Concepts of LAW: (1) it commands that something be done, in w/c

> In the general sense, law is defined as the case it is mandatory;

"science of moral rules, founded on the rational (2) it commands that something should not be
nature of man, w/c govern his free activity, for done, in w/c case it is prohibitory; and
the realization of the individual and social ends, (3) it commands that what it permits to be done
of should be tolerated or respected, in w/c case it
a nature both demandable and reciprocal." is permissive.
(Sanchez Roman.) Codification of Laws.
> In the specific sense, it is defined as "a rule - A code is a collection of laws of the
of conduct, just, obligatory, promulgated by same kind; a body of legal provisions
legitimate authority, and of common observance referring to a particular branch of law.
and benefit." Reasons for codification:
(1) the necessity of simplifying and
arranging the many juridical rules
Characteristic of LAW: scattered in several laws and customs;
(1) it is a rule of human conduct; (2) the necessity of unifying various
(2) promulgated by competent legislations in the same country; and
authority; (3) the necessity of introducing reforms
(3) obligatory; and occasioned by social changes.
(4) of general observance.
There are two great models of a modern civil
code:
- the French Civil Code (Code
General Divisions of LAW: Napoleon) and
Divine Law - meant that in w/c God himself is - the German Civil Code {BGB or
the legislator who has promulgated the law; Buogeoliches Gesetzbuch
Human Law - meant that w/c is promulgated by - Beuo w/c means "town," "that
man to regulate human relations. w/c has reference to a citizen;"
(2) Main Classes of Human Law: - Buch w/c means "book;"
(1) General/Public Law: - BGB means "a lawbook
(a) International law; governing citizens."
(b) (b) Constitutional law;
(c) (c) Administrative law;
(d) (d) Criminal law;
Civil Law
(e) (e) Religious law
(2) Individual/ Private Law: - Civil law has been defined as "the mass
(a) Civil law; of precepts w/c determine and regulate
(b) (b) Mercantile law; the relations of assistance, authority and
(c) (c) Procedural law. obedience among the members of a
family, and those w/c exist among
Kinds of Specific Law.- Law, in the specific members of a society for the protection
sense, is generally classified into: of private interests." (Sanchez Roman.)
mandatory, prohibitory, and
permissive.

In one sense, every law commands, bec. it is

obligatory; but it commands in 3 different ways:
Civil Code year after its publication, reckoned from the date
- A civil code is a collection of laws w/c of actual release.
regulate the private relations of the
members of civil society, determining
their respective rights and obligations,
w/ reference to persons, things, and civil Revised Administrative Code (RAC), Secs. 18-
acts. 24
Section 18. When Laws Take Effect. - Laws
Art. 1. This Act shall be known as the "Civil shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following
Code of the Philippines." the completion of their publication in the Official
Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation,
Sources of the Civil Code: unless it is otherwise provided.
(1) The Civil Code of 1889;
Section 19. Prospectivity. - Laws shall have
(2) The codes, laws, and judicial decisions, as
prospective effect unless the contrary is
well as the works of jurists of other
expressly provided.
countries, such as Spain, the various states of
the American Union, etc.;
Section 20. Interpretation of Laws and
(3) Doctrines laid down by the SC of the Phils.;
Administrative Issuances. - In the
(4) Filipino customs and traditions;
interpretation of a law or administrative issuance
(5) Philippine statutes, such as the Marriage
promulgated in all the official languages, the
Law, the Divorce Law, the Code of Civ. Proc.
English text shall control, unless otherwise
and the Rules of Court.
specifically provided. In case of ambiguity,
(6) The Code Commission itself
omission or mistake, the other texts may be
(7) Works of jurists and commentators of various
consulted.
nations (added by Jurado, CIVIL LAW
REVIEWER.)
Section 21. No Implied Revival of Repealed
Law.- When a law which expressly repeals a
prior law itself repealed, the law first repealed
I. EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS shall not be thereby revived unless expressly so
[NCC, ARTS. 1-18] AND HUMAN RELATIONS provided.
[NCC ARTS. 19-36]
Section 22. Revival of Law Impliedly
A. When do laws take effect? Repealed. - When a law which impliedly repeals
New Civil Code (NCC), Art. 2 a prior law is itself repealed, the prior law shall
thereby be revived, unless the repealing law
Art. 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen provides otherwise.
days following the completion of their
publication either in the Official Gazette or in Section 23. Ignorance of the Law. - Ignorance
a newspaper of general circulation in the of the law excuses no one from compliance
Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided. therewith.
(as amended by EO 200.)
*the law shall take effect after 15 days after CHAPTER 6 - Official Gazette
the completion of its puiblication in OG
* Section 24. Contents. - There shall be
published in the Official Gazette all legislative
* The Civil Code took effect on August 30, 1950 acts and resolutions of a public nature; all
according to the case of Lara v. del Rosario, one executive and administrative issuances of
general application; decisions or abstracts of - Covered by this rule are PDs and EOs
decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of promulgated by the Pres. in the exercise
Appeals, or other courts of similar rank, as may of legislative powers. Administrative
rules and regulations must also be
be deemed by said courts of sufficient
published if their purpose is to enforce
importance to be so published; such documents or implement existing law pursuant to a
or classes of documents as may be required so valid delegation.
to be published by law; and such documents or
classes of documents as the President shall Interpretative regulations and those merely
determine from time to time to have general internal in nature, i.e., regulating only the
application or which he may authorize so to be personnel of the administrative agency and
not the public, need not be published. Neither
published.
is publication required of the so-called letters of
instructions issued by administrative superiors
The publication of any law, resolution or other concerning the rules or guidelines to be followed
official documents in the Official Gazette shall be by their subordinates in the performance of their
prima facie evidence of its authority. duties.

Publication must be in full or there is no

publication at all since its purpose is to inform
Executive Order 200 Sec. 1 & 2 the public of the contents of the laws. The mere
mention of the number of the PD, the title of
Sec. 1. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days such decree, its whereabouts, the supposed
following the completion of their publication date of effectivity, and in a mere supplement of
either in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper the OG cannot satisfy the publication
of general circulation in the Philippines, unless it requirement. This is not even substantial
is otherwise provided. compliance.

