Practice question
A parent legally obliged to support a child unjustly refuses urgently needed maintenance. A third person supplies it and seeks reimbursement under207, with all statutory facts proved. The parent argues only a voluntary assignment could permit recovery. Which is correct?
- 207 itself supplies the qualified reimbursement right
- A prior assignment is always indispensable
- The child must forfeit support
- Only donors who intended no reimbursement may recover
- Urgency makes the obligation disappear
Legal references
- Family Code EO209: https://lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo1987/eo_209_1987.html Articles200 and203–208.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.