention should be given to both the law and the Bar candidate's presentation and use of English. In many instances, incorrect English is more serious as a problem than the lack of precise knowledge of law, and has been the cause of high failure rates. [Emphases supplied] Clearly discernible from the guidelines is the need for someone to evaluate the practice exam. It is strongly advised that an experienced or certified bar exam coach be the one to undertake the evaluation, taking into account the obvious limitations of self-coaching. Fine-tuning of coaching and training to read and answer essay questions In light of the increased role of issue-spotter questions, Jurists fine-tuned its coaching program to further train the examinees in issue-spotting skills, including the use of fact-pattern recognition, embedded-rule recognition, and other issue-spotting and rule-spotting techniques. Issue-spotter questions are rarely if ever seldom asked in law school; hence the overwhelming majority of bar examinees have not had the benefit of any training and coaching on how to tackle them. With this in mind, Jurists has added to its data bank of issue-spotter questions for use in its training and coaching program and undertaken further training of its corps of coaches to respond to the latest changes. Jurists has fortified its essay question training program by adding more process and remedy-focused questions to its bank of mock-bar questions and devising the appropriate training modules to help the reviewee tackle these kinds of questions. Jurists has also further fine-tuned its logical and analytical matrixes to help the bar examinee better confront the increased use of problem-type essay questions. Time-management training The great number of questions which an examinee has to tackle in four hours puts emphasis on the need for training on time-management. Thus simulated tests under the guidance and supervision of certified coaches has become imperative. The table below illustrates the time-pressure which the bar examinee has to work with. (Note: Items refer to question numbers while actual questions include the sub-questions. Thus an item containing two subquestions is counted as not one but two questions) 2015 BAR EXAMINATION, AVERAGE TIME NEEDED PER QUESTION

SUBJECT POLITICAL LAW LABOR LAW CIVIL LAW TAXATION MERCANTILE LAW CRIMINAL LAW REMEDIAL LAW

NO. OF ITEMS NO. OF ACTUAL QUESTIONS 22 27 22 34 20 34 22 42 16 39 22 35 18 41

AVERAGE TIME PER QUESTION 8 min 53 sec 7 min 7 min 5 min 43 sec 6 min 9 sec 6 min 51 sec 5 min 51 sec

LEGAL ETHICS

24

36

6 min 40 sec

The third column (No. of Actual Questions) would give a better picture of the challenge confronting the examinee. Let us look at the remedial law bar exam. At first blush, the number of items, which is 18, would appear to be manageable. If we count however the subquestions, there would actually be 41 questions all in all. The fourth column gives the average time needed per question, obtained by dividing 240 minutes (4 hours) by the number of actual questions. The average time ranges from a high of 8 minutes and 53 seconds for the political law exam to a low of only 5 minutes and 43 seconds for taxation. For the critical remedial law exam which makes up 20% of the bar examinee’s grade, he or she has only 5 minutes and 51 seconds on average to answer a question. This table is quite useful for a bar exam coach. Taking into account that 8 minutes and 53 seconds is not a whole lot of time for a single question (let’s not even talk about the 5 minutes and 43 seconds for taxation), the coachee must be trained to “think fast” using fact-pattern recognition and other exam tactics and strategies. The number of questions in the 2016 was more reasonable. Nonetheless timemanagement is still an important aspect of bar exam training and coaching “Shock and awe” questions asked in 2015 bar The 2015 Bar has gained notoriety for its trend of asking bar examinees to define some esoteric legal terms or to discuss the history of legal concepts which would challenge even the most avid lexicographers and legal historians. In Political Law, bar examinees were asked to discuss the “evolution” of jus sanguinis under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions. In Labor Law, the word of the day was “equity of the incumbent,” an anachronism whose term of office had long ago expired. In Civil Law, they were asked to define “depecage.” In Commercial Law, the shock-and-awe word to define was “Jason Clause.” One cannot discount the posing of “shock and awe” questions in the bar exam. The bar reviewee must also be trained on how to react and to answer such kinds of questions. Shock-and-awe questions were not employed in the 2016 bar, but the examinee should still expect them in any bar exam. Objective-type questions While the great majority of the questions in the 2015 bar were problem-type essay questions, there was a liberal sprinkling of objective-type questions, which call for distinctions, definitions, and enumerations, as well as questions which ask for discussions or explanations. The bar examinee thus has to prepare and train for these types of questions. See for instance question no. 3 of the mercantile law bar exam: III. A. Discuss the three-fold character of a bill of lading. (3%) B. What is a "Jason clause" in a charter party? (2%) C. Are common carriers liable for injuries to passengers even if they have observed ordinary diligence and care? Explain. (2%)