Sec. 2. Article 2 of Republic Act No. 386,

otherwise known as the "Civil Code of the
Philippines," and all other laws inconsistent with Cases:
this Executive Order are hereby repealed or
modified accordingly.

Conclusive presumption of knowledge of the PESIGAN V. ANGELES - Crim Digest

law.-

- The conclusive presumption that every

person knows the law presupposes that the 129 SCRA 174
law has been published if the presumption is April 30, 1984
to have any legal justification at all. Facts:
Before publication in the Official Gazette of June
- The term laws should refer to all laws 14, 1982, Presidential Executive Order No. 626-
and not only to those of general application, for
A dated October 25, 1980, providing to the
strictly speaking all laws relate to the people in
general albeit there are some that do not apply confiscation and forfeiture by the government of
to them directly. carabaos transported from one province to
another. Anselmo L. Pesigan and Marcelo L.
RULE: All statutes, including those of local Pesigan, carabao dealers, transported in an
application and private laws, shall be published Isuzu ten-wheeler truck in the evening of April 2,
as a condition for their effectivity, w/c shall
1982 with twenty-six (26) carabaos and a calf
begin 15 days after publication unless a
different effectivity date is fixed by the from Sipocot, Camarines Sur with Padre Garcia,
legislature. Batangas as the destination. In spite of having
all the needed permit to transport and
Coverage.-- certificates, the carabaos , while passing at
Basud, Camarines Norte, were confiscated by 1. On or about the 2nd week
Lieutenant Arnulfo V. Zenarosa, the town’s of May 1979, private
police station commander, and by Doctor Bella
respondent Benito Go Bio Jr.
S. Miranda, provincial veterinarian, based on the
aforementioned Executive Order No. 626-A. issued a check amounting to
Doctor Miranda distributed the carabaos among P200, 000 to one Filipinas Tan.
25 farmers of Basud and to a farmer from Said check was subsequently
Vinzons municipal nursing. The Pesigans filed dishonored and despite
against Zenarosa and Doctor Miranda an action
repeated demands, the
for recovery of the carabaos.
respondent failed to make the
Issue: necessary payment. Hence, the
(1) Whether the Pesigans may have the filing of charges against him for
recovery of the carabaos. violation of B.P. 22 or the
(2) Whether the said Executive Order should
Bouncing Check law.
not be enforced against the Pesigans on April 2,
1982.
2. Go Bio filed a Motion to
Ruling: Quash alleging that the
(1) Yes. The Pesigans are entitled to the return information did not charge an
of their carabaos of the value of each carabao
offence on ground that BP 22
which is not returned for any reason. The
Pesigans are also entitled to a reasonable rental has not yet taken effect when
for each carabao from the 26 farmers who used the offense was committed on
them. The farmers should not enrich themselves May 1979. Said law took into
at the expense of the Pesigans. effect on June 29, 1979. The
(2) No. The Executive Order should not be
prosecution opposed the
enforced against the Pesigans on April 2, 1982
because, as already noted, it is a penal motion and contended that the
regulation published more than two months later date of the dishonor of the
in the Official Gazette dated June 14, 1982. It check -- September 26, 1979, is
became effective only 15 days thereafter as
the date of the commission of
provided Article 2 of the Civil Code and Section
11 of the Revised Administrative Code. the offense, hence BP 22 is
applicable.

People v Veridiano Digest

3. The respondent judge
granted Go Bio's motion and
G.R. L-62243, October 12, 1984
dismissed the criminal action
hence, this petition. Petitioner
Effectivity of laws
contends that BP 22 was
published in the Official Gazette
At issue in this case is the applicability of BP 22
on April 4, 1979, and hence
which was circulated a month after private
became effective 15 days
respondent issued the dishonored check.
thereafter or on April 24, 1979.
PR contends however that said
Facts:
 publication was only released LORENZO M. TAÑADA, ABRAHAM
F. SARMIENTO, and MOVEMENT
on June 14, 1979 but since the
OF ATTORNEYS FOR
questioned check was issued BROTHERHOOD,
about the second week of May INTEGRITY AND NATIONALISM,
INC. [MABINI], petitioners,
1979, then he could not have vs.
violated BP 22 because it was HON. JUAN C. TUVERA, in his
capacity as Executive Assistant to the
not yet released for circulation President, HON. JOAQUIN VENUS,
at the time. in his capacity as Deputy Executive
Assistant to the President ,
MELQUIADES P. DE LA CRUZ, in
Issue: W/N BP 22 was already in effect when his capacity as Director, Malacañang
the offense was committed. Records Office, and FLORENDO S.
PABLO, in his capacity as Director,
Bureau of Printing, respondents.
NO.

Facts:
The penal statute in question was circulated only The petitioners sought a writ of
on June 14, 1979 and not on its printed date of mandamus from the Court in order to
compel the respondent public officials
April 9, 1979. Publication of the law is necessary to publish in the Official Gazette
so that the public can be apprised of the various presidential decrees, letters
of instructions, general orders,
contents of a penal statute before it can be
proclamations, executive
bound by it. If a statute had not been published implementations, and administrative
before its violation, then in the eyes of the law orders. They did so because of the
right of the people to be informed on
there was no such law to be violated. Hence, the matters of public concern, a right
accused could not have committed the alleged recognized in Section 6, Article IV of
the 1973 Constitution. In addition,
crime. In effect, when the alleged offense was petitioners stress that Article 2 of the
committed there was still no law penalizing it. If Civil Code requires the publication of
laws as a requirement for their
BP 22 intended to make the printed date of
effectivity.
issue of the Official Gazette as the point of
reference in the determination of its the
Issue:
effectivity, it could have provided a special Can laws of general application take
effectivity provision. Finally, the term effect even without being published
as long as it provides the date of
"publication" in BP 22 must be given the
effectivity?
ordinary accepted meaning, to make known to
the people in general.
Ruling:
No. “Article 2 does not preclude the
requirement of publication in the
Official Gazette, even if the law itself
provides for the date of its effectivity.”
Tanada v. Tuvera This is because if laws are allowed to
G.R. No. L-63915 take effect without publication, the
April 24, 1985 public would not be informed of the
existence of the law that essentially
governs them. Without such
publication, Article 3 of the Civil
 Code, which provides that “ignorance public of the contents of the law. Pursuant to
of the law excuses no one from Article 2 of the Civil Code,
compliance therewith” would have no the requirement of publication is indispensable
basis. Thus, the Court ruled that all in the effectivity of a law
unpublished laws which are of unless otherwise provided by the law itself.
general application have no binding
force and effect.

CASE DIGESTS in PERSONS and FAMILY B. Ignorance of the law

RELATIONS
NCC, Art. 3
NMSMI vs. DND, G.R. NO. 187587, June 5,
2013, 697 SCRA 359 CHAPTER I
Petitioner: EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS
Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. Art. 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one
Respondents: from compliance therewith.
Department of National Defense (DND) Kasilag v. Rodriques, 69 Phil 217
Military Shrine Services - Philippine Veterans Kasilag v. Rodriguez, 69 PHIL 217
Affairs FACTS: Marcial Kasilag and Emiliana Ambrosio
Office, entered a contract of mortgage of improvements
of land acquired as homestead to secure the
Facts:
Former President Marcos issued a proclamation payment of the indebtedness of P1,000 plus
which excludes a certain area in a parcel of land interest. The parties stipulated that Emilina
previously reserved for military purposes and
Ambrosio was to pay the debt with interest
declared it open for disposition. The
proclamation includes three barangays (Lower within 4 ½ years., and in such a case, the
Bicutan, Upper Bicutan and Signal Village) in its mortgage would not have any effect. They also
body and another barangay (Western Bicutan)
contained at the bottom through a handwritten agreed that Emiliana Ambrosio would execute a
addendum by the President. Said deed of sale if it would not be paid within 4 ½
proclamation was published in the Official
years and that she would pay the tax on the
Gazette without the handwritten addendum.
land. After a year, it turned out that she was not
Issue: able to pay the tax. Hence, they entered a verbal
agreement whereby she conveyed to the latter
Whether or not the handwritten addendum is an
integral part of the the possession of the land on the condition that
Proclamation. they would not collect the interest of the loan,
would attend to the payment of the land tax,
Held:
would benefit by the fruits of the land, & would
No, the handwritten addendum has no legal introduce improvement thereof.
force and effect due to
lack of the required publication in the Official
These pacts made by the parties independently
Gazette. Publication must be
in full or it is no publication at all for the purpose were calculated to alter the mortgage a contract
that it should inform the clearly entered into, converting the latter into a
contract of antichresis. The contract of
antichresis, being a real encumbrance C. Retroactivity
NCC, Art. 4
burdening the land, is illegal and void because it
Art. 4. Laws shall have no retroactive effect,
is legal and valid. unless the contrary is provided.
NCC, Arts. 2252-2269
ISSUE: W/N the petitioner should be deemed
the possessor of the land in good faith because TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
Art. 2252. Changes made and new provisions
he was unaware of any flaw in his title or in the
and rules laid down by this Code which may
manner of its acquisition by which it is prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in
invalidated accordance with the old legislation shall have no
retroactive effect.
RULING: Yes. From the facts found established
for the determination of the applicable law in
by the Court of Appeals we can neither deduce
cases which are not specified elsewhere in this
nor presume that the petitioner was aware of a Code, the following articles shall be observed:
flaw in his title or in the manner of its acquisition, (Pars. 1 and 2, Transitional Provisions).
aside from the prohibition contained in section
116. This being the case, the question is Art. 2253. The Civil Code of 1889 and other
previous laws shall govern rights originating,
whether good faith may be premised upon
under said laws, from acts done or events which
ignorance of the laws. took place under their regime, even though this
Code may regulate them in a different manner,
or may not recognize them. But if a right should
Gross and inexcusable ignorance of law may not be declared for the first time in this Code, it shall
be effective at once, even though the act or
be the basis of good faith, but possible,
event which gives rise thereto may have been
excusable ignorance may be such a basis. It is a done or may have occurred under prior
fact that the petitioner is not conversant with the legislation, provided said new right does not
laws because he is not a lawyer. In accepting prejudice or impair any vested or acquired right,
of the same origin. (Rule 1)
the mortgage of the improvements he
proceeded on the well-grounded belief that he Art. 2254. No vested or acquired right can arise
was not violating the prohibition regarding the from acts or omissions which are against the law
or which infringe upon the rights of others. (n)
alienation of the land. In taking possession
thereof and in consenting to receive its fruits, he Art. 2255. The former laws shall regulate acts
did not know, as clearly as a jurist does, that the and contracts with a condition or period, which
were executed or entered into before the
possession and enjoyment of the fruits are effectivity of this Code, even though the
attributes of the contract of antichresis and that condition or period may still be pending at the
time this body of laws goes into effect. (n)
the latter, as a lien, was prohibited by section
116. These considerations again bring us to the Art. 2256. Acts and contracts under the regime
conclusion that, as to the petitioner, his of the old laws, if they are valid in accordance
therewith, shall continue to be fully operative as
ignorance of the provisions of section 116 is provided in the same, with the limitations
excusable and may, therefore, be the basis of established in these rules. But the revocation or
modification of these acts and contracts after the
his good faith.
beginning of the effectiveness of this Code, shall
be subject to the provisions of this new body of into effect, shall continue to act as such,
laws. (Rule 2a) notwithstanding the provisions of Article 320. (n)