In fact the use of objective-type questions increased in the 2016 Bar. Consider the following items in the 2016 remedial law bar: I State at least five (5) civil cases that fall under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Courts (RTCs). (5%) II [a] Briefly explain the procedure on "Interrogatories to Parties" under Rule 25 and state the effect of failure to serve written interrogatories. (2.5%) [b] Briefly explain the procedure on "Admission by Adverse Party" under Rule 26 and the effect of failure to file and serve the request. (2.5%) III What are the contents of a judicial affidavit? (5%) V [a] What is the "most important witness" rule pursuant to the 2004 Guidelines of Pretrial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures? Explain. (2.5%) [b] What is the "one day examination of witness" rule pursuant to the said 2004 Guidelines? Explain. (2.5%) X xxx [a] xxx [b] What is the writ of continuing mandamus? (2.5%) XVI xxx [a] xxx [b] What does "personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested committed it" mean? (2.5%) XX xxx [a] xxx (2.5%) [b] Distinguish "Summary Judgment" and "Judgment on the Pleadings." (2.5%) It has to be emphasized however that the study of definitions, enumeration, and distinctions is the “nuts and bolts” of answering problem-type questions. Hence regardless of whether or not objective-type questions will be asked in the bar, the examinee still has to pore over definitions, etc., in order as part of his over-all preparation for the bar. Utmost preparation and training

With the substantial use of issue-spotter questions and process and remedyfocused questions, there is a felt need for a bar review program which would properly train the reviewee, taking into account that these types of questions are not widely used in law schools. A traditional bar review program based exclusively or heavily on lectures and passive study without any or scant training and mechanism for feedback would ill prepare the examinee for the argumentdriven and competencies-based bar exams and could lead to the bitter agony of defeat. On the other hand the examinee who backstops a rigorous study regime with a tested mock-bar and coaching program would significantly boost his chances of savouring the thrill of victory when he is granted leave by the High Court en banc to take the lawyer’s oath and to inscribe his or her name in the hallowed roll of attorneys. -oOo-

20 March 2017

As a long-time bar exam coach, one of the common errors or shortcomings which I note in my coachees is the misstatement or assumption of facts. I strongly advise my coachees to read carefully the facts of the question in order to avoid this error. One of the most irritating experiences for an examiner is to read answers which misstate or assume facts. The following suggested answer to Question No. V(B) of the 2014 Remedial Law Bar Exam shows that even the experts may fall prey to this kind of oversight. “Landlord, a resident of Quezon City, entered into a lease contract with Tenant, a resident of Marikina City, over a residential house in Las Piñas City. The lease contract provided, among others, for a monthly rental of P25,000.00, plus ten percent (10%) interest rate in case of non-payment on its due date. Subsequently, Landlord migrated to the United States of America (USA) but granted in favor of his sister Maria, a special power of attorney to manage the property and file and defend suits over the property rented out to Tenant. Tenant failed to pay the rentals due for five (5) months. Maria asks your legal advice on how she can expeditiously collect from Tenant the unpaid rentals plus interests due. (A) What judicial remedy would you recommend to Maria? (B) Where is the proper venue of the judicial remedy which you recommended? “Suggested Answer of the UP Law Center Committee to V(B): If Maria decides to file a complaint for collection of sum of money under the Rules of Summary Procedure or Small Claims, the venue is the residence of the plaintiff or defendant, at the election of the plaintiff. (Section 2, Rule 4, Rules of Court). Hence it may be in Quezon City or Marikina City, at the option of Maria. (Emphases supplied).” The suggested answer overlooks however that Landlord had already migrated to the USA prior to the filing of the complaint. Clearly therefore Landlord the Plaintiff no longer resided in Quezon City and hence the collection suit may not be filed there. There is a psychological explanation for this oversight. The problem starts out with “Landlord, a resident of Quezon City,” and this fact stands out and remains embedded in the mind of the reader, creating a mental blind spot to the significance of the phrase “migrated to the United States.” That is why I always tell my coachees to read carefully the fact-setting of a problem twice and to underline important facts. The examinee should take note of “factchangers” or “fact-modifiers.” For instance the examinee might have underlined twice “migrated” and then put an “x” atop “resident,” thus alerting him that “resident” is already a superseded or modified fact. It is advised that a bar reviewee take practice exams and have the same reviewed by another person, preferably a bar exam coach. Factual misstatements are often not detected by the examinee himself even if he reviews his answer since he is still laboring under the same blind spot. A certified bar exam coach can spot these errors and identify and remedy the mental blind spots which lead to these blunders. -oOo-

y: PROF. MANUEL R. RIGUERA “The key is not the will to win. Everybody has that. It is the will to prepare to win that is important.” -- Bobby Knight, Hall of Fame Basketball Coach. I have put together some advice and tips for those about to sit for the bar examination. These are based on my two decades’ experience as a law professor, bar review lecturer, and bar exam coach. I hope that they will prove of some help to the examinee who aspires to hurdle one of the toughest bar examinations in the planet. BEFORE THE BAR EXAM READ MATERIALS ON HOW TO PREPARE FOR AND PASS THE BAR EXAM. The bar exam is not a matter to take lightly. Hence reading materials on how to prepare for and to pass the bar will greatly increase your chances of seeing your name inscribed in the bar exam hall of fame. You can bring these materials as light reading to your three-day vacation after law school graduation. When I prepared for the 1991 bar, I read a well-worn pamphlet by Prof. Jose Nolledo, Pointers for a Bar Candidate (1960). I also read a booklet by Commissioner Regalado Maambong on the bar examination. The two booklets served me well by giving practical advice on how to prepare for the bar and how to avoid costly mistakes during the preparation and the actual taking of the bar. From the current crop of bar prep books, I strongly recommend Bar Blues (Central Books)written by Tanya Karina Lat, Maria Gracia Gamez, and Marilyn Manait. Bar Blues is comprehensive yet very readable. Slaying the Bar Exam Dragon by Dean Rufus Rodriguez is another book which I would advise you to read. Other useful books in this genre are Performance Boosters to Conquer Any Law Exam (Not Just the Bar Exam) by Siegfred Mison; Effective Bar Review Methods by Abelardo Domondon; and the inspiring The Law School Boot Camp (Create Yourself, Achieve Your Dreams) by Ma. Christina G. Castillo (Central Books, 2015). PREPARE AND ORGANIZE YOUR REVIEW MATERIALS. Prepare your list of reviewers after your graduation and buy those that you do not have. Get the opinion of professors and last year’s bar examinees as they are the best judges of law reviewers and can give you the pros and cons of a particular reviewer. As for the copious annotations or commentaries that you used as textbooks during your first three years in law school, consult them only if you need examples or illustrations of particular legal provisions. This is an area where annotations or commentaries have an advantage over most reviewers which tend to put too much emphasis on rules without giving the underlying fact pattern for such rule. In this regard, I strongly advise the use of reviewers which are in Q&A form or which give examples or illustrations of the rules. This reviewers will serve the dual purpose of being a review material as well as a training material for answering the bar which is substantially made up of problem-type or fact-based questions. I also recommend that you study the Q&As of the preceding ten bar examinations. This will give you a feel of the trend or style of the previous bar exams and of recurring fact-patterns and themes. Who knows some of the concepts examined in these exams may be asked again? In fact Abelarto T. Domondon claims that 5% to 20% of the concepts examined in the immediately preceding bar are repeated the next year. (EFFECTIVE BAR REVIEW METHODS 49). The percentage will certainly increase if you study the preceding 10 bar exams. Aside from its predictive value, this study will sharpen your fact-pattern recognition and analytical skills and increase your confidence. PREPARE A BAR REVIEW SCHEDULE. A bar-review schedule is your road-map to navigating the six months of bar review. If you are enrolled in a bar review center, synchronize your schedule with that of the bar review center. Otherwise you will not be reviewing effectively. It’s not advisable to listen to the lecturer discuss negotiable instruments and then go home and read up on labor relations. In this regard, choose a bar review center wherein there is a topical unity and continuity in the schedule, that is, where one particular bar exam subject is discussed at a time before proceeding to another bar exam subject. Avoid bar review centers with a hodgepodge schedule where for example, negotiable instruments is discussed on one day, then labor relations on the next, and then civil procedure on the day after. My advice is that you study one bar exam subject before going to another. Some advise reviewing one subject in the first half of the day (say remedial law) and then another (say commercial law) in the second half of the day. The avowed purpose is to avoid ennui. I think this sacrifices focus and effectiveness just to add variety. One must simply have the self-discipline and drive to study one bar subject at a time. If you are not attending or viewing bar review lectures, you have to prepare your own detailed schedule. A rule of thumb in dividing your study time is to multiply the number of days available for review with the weight given to a particular bar examination subject. Let us say that you have 156 days allocated for your review (May to October, excluding Sundays). Political law has a weight of 15%. 156 days multiplied by 15% will give you 23 days. So you allocate 23 days more or less for political law. In your review schedule, the last bar subjects that you should study should be labor law and then political law (the so-called “mirror schedule). This will enhance the effectiveness of your review since political law and labor law are the bar exam subjects you will tackle on the first Sunday. You should also prepare a daily study schedule. The latter is a detailed daily planner of your wake-up time, meals, breaks, and your “lights out” which you should follow strictly in order to get into the groove of rigorous studying.