Art. 2257. Provisions of this Code which attach Art. 2263. Rights to the inheritance of a person
a civil sanction or penalty or a deprivation of who died, with or without a will, before the
rights to acts or omissions which were not effectivity of this Code, shall be governed by the
penalized by the former laws, are not applicable Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws, and
to those who, when said laws were in force, may by the Rules of Court. The inheritance of those
have executed the act or incurred in the who, with or without a will, die after the
omission forbidden or condemned by this Code. beginning of the effectivity of this Code, shall be
adjudicated and distributed in accordance with
If the fault is also punished by the previous this new body of laws and by the Rules of Court;
legislation, the less severe sanction shall be but the testamentary provisions shall be carried
applied. out insofar as they may be permitted by this
Code. Therefore, legitimes, betterments,
If a continuous or repeated act or omission was legacies and bequests shall be respected;
commenced before the beginning of the however, their amount shall be reduced if in no
effectivity of this Code, and the same subsists or other manner can every compulsory heir be
is maintained or repeated after this body of laws given his full share according to this Code. (Rule
has become operative, the sanction or penalty 12a)
prescribed in this Code shall be applied, even
though the previous laws may not have provided Art. 2264. The status and rights of natural
any sanction or penalty therefor. (Rule 3a) children by legal fiction referred to in article 89
and illegitimate children mentioned in Article
Art. 2258. Actions and rights which came into 287, shall also be acquired by children born
being but were not exercised before the before the effectivity of this Code. (n)
effectivity of this Code, shall remain in full force
in conformity with the old legislation; but their Art. 2265. The right of retention of real or
exercise, duration and the procedure to enforce personal property arising after this Code
them shall be regulated by this Code and by the becomes effective, includes those things which
Rules of Court. If the exercise of the right or of came into the creditor's possession before said
the action was commenced under the old laws, date. (n)
but is pending on the date this Code takes
effect, and the procedure was different from that Art. 2266. The following shall have not only
established in this new body of laws, the parties prospective but also retroactive effect:
concerned may choose which method or course
to pursue. (Rule 4) (1) Article 315, whereby a descendant cannot be
compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against
Art. 2259. The capacity of a married woman to his parents and ascendants;
execute acts and contracts is governed by this
(2) Articles 101 and 88, providing against
Code, even if her marriage was celebrated
under the former laws. (n) collusion in cases of legal separation and
annulment of marriage;
Art. 2260. The voluntary recognition of a natural (3) Articles 283, 284, and 289, concerning the
child shall take place according to this Code, proof of illegitimate filiation;
even if the child was born before the effectivity (4) Article 838, authorizing the probate of a will
of this body of laws. (n) on petition of the testator himself;
(5) Articles 1359 to 1369, relative to the
Art. 2261. The exemption prescribed in Article
302 shall also be applicable to any support, reformation of instruments;
pension or gratuity already existing or granted (6) Articles 476 to 481, regulating actions to
before this Code becomes effective. (n) quiet title;
(7) Articles 2029 to 2031, which are designed to
Art. 2262. Guardians of the property of minors, promote compromise. (n)
appointed by the courts before this Code goes
Art. 2267. The following provisions shall apply defendants-appellants. 1953-01-29 | G.R. No. L-
not only to future cases but also to those 4963 DECISION
pending on the date this Code becomes
effective:
Retroactivity
(1) Article 29, Relative to criminal prosecutions
wherein the accused is acquitted on the ground APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First
that his guilt has not been proved beyond Instance of Pangasinan. Martinez, J.
reasonable doubt;
(2) Article 33, concerning cases of defamation, BAUTISTA ANGELO, J
fraud, and physical injuries. (n)
Facts:
Art. 2268. Suits between members of the same Maria Uson is the lawful wife of
family which are pending at the time this Code Faustino Nebreda who owned five parcels of
goes into effect shall be suspended, under such lands litigated in the present case. However,
terms as the court may determine, in order that Maria del Rosario, his common-law wife with
compromise may be earnestly sought, or, in whom she had four illegitimate children took
case of legal separation proceedings, for the
possession illegally of said lands when Faustino
purpose of effecting, if possible, a reconciliation.
(n) Nebreda died in 1945. Thus, Maria Uson, the
legal wife, filed action for the recovery of the
Art. 2269. The principles upon which the ownership of the lands. The court ruled in favor
preceding transitional provisions are based of the legal wife. Then the defendants
shall, by analogy, be applied to cases not interposed this present appeal. They contend
specifically regulated by them. (Rule 13a)
that, while it is true that the four minor
defendants are illegitimate children of Faustino
RPC, Art. 22 and under the old Civil Code are not entitled to
any successional rights, however, because
Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege (RPC) these successional rights were declared for the
first time in the new code, they shall be given
1. A person shall not be criminally
responsible under this Statute unless the retroactive effect, even though the act or event
conduct in question constitutes, at the time which gives rise
it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction
of the Court. Issues: Whether or not Article 2264 and Article
287, new Civil Code shall be given retroactive
2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly
construed and shall not be extended by effect since these successional rights were
analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition declared for the first time in the new code
shall be interpreted in favor of the person (Article 2253) thereto may have been done or
being investigated, prosecuted or may have occurred under the prior legislation
convicted. (Article 2253, new Civil Code).
3. This article shall not affect the
characterization of any conduct as criminal Ruling:
under international law independently of No, it shall not be given retroactive
this Statute. effect. It must give retroactive effect only when
the new rights do not prejudice any vested or
Uson v. Del Rosario, 92 Phil. 530 acquired right of the same origin. (Article 2253,
MARIA USON, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARIA new civil code) Article 2253: “if a right should be
DEL ROSARIO, CONCEPCION NEBREDA, declared for the first time in this Code, it shall be
CONRADO NEBREDA, DOMINADOR effective at once, even though the act or event
NEBREDA, and FAUSTINO NEBREDA, Jr., which gives rise thereto may have been done or
may have occurred under the prior legislation,
provided said new right does not prejudice or
impair any vested or acquired right, of the same Accion publiciana is an ordinary civil
origin” In this case, the new right recognized by proceeding to recover the right of possession
the new Civil Code in favor of the illegitimate and determine the better right of possession of
children of the cannot be asserted since Maria realty independently of title when the
Uson is now the owner of the lands in dispute. dispossession has lasted for more than one year
Allowing such recognition will result in the and the plenary action of forcible entry or illegal
impairment of the vested right of Maria, thus, a detainer is no longer available
violation of Article 2253. Wherefore, the decision
appealed from is affirmed, without costs Substantive law - creates rights and obligations
Procedural law - (can apply retrospectively
because they don't impair rights) ex bp 22
Acosta v. Plan, 169 SCRA 591, January 30,
1989
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed an accion publiciana TOPIC CASE TITLE G.R. NO. DATE PONENTE
against private respondent Bernardino Magday
at the RTC, Isabela however it was dismissed. : RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE
Believing that as pauper litigants they did not LAWS : Sps. Augusto and Ofelia Dacudao v.
have to submit records of the case to the Court Secretary of Justice Raul M. Gonzales :
of Appeals as provided in Sec 16, Rule 41 of the 188056 : January 8, 2013 : Justice Bersamin
Rules of Court. The Defendant judge dismissed FACTS
the appeal for failure to file a record on appeal. Herein spouses were among the
Under the Rules of Court in force, a record on investors whom Celso G. Delos Angeles, Jr. and
appeal was indeed required to be filed by the his associates in the Legacy Group of
pauper petitioner although it is not required to Companies (Legacy Group) allegedly defrauded
have been printed. During the pending of the through the Legacy Group's "buy back
case, B.P. Blg. 129 has taken into effect before agreement" that earned them check payments
it was decided, a record is no longer required for that were dishonored. After their written
the perfection of an appeal. demands for the return of their investments went
unheeded, they initiated a number of charges for
Issue: Whether or not B.P. Blg. 129 should be syndicated estafa against Delos Angeles, Jr., et
given retroactive effect. al. in the Office of the City Prosecutor of Davao
City on February 6, 2009. On March 18, 2009,
Rationale/Legal Basis/Analysis: the Secretary of Justice issued Department
Yes, B.P. Blg. 129 should be given Order No. 182 (DO No. 182), directing all
retroactive effect. Under B.P. 129 which was Regional State Prosecutors, Provincial
overtaken before the case was decided, a Prosecutors, and City Prosecutors to forward all
record on appeal is no longer required for the cases already filed against Delos Angeles, Jr., et
perfection of an appeal. Under the case of Alday al. to the Secretariat of the DOJ Special Panel in
vs. Calimon it was ruled that being procedural in Manila for appropriate action except that of
nature, those provisions appearing in Sec. 18 of cases filed in Cagayan de Oro City which is
the Interim Rules and Guidelines issued by the covered by another DOJ Memorandum dated
government may be applied retroactively for the March 2, 2009 (March 2 Memorandum).
benefit of petitioners, as appellants. Disposition: Pursuant to DO No. 182, the complaints of the
The trial court was ordered to forward the entire spouses were forwarded by the Office of the City
records to the Court of Appeals for the Prosecutor of Davao City to the Secretariat of
determination and disposition of the petitioner's the Special Panel of the DOJ. Aggrieved by
appeal on merits. such turn of events, the spouses have directly
come to the Supreme Court via petition for inquire into the wisdom behind the exemption
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus and raise upon the ground that the non-application of the
as issue, among others, that the March 2 exemption to them would cause them some
Memorandum violated their right to equal inconvenience. The Supreme Court dismissed
protection under the Constitution since it the spouses’ petition for lack of merit.
exempts from the coverage of DO No. No. 182
all the cases for syndicated estafa already filed Laws can be applied retroactively
and pending in the Office of the City Prosecutor
of Cagayan de Oro City The Office of the Ex of laws applied retroactively:
Solicitor General (OSG), representing - If in favor to the accused
respondent Secretary of Justice, maintains the - Interpretative laws
validity of DO No. 182 and the March 2 - Laws enacted in the exercise of police
Memorandum. Hence, it posits that the petition power
should be dismissed for lack of merit.

ISSUE: Whether the questioned Department D. Acts executed against mandatory or

Order and Memorandum violate the spouses’ prohibitory laws
right to equal protection of the laws. NCC, Art. 5
Art. 5. Acts executed against the provisions of
RULING mandatory or prohibitory
The Supreme Court negates. The equal laws shall be void, except when the law itself
protection clause of the Constitution does not authorizes their validity.
require the universal application of the laws to all General Rule: Acts which are contrary to
persons or things without distinction; what it mandatory or prohibited laws are void.
requires is simply equality among equals as Exceptions:
determined according to a valid classification. 1. When the law itself authorized its validity (i.e.,
Hence, the Court has affirmed that if a law lotto, sweepstakes)
neither burdens a fundamental right nor targets 2. When the law makes the act only voidable
a suspect class, the classification stands as long and not void (i.e., if consent is vitiated,
as it bears a rational relationship to some the contract is voidable and not void)
legitimate government end. That is the situation 3. When the law makes the act valid but
in the instant case. In issuing the assailed DOJ punishes the violator (i.e., if the marriage is
Memorandum dated March 2, 2009, the celebrated by someone without legal authority
Secretary of Justice took into account the but the parties are in good faith,
relative distance between Cagayan de Oro, the marriage is valid but the person who married
where many complainants against the Legacy the parties is liable)
Group resided, and Manila, where the 4. When the law makes the act void but
preliminary investigations would be conducted recognizes legal effects flowing therefrom.
by the special panel. He also took into account
that the cases had already been filed in the City CASE:
Prosecutor’s Office of Cagayan de Oro at the
time he issued DO No. 182. Given the BPI vs. Intermediate Appellate Court GR# L-
considerable number of complainants residing in 66826, August 19, 1988
CORTES, J:
Cagayan de Oro City, the Secretary of Justice
was fully justified in excluding the cases
commenced in Cagayan de Oro from the ambit Facts:
of DO No. 182. The classification taken into
consideration by the Secretary of Justice was
really valid. Resultantly, the spouses could not
Rizaldy T. Zshornack and his wife maintained in the thing delivered is not the principal purpose of
COMTRUST a dollar savings account and a the contract, there is no deposit but some other
peso current account. An application for a dollar contract.
draft was accomplished by Virgillo Garcia
branch manager of COMTRUST payable to a
certain Leovigilda Dizon. In the PPLICtion, E. Waiver of rights
Garcia indicated that the amount was to be NCC, Art. 6
charged to the dollar savings account of the Art. 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver
Zshornacks. There was no indication of the is contrary to law, public order, public policy,
name of the purchaser of the dollar draft. morals, or good customs, or prejudicial to a third
Comtrust issued a check payable to the order of person with a right recognized by law.
Dizon. When Zshornack noticed the withdrawal Title IX. - SUPPORT
from his account, he demanded an explanation Art. 301. The right to receive support cannot be
renounced; nor can it be transmitted to a third
from the bank. In its answer, Comtrust claimed
person. Neither can it be compensated with
that the peso value of the withdrawal was given what the recipient owes the obligor.
to Atty. Ernesto Zshornack, brother of Rizaldy.
When he was encashed with COMTRUST a CASES:
cashiers check for P8450 issued by the manila
banking corporation payable to Ernesto.
De Borja vs. Vda. de Borja
Issue: Whether the contract between petitioner
and respondent bank is a deposit? G.R. No. L-28040. August 18, 1972