I recommend that your wake-up time should be at 4:30 a.m. and “lights out” should be at 9 p.m. This is to make your body clock adjust to this schedule so that by November, you would be used to sleeping and waking up early. After you have drawn up your schedule, stick to it at all costs! If you see that you are running behind schedule, pick up your pace. This is the reason why you should select and prune your reading materials. Many reviewees make the mistake of being overly ambitious in their study load with the result that they fall behind schedule. Study smart! The point is that you are not studying to be a legal authority but to pass the bar. The bar reviewers (with rare exceptions) will not quiz you on arcane areas of the law. Leave the scholarly stuff for later after you have passed the bar and have decided to write a law journal article. ENROLL IN A BAR REVIEW CENTER. There are advantages and disadvantages to enrolling in a bar review center. Among the perceived disadvantages are the increased costs, which include the enrollment fee, the transportation and food costs, and accommodation costs for those who reside in the provinces. Also quite some time is spent in preparing and dressing up and in going to and from the bar review center. Despite these considerations, I strongly recommend that a bar examinee enroll in a bar review center. A law graduate does not have the degree of knowledge of the bar subject and the intuitive feel for what are the important topics and probable bar exam questions which an experienced bar review lecturer has. Also a bar review center provides case and statutory updates, which because of time limitations, is often not provided by law schools. Take note that law and jurisprudence is in a constant state of flux and what you thought may have been good law last year or even last month may no longer be so. Recent developments affect the law as a whole and not just specific or isolated provisions. Hence these should not be taught or learned in a truncated or isolated manner but should be imparted to the reviewee in a holistic manner, that is, seamlessly woven into a bar review subject as an integral element thereof. Only a seasoned bar lecturer, with his experience and intuitive feel of the law, is capable of performing this challenging feat. A bar reviewee who relies on past review material and simply tries to incorporate “updates” into his study is playing with fire. A recent innovation is online bar review. The bar reviewee need not go to a “brick-and-mortar” bar review center but can review in the comfort of his own home or wherever there is internet access. This has the advantages of cost and time efficiency. In this regard, Jurists Bar Review is offering JURISTS COMBO, which combines the structured regimen and faceto-face coaching of the traditional review with the convenience and flexibility of an online review. CHOOSE YOUR BAR REVIEW CENTER WISELY. There are three important things which you should take into account in choosing a bar review center: The line-up of lecturers, the schedule, and the existence of a coaching or mentoring program. The line-up of lecturers is important. Get the line-up and study this carefully. In appraising the line-up, get the opinion of successful bar examinees and your law professors. Word usually gets around among the bar reviewees and the law academe about the outstanding and the mediocre or irresponsible lecturers. Pay special attention to the lecturers in the subjects in which you feel you are weak. The schedule is also of capital importance. Some bar review centers draw up their schedule based on the availability of the lecturers rather than on topical continuity. As previously stated, avoid bar review centers with hodgepodge schedules. This will greatly undercut the effectiveness of your study. If you have taken the bar more than three times, ensure that the bar review center is run by a recognized law school or that it has an accreditation agreement with one. The Supreme Court will not allow you to sit for the bar examination unless you get a certification from such a bar review center. TAKE MOCK BAR EXAMS AND AVAIL OF THE SERVICES OF A BAR-EXAM COACH. Another thing to look out for is if the bar review center has a coaching program. The program should not be limited to the mere administration of mock bar exams, but should provide for one-on-one coaching wherein a coach reads and evaluates the examinee’s answers and then sits down and discusses the same with the examinee, seeking to identify the examinee’s strong and weak points, to remedy the latter, to coach the examinee on how to read and answer the bar exam questions, and in general to improve and maximize the examinee’s test-taking abilities. See to it that the mock bars replicate the bar examination (that’s why they’re called mock bars) and that there is a series of mock bars and coaching sessions (not just one or two) so that there will be adequate feedback and performance monitoring. Professor Mario Mainero, one of the foremost bar prep experts in the U.S., advises thus: “taking a practice exam under exam conditions is the best way to prepare for an exam. If you do not take them as actual run-throughs, your mind and body will not become used to taking law school [bar] exams, and you are more likely to freeze up or perform at a less-than-peak performance level.” (Dennis Tonsing, 1000 Days to the Bar). Analyzing and answering bar exam questions is not a matter of gut feel or intuition. The examinee who thinks that it is enough to just read and attend lectures when preparing for the bar is taking a huge risk. A bar-exam coach or mentor would be most invaluable in helping the examinee acquire the necessary competencies for succeeding in the bar exam. The high mortality rate in the bar examination is traceable to the sole or over-reliance on passive study and the absence or lack of training and practice on bar exam strategies and tactics. This matter has been raised as early as