FACTS:
Held: The document which embodies the
contract states that the US$3,000.00 was Francisco de Borja, upon the death of his wife
Josefa Tangco on 6 October 1940, filed a
received by the bank for safekeeping. The petition for the probate of her will. The will was
subsequent acts of the parties also show that probated and Francisco de Borja was appointed
executor and administrator: in 1952, their son,
the intent of the parties was really for the bank to
Jose de Borja, was appointed co-administrator.
safely keep the dollars and to return it to When Francisco died, Jose became the sole
Zshornack at a later time. Thus, Zshornack administrator of the testate estate of his mother.
demanded the return of the money on May 10, While a widower Francisco de Borja allegedly
1976, or over five months later. took unto himself a second wife, Tasiana
Ongsingco. Upon Francisco’s death, Tasiana
instituted testate proceedings where in she was
The above arrangement is that contract defined appointed special administratrix.
under Article 1962, New Civil Code, which
A compromise agreement was entered into on
reads:
12 October 1963, by and between “[T]he heir
Art. 1962. A deposit is constituted from the and son of Francisco de Borja by his first
moment a person receives a thing belonging to marriage, namely, Jose de Borja personally and
as administrator of the Testate Estate of Josefa
another, with the obligation of safely keeping it Tangco,” and “[T]he heir and surviving spouse of
and of returning the same. If the safekeeping of Francisco de Borja by his second marriage,
Tasiana Ongsingco Vda. de Borja.
On 16 May 1968, Jose de Borja submitted for hereditary share in a decedent’s estate is
Court approval the agreement to the Court of transmitted or vested immediately from the
First Instance of Rizal, in Special Proceeding moment of the death of such causante or
No. R-7866; and again, on 8 August 1966, to the predecessor in interest there is no legal bar to a
Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, in Special successor (with requisite contracting capacity)
Proceeding No. 832. Tasiana Ongsingco Vda. disposing of her or his hereditary share
de Borja opposed in both instances. The Rizal immediately after such death, even if the actual
court approved the compromise agreement, but extent of such share is not determined until the
the Nueva Ecija court declared it void and subsequent liquidation of the estate.
unenforceable. Special administratrix Tasiana
Ongsingco Vda. de de Borja appealed the Rizal In this connection, as the surviving spouse of
Court’s order of approval while administrator Francisco de Borja, Tasiana Ongsingco was his
Jose de Borja appealed the order of disapproval. compulsory heir under article 995 of the present
Civil Code. Wherefore, barring unworthiness or
The genuineness and due execution of the valid disinheritance, her successional interest
compromise agreement of 12 October 1963 is existed independent of Francisco de Borja’s last
not disputed, but its validity is, nevertheless, will and testament, and would exist even if such
attacked by Tasiana Ongsingco on the ground will were not probated at all. Thus, the
that: (1) the heirs cannot enter into such kind of prerequisite of a previous probate of the will, as
agreement without first probating the will of established in the Guevara and analogous
Francisco de Borja; (2) that the same involves a cases, can not apply to the case.
compromise on the validity of the marriage
between Francisco de Borja and Tasiana Since the compromise contract was entered into
Ongsingco; and (3) that even if it were valid, it by and between “Jose de Borja personally and
has ceased to have force and effect. as administrator of the Testate Estate of Josefa
Tangco” on the one hand, and on the other, “the
In assailing the validity of the agreement, heir and surviving spouse of Francisco de Borja
Tasiana Ongsingco and the Probate Court of by his second marriage, Tasiana Ongsingco
Nueva Ecija rely on this Court’s decision in Vda. de Borja”, it is clear that the transaction
Guevara vs. Guevara, wherein the Court’s was binding on both in their individual
majority held the view that the presentation of a capacities, upon the perfection of the contract,
will for probate is mandatory and that the even without previous authority of the Court to
settlement and distribution of an estate on the enter into the same.
basis of intestacy when the decedent left a will,
is against the law and public policy.

ISSUE: Asian Cathay Finance v. Sps. Gravador, G.R.

No. 186550, July 5, 2010
Whether or not the compromise agreement FACTS:
entered by Francisco and Tasiana is valid
On October 22, 1999, petitioner Asian Cathay
Finance and Leasing Corporation (ACFLC)
RULING:
extended a loan of Eight Hundred Thousand
The doctrine of Guevara vs. Guevara, ante, is Pesos (₱800,000.00) to respondent Cesario
not applicable to the case at bar. Gravador, with respondents Norma de Vera
and Emma Concepcion Dumigpi as
There was here no attempt to settle or distribute comakers. The loan was payable in sixty
the estate of Francisco de Borja among the heirs (60) monthly installments of ₱24,000.00 each.
thereto before the probate of his will. The clear To secure the loan, respondent Cesario
object of the contract was merely the
executed a real estate mortgage over his
conveyance by Tasiana Ongsingco of any and
all her individual share and interest, actual or property in Sta. Maria, Bulacan, covered by
eventual, in the estate of Francisco de Borja and Transfer Certificate of Title No. T29234.
Josefa Tangco. There is no stipulation as to any Respondents paid the initial installment due in
other claimant, creditor or legatee. And as a November 1999. However, they were unable to
pay the subsequent ones. Consequently, on F. Repeal of laws
February 1, 2000, respondents received a NCC, Arts. 7, 8, and 10
letter demanding
payment of ₱1,871,480.00 within five (5) Art. 7. Laws are repealed only by subsequent
days from receipt thereof. Respondents ones, and their violation or non-observance shall
requested for an not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice
additional period to settle their account, but to the contrary.
ACFLC denied the request. Petitioner filed a
petition for When the courts declare a law to be inconsistent
extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage with the with the Constitution, the former shall be void
and the latter shall govern.
Office of the Deputy Sheriff of Malolos, Bulacan.
Administrative or executive acts, orders and
ISSUE: regulations shall be valid only when they are not
WON the Honorable Court of Appeals erred contrary to the laws or the Constitution.
in invalidating the interest rates imposed on
the Art. 8. Judicial decisions applying or
respondents’ loan, and the waiver of the right of interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall
redemption. form a part of the legal system of the
Philippines.
RULING:
No, The imposition of an unconscionable rate Art. 10. In case of doubt in the interpretation or
of interest on a money debt, even if application of laws, it is presumed that the
knowingly lawmaking body intended right and justice to
and voluntarily assumed, is immoral and prevail.
unjust. It is tantamount to a repugnant
spoliation and an
iniquitous deprivation of property, repulsive to
the common sense of man. It has no support on 1987 Constitution, Art. XVIII, Sec. 3
law, in Section 3. All existing laws, decrees, executive
principles of justice, or in the human conscience orders, proclamations, letters of instructions, and
nor is there any reason whatsoever which may other executive issuances not inconsistent with
justify this Constitution shall remain operative until
such imposition as righteous and as one amended, repealed, or revoked.
that may be sustained within the sphere of
public or private
morals.Settled is the rule that for a waiver
to be valid and effective, it must, in the first GUINGONA, JR. V. CARAGUE 196 SCRA 221
place, be couched in clear and unequivocal (1991)
terms which will leave no doubt as to the FACTS:
intention of a party to give up a right or benefit Petitioners question the constitutionality
which legally pertains to him. Additionally, of the automatic appropriation for debt service in
the intention to waive a right or an the 1990 budget. The 1990 budget consists of
advantage must be shown clearly and P98.4 Billion in automatic appropriation (with
convincingly. Unfortunately, ACFLC failed to P86.8 Billion for debt service) and P155.3 Billion
convince us that respondents waived appropriated under Republic Act No. 6831,
their right of redemption voluntarily. otherwise known as the General Appropriations
Act, or a total of P233.5 Billion. This automatic
appropriation was made pursuant to three
Marcos-era issuances: PDs 81, 1177, and 1967.
 the President, and Congress in the exercise of
ISSUES :Whether or not automatic appropriation its own judgment and wisdom formulates an
is violative of Section 29(1), Art. VI of the 1987 appropriation act precisely following the process
Constitution. established by the Constitution, which specifies
that no money may be paid from the Treasury
RULING: No, the Court held there was no undue except in accordance with an appropriation
delegation of legislative power because the made by law. Debt service is not included in the
assailed PDs are complete. Although the subject General Appropriation Act, since authorization
presidential decrees do not state specific therefor already exists under RA No. 4860 and
amounts to be paid, necessitated by the very 245, as amended and PD 1967. Precisely in the
nature of the problem being addressed, the light of this subsisting authorization as embodied
amounts nevertheless are made certain by the in said Republic Acts and PD for debt service,
legislative parameters provided in the decrees. Congress does not concern itself with details for
The Executive is not of unlimited discretion as to implementation by the Executive, but largely
the amounts to be disbursed for debt servicing. with annual levels and approval thereof upon
The mandate is to pay only the principal, due deliberations as part of the whole obligation
interest, taxes and other normal banking program for the year. Upon such approval,
charges on the loans, credits or indebtedness, Congress has spoken and cannot be said to
or on the bonds, debentures or security or other have delegated its wisdom to the Executive, on
evidences of indebtedness sold in international whose part lies the implementation or execution
markets incurred by virtue of the law, as and of the legislative wisdom.
when they shall become due. No uncertainty
arises in executive implementation as the limit 3. Budget Execution.
will be the exact amounts as shown by the -Tasked on the Executive, the third phase of the
books of the Treasury. budget process covers the various operational
aspects of budgeting. The establishment of
1.The Government budgeting process consists obligation authority ceilings, the evaluation of
of four major phases: (1) Budget preparation. work and financial plans for individual activities,
-The first step is essentially tasked upon the the continuing review of government fiscal
Executive Branch and covers the estimation of position, the regulation of funds releases, the
government revenues, the determination of implementation of cash payment schedules, and
budgetary priorities and activities within the other related activities comprise this phase of
constraints imposed by available revenues and the budget cycle. Release from the debt service
by borrowing limits, and the translation of fund is triggered by a request of the Bureau of
desired priorities and activities into expenditure the Treasury for allotments from the Department
levels. With regard to debt servicing, the DBCC of Budget and Management, one quarter in
staff, based on the macroeconomic projections advance of payment schedule, to ensure prompt
of interest rates (e.g. LIBOR rate) and estimated payments. The Bureau of Treasury, upon
sources of domestic and foreign financing, receiving official billings from the creditors,
estimates debt service levels. Upon issuance of remits payments to creditors through the Central
budget call, the Bureau of Treasury computes Bank or to the Sinking Fund established for
for the interest and principal payments for the government security issues (Annex F).
year for all direct national government
borrowings and other liabilities assumed by the
same. 4.Budget accountability.
-The fourth phase refers to the evaluation of
2. Legislative authorization. actual performance and initially approved work
-At this stage, Congress enters the picture and targets, obligations incurred, personnel hired
deliberates or acts on the budget proposals of and work accomplished are compared with the
targets set at the time the agency budgets were Justice, such statement as may be deemed
approved. Our Constitution does not require a proper, without suspending the execution of the
definite, certain, exact or 'specific appropriation sentence, when a strict enforcement of the
provisions of this Code would result in the
made by law.' Section 29, Article VI of our 1987
imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking
Constitution omits any of these words and into consideration the degree of malice and the
simply states: 'Section 29(1). No money shall be injury caused by the offense.
paid out of the treasury except in pursuance of
an appropriation made by law. An appropriation
may be made implicitly (as by past but
subsisting legislations) as well as expressly for H. Applicability of custom
the current fiscal year (as by enactment of laws NCC, Arts. 11-12
by the present Congress), just as said
appropriation may be made in general as well as Art. 11. Customs which are contrary to law,
in specific terms. The Congressional public order or public policy shall not be
authorization may be embodied in annual laws, countenanced.
such as a general appropriations act or in
Art. 12. A custom must be proved as a fact,
special provisions of laws of general or special according to the rules of evidence.
application which appropriate public funds for
specific public purposes, such as the questioned 1987 Constitution, Art. XII, Sec. 5
decrees. The Court, therefore, finds that R.A.
No. 4860, as amended by P.D. No. 81, Section Section 5. The six-year term of the incumbent
31 of P.D. 1177 and P.D. No. 1967 constitutes President and Vice-President elected in the
February 7, 1986 election is, for purposes of
lawful authorizations or appropriations, unless
synchronization of elections, hereby extended to
they are repealed or otherwise amended by noon of June 30, 1992.
Congress. The Executive was thus merely
complying with the duty to implement the same. Rules of Court, Rule 129, pars. 2 and 3