1959 by Dean Wenceslao G. Laureta in the preface to his classic Secrets on How to Pass the Bar Examination (Rex Book Store, 1959 ed.) Thus, it may be proper to remind the bar candidates some of the myths involved in the domain of bar examinations. Almost invariably the bar candidates have the mistaken belief that by - - (1) Attending the best law schools; (2) Listening to lectures of renowned bar reviewers during review classes; and (3) Memorizing the law or the rules of procedure, including doctrinal rulings will guarantee his passing the bar examinations.

Wrong. There is no question that the above circumstances will help to enable the bar candidate pass the bar examinations. But the blooming secret in this regard is simply this: Present good answers that will make the examiner take notice. Good answers anchored upon logical reasoning, written in readable English and more importantly, justified by appropriate legal authority. … It would do well for the bar candidate to study carefully the manner in which answers are framed and the corresponding comments given. He will not fail to see why a given answer is poorly presented and the value of the corresponding remedy to improve it in a manner acceptable to the examiner. He must not make the tragic mistake of assuming that he knows all these things. He must supplement his reading by actual practice in answer framing. After all, one may know all the techniques on swimming which he can master from books on the subject, but until he jumps into the water, he will never learn to swim. [Emphases supplied] Bar exam strategies and tactics is a nuanced field which cannot be acquired from merely reading books and listening to omnibus lectures. The services of a competent bar exam coach or mentor would be most helpful. A mock bar and coaching program is also in line with the recent pedagogical trend of shifting stress to “outcome-based education” from the conventional “input-based learning.” The Supreme Court itself recognized the salient role played by mock bars and bar exam coaching. The Guidelines for the 2014 Bar recommend thus:

Practice Exams A good practice for law schools/review classes to observe is to hold practice examination sessions with the Bar candidates, both on the Essay and the MCQ formats. In evaluating these practice exams, attention should be given to both the law and the Bar candidate's presentation and use of English. In many instances, incorrect English is more serious as a problem than the lack of precise knowledge of law, and has been the cause of high failure rates. [Emphases supplied] In line with the Supreme Court’s observation, Jurists has brought back the lecture “English for Bar Examinees” in order to train the bar examinees write in correct, readable, and concise English. This would be especially helpful for those who need improvement in their legal writing and English proficiency as the course would provide them with helpful tips in order to surmount their challenges. FOCUS ON THE FUNDAMENTALS IN YOUR BAR REVIEW. The key is not really studying more but studying smart. It is simply impossible to read during the five months of review the entire code provisions of a law much less the texts or annotations thereon. Besides some code provisions and comments are unimportant for purposes of the bar and are seldom if ever asked in the bar. During your review, you need to concentrate only on the primary review materials: a bar reviewer, the code provisions, and the bar review materials provided by the bar review center. In reading the code provisions, do not read the entire code but only those which are important. You know a code provision is important if it was discussed by your professor or bar review lecturer or mentioned in your bar reviewer. A useful supplement to your reviewer is the Lex Pareto Notes written by Zigfred Diaz, Maria Patricia Katrina de Guia, Alrey Ouano, Louella Matsumoto, Ma. Salud Barillo, Danell Fernandez, Nolito Dayanan, and Helenytte Yu. This is a breakthrough work wherein the authors, applying the Pareto Principle to the field of bar exam review and forecasting, have found that approximately 80% of the bar exam questions are derived from 20% of the law. The authors have pinpointed this 20% of the law on which the reviewee should spend 80% of his study time thus optimizing the effectiveness of his review. TAKE CARE OF YOUR HEALTH AND FITNESS. Remember to exercise daily or at least three times a week. Exercising improves blood circulation to the brain and makes one think more clearly. It also builds up one’s resistance to sickness and infection and improves one’s stamina. Remember that the bar exam is a grueling fourhour exam in the morning and another one in the afternoon. So I’m not greatly exaggerating when I say that it’s like training for a 20-kilometer run. I’m not saying though that you should train like a triathlete - - brisk walking or a short jog will do. Get enough sleep. At least six, preferably seven hours of daily sleep is advised. Lack of sleep will result in drowsiness and sluggishness when studying, aside from making you susceptible to sickness or fatigue. Proper diet is often overlooked but it is of the utmost importance. Observe a balanced and healthy diet, not forgetting fruits and vegetables. Please take it easy on fast food especially instant noodles! (Well, from time to time

fast food is alright but don’t make it your staple food). A diet which would send a cardiologist into fits is not likewise appropriate for a bar reviewee. For coffee drinkers, black coffee is the best. Take it easy with the popular “3-in-1” coffee preparations which tend to contain a lot of sugar and fat. Drink plenty of water when studying. In fine take care of your health. Good health is the foundation of an outstanding bar review. IMPROVE YOUR HANDWRITING. Handwriting is of capital importance in the essay exams. Your answers may all be logical and correct but if your handwriting is illegible all your hard work will go down the drain. If your handwriting is difficult to read, the examiner will most probably not take the time to decipher your booklet, taking into consideration that he has about five thousand other booklets to read. You may think that your handwriting is legible when it’s actually not. Take a mock bar examination and show your booklet to another person and have him read it. You may be surprised to find that your handwriting is actually difficult to read. If that is the case, work on improving your handwriting.

DURING NOVEMBER AND THE BAR EXAM ATTEND OR LISTEN TO PRE-WEEK LECTURES. Pre-week lectures are important. This is where experienced pre-week lecturers condense or synthesize the law and concentrate on the topics or areas which are most likely to be asked in the bar examination. As I earlier said, a law graduate does not have the degree of knowledge of the bar subject and the intuitive feel for what are the important topics and probable bar exam questions which an experienced bar review lecturer has. A bar reviewee who forgoes entirely the pre-week lectures would be missing out on a vital area of bar exam preparation.

In line with its tradition of bar review leadership and innovation, Jurists Bar Review came up with another first in 2016: JURISTS PREWEEK ONLINE. This is a useful option for bar reviewees during the hectic pre-week review period. Instead of travelling to and from the pre-week review venue, reviewees can save valuable time by viewing the full 2017 Jurists pre-week lectures “off-site” via on-demand videos through their desktop computer, laptop, PDA, tablet, hand phone, or any other electronic device with internet access.

This 2017, another new program, JURISTS PREWEEK COMBO, will be made available to reviewees. Jurists Preweek Combo combines the features of Jurists Preweek Classic with Jurists Preweek Online. This would be attractive for reviewees who may want to attend some pre-week lectures on-site and to view others online, or those who would want to have a back-up measure in case they would be unable to attend some pre-week lectures on-site. AVOID UNNECESSARY STRESS AND DISTRACTIONS. Some stress and nerves is unavoidable during the review and exam week and in fact helps to drive you harder in your studies. However undue and excessive stress and nerves is an enemy of the bar examinee as it results in lack of sleep and hinders proper thinking both while studying and taking the exam itself. If you feel that you are unduly stressed or worried, learn relaxation techniques like yoga and deep breathing. Prayer and meditation are powerful relaxation techniques. Ignore useless distractions. Usually rumors of who the examiner is become widespread during this time and examinees worry themselves silly with the type of questions the rumored examiner usually asks and with obtaining notes and materials written by or about the rumored examiner. This is just a useless exercise which would distract you from doing what should be done: studying. All examiners are in the main bound by an unwritten law that their questions should be on the basics of the law and on significant jurisprudence. So just ignore rumors or information on the examiner’s identity and stick your nose to your review materials. The bar exam month features the annual frenetic paper chase by bar examinees. Examinees go on a quest for the Holy Grail of the bar exams: the red or blue notes from San Beda or Ateneo or the UP notes. These notes are supposed to embody the answers or even “leaks” of bar exam questions. This is balderdash. I graduated from Ateneo and worked in the bar-ops. I know that the so-called blue notes are simply compilations of probable bar questions with answers prepared by law students with a little assistance from the faculty. While they are definitely helpful, you don’t have to wail and grind your teeth if you do not get them. What is contained in the blue notes is more often than not also in your bar reviewers and review materials. One examinee I knew spent a lot more time looking for notes, tips, and leaks and compiling dossiers on the rumored examiners rather than actually studying. He failed the bar five times and is now exploring career opportunities with the CIA. GET ENOUGH SLEEP ON THE NIGHT BEFORE THE EXAM. This advice cannot be overemphasized. Adequate sleep makes the mind sharper and allows us to recall what we have studied with facility. So do not make the mistake of studying until the witching hour. The extra hours of study is not worth it if you find yourself sleepy and thinking sluggishly during the bar exam. You should hit the sack by 9 p.m. Do not panic if you find that you are unable to sleep. Just relax and continue lying down in bed, at least your body will be rested. But do not make the mistake of standing up and studying. In that case you will lack both sleep and rest, and the chances of a disaster are multiplied threefold. Ron de Vera slept for only an hour the night before the first Sunday exam and for only 30 minutes the night before the second Sunday exam of 2004. He placed second. (Lat et al., Bar Blues, p. 85). Of course I’m not saying that you get only an

hour’s sleep if you want to place in the top ten, what I’m saying is that there is no need for you to call 911 if you find yourself unable to fall into the arms of Morpheus. I advise against taking sleeping pills. They often have the side effect of muddling up your thinking. There was an examinee who, finding himself unable to sleep the night before the Civil Law exam, popped a sleeping pill. He was able to sleep all right, but the next day he found himself unable to distinguish between loco parentis and crazy momma. REMEMBER TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS. Before you start reading and answering the questions, take the time to first read and understand the instructions. Quite a lot of examinees in their eagerness go straight to reading and answering the questions without bothering to read the instructions. This could be disastrous. NEVER LEAVE ANY QUESTION UNANSWERED. Even if you are clueless as to the answer to a question, give it your best try. Never leave any question unanswered. The examiner may feel slighted if you do not answer a question. He may think that you felt that the question was not properly crafted that is why did not answer it. Moreover a blank response will get you zero while giving it your best shot could net you 2 or 3 points which could spell the difference between flunking and passing. MANAGE YOUR TIME WISELY. Many examinees spend too much time on the first part of the exam only to find themselves rushing through the second part or worse running out of time and leaving some questions unanswered. Learn to pace yourself properly. Taking mock bar exams will help you learn how to pace yourself in an 18-to-20 question examination. Aim to answer at least ½ of the total items plus 1 by the halfway mark. Thus if the exam is from 8 am to 12 noon with 20 items, aim to answer at least 11 items by 10 a.m. DO NOT BE FLUSTERED BY “SHOCK AND AWE” QUESTIONS. Those who took the 1991 Bar Examination (like me) will never forget the infamous first question in Political Law: “What is the Writ of Amparo? Discuss its constitutional basis.” Considering that the only Amparo we knew of was Amparo Muñoz (the 1974 Miss Universe who won her title in Manila, if you’re a Millennial), the question had the effect of a sneak punch to the solar plexus. I can still picture in my mind the bar exam room at MLQU, with everyone’s jaw plunging to the floor in utter shock. Of course, now every law student knows what a writ of amparo is, but back then in 1991 B.G. (before Google), only a law student or law professor who had travelled to Latin America could have known of this most extraordinary writ. Other “shock and awe” questions include one which asked who the current president of the International Court of Justice was, one which asked for the meaning of the acronym ACID (from a speech of Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban), and another which asked the examinee to define the Denicola test in intellectual property law. “Shock and awe” questions were trending in the 2015 Bar. In Political Law, bar examinees were asked to discuss the “evolution” of jus sanguinis under the 1935, 1973, and 1987 Constitutions. In Labor Law, the word of the day was “equity of the incumbent,” an anachronism whose term of office had long ago expired. In Civil Law, they were asked to define “depecage.” In Commercial Law, the shock-and-awe word to define was “Jason Clause.” In Remedial Law, the examinees were confronted with the common-law terms, “larceny” and “voir dire.” It did not help any that “larceny” was used in a fact-setting which did not involve any unlawful taking of property but rather violence and sexual abuse, while “voir dire” is a term that a Filipino lawyer would be unfamiliar with unless he is an aficionado of American jury trials. The examiners’ penchant for throwing screwball questions put the bar examinees in a serious funk. Many spent quite a bit of time accumulating a glossary of legal gobbledygook in the various bar exam subjects instead of studying the fundamentals and important jurisprudence. I even heard a story (probably apocryphal) that a law school engaged a lexicographer to beef up its bar ops. This brought back memories of the 1991 bar examination. After the examinees were torched by the Amparo question in political law, the succeeding preweek reviews were turned into a Gobbledygook chase. The fad back then was the M&A (mergers & acquisitions) craze in Wall Street (remember Michael Milkin and Ivan Boesky with his infamous “Greed is Good” mantra). In the mercantile law preweek, we parroted terms like “hostile take-over,” “leveraged buy-out,” “white knight,” “junk bonds,” and a plethora of other investment-bank junk rather, jargon. I think this was partly to blame for the dismal pass rate of 17.81%. An examinee who flunked the bar “leveraged” his experience to apply for and land a job in the M&A department of a leading investment bank. My advice is that a bar candidate should not spend precious time burning the midnight oil with Black’s Law Dictionary. A cost-benefit analysis would lead one to conclude that time spent on looking for and even studying obscure legal nomenclature would only result in dividends that are well, de minimis. Better to just study the basic legal principles and significant jurisprudence and encounter legal terms in the course of such study. Moreover, screwball questions are not really expected to be answered correctly by the majority of the examinees (and even law professors) but are meant more to test the resolve and fortitude of one who aspires to be a lawyer. Do not panic or lose hope if you do not know the answer to the question. Just give it your best try and proceed to the other questions.

AFTER THE EXAM DO NOT DISCUSS THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS. After you have taken a bar exam in a particular

subject, forget about it and concentrate on preparing and studying for the next bar exam subject. After all you cannot undo what you have already written. Avoid discussing the probable answers and avoid people who delight in discussing them. The time spent on arguing and discussing the probable answers is better spent relaxing and preparing for the next exam.

CONCLUSION To paraphrase Bobby Knight, the key is not the will to pass. Everybody has that. It is the will to prepare to pass that is important. The bar exam is a formidable challenge but like any other hurdle it can be surmounted by assiduous planning and preparation. The following quote from Steve Nash, a player of less than imposing physical attributes but who went on to become one of the NBA all-time greats, is inspiring:

You have to rely on your preparation. You got to really be passionate and try to prepare more than anyone else, and put yourself in a position to succeed, and when the moment comes you got to enjoy, relax, breathe and rely on your preparation so that you can perform and not be anxious or filled with doubt. When your moment comes, enjoy it! March 2017 -oOo-