SEC. 2. Judicial notice, when discretionary.

– A court may take judicial notice of matters
G. Duty to render judgment
which are of public knowledge, or are capable of
NCC, Art. 9 unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be
Art. 9. No judge or court shall decline to render known to judges because of their judicial
judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity or functions. (1a)
insufficiency of the laws.
SEC. 3. Judicial notice, when hearing
RPC, Art. 5 necessary. – During the trial, the court, on its
own initiative, or on request of a party, may
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts announce its intention to take judicial notice of
which should be repressed but which are not any matter and allow the parties to be heard
covered by the law, and in cases of excessive thereon. After the trial, and before judgment or
penalties.chanrobles virtual law library — on appeal, the proper court, on its own initiative
Whenever a court has knowledge of any act or on request of a party, may take judicial notice
which it may deem proper to repress and which of any matter and allow the parties to be heard
is not punishable by law, it shall render the thereon if such matter is decisive of a material
proper decision, and shall report to the Chief issue in the case. (n)
Executive, through the Department of Justice,
the reasons which induce the court to believe CASE:
that said act should be made the subject of
legislation.chanrobles virtual law library Martinez vs. Van Buskirk, 18 Phil. 79
In the same way, the court shall submit to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of
FACTS: condition in which they were left on the day of
On 11th day of September 1908, the accident and they had never run away up to
plaintiff, Carmen Ong de Martinez, was riding in that time and there had been no accident due to
a carromata on Calle Real, district of Ermita, city such practice. The SC also ruled that to leave
of Manila, P.I., along the left-hand side of the the horses and assist in unloading the
street as she was going, when a delivery wagon merchandise in the manner described on the
belonging to the defendant used for the purpose day of the accident was the custom of all
of transportation of fodder and to which was cochero who delivered merchandise of the
attached a pair of horses, came along the street character of that which was being delivered by
in the opposite direction. Thereupon the driver the cochero of the defendant on the day in
of the said plaintiff’s carromata, observing that question, which custom was sanctioned by their
the delivery wagon of the defendant was coming employers. The act of the defendant's driver in
at a great speed, crowded close to the sidewalk leaving the horses in the manner provided was
and stopped, in order to give the defendant's not unreasonable or imprudent. Acts, the
delivery wagon an opportunity to pass by. But performance of which has not proved destructive
instead of passing by, the defendant’s wagon or injurious and which have, therefore, been
and horses ran into the carromata occupied by acquiesced in by society for so long a time that
said plaintiff with her child and overturned it, they have ripened into custom, cannot be held to
severely wounding plaintiff and also injuring the be themselves unreasonable or imprudent.
carromata itself and the harness upon the horse Therefore, the SC ruled that the doctrine of res
which was drawing it. The defendant contends ipsa loquitur does not apply.
that the cochero, who was driving his delivery
wagon at the time of the accident, was actually a
good servant and was considered a safe and
reliable cochero. He also claims that the cochero I. Legal Periods
was tasked to deliver some forage at Calle
Herran and for that purpose the defendant’s
employee tied the driving lines of the horses to
the front end of the delivery wagon for the NCC, Art. 13
purpose of unloading the forage to be delivered.
However, a vehicle passed by the driver and Art. 13. When the laws speak of years, months,
made noises that frightened the hoses causing days or nights, it shall be understood that years
them to run. The employee failed to stop the are of three hundred sixty-five days each;
horses since he was thrown upon the ground. months, of thirty days; days, of twenty-four
The trial court found the defendant guilty of hours; and nights from sunset to sunrise.
negligence and ordered to pay the plaintiff the
sum of P442.50 with interest. Hence, the If months are designated by their name, they
petition. shall be computed by the number of days which
they respectively have.
ISSUE: 1. Whether or not the defendant
employer who has furnished a gentle and In computing a period, the first day shall be
tractable team (of horses) and a trusty and excluded, and the last day included.
capable driver, is liable for the negligence of
such driver?

RULING: 1. The SC reversed the decision of the

lower court. The SC ruled that the cochero was
not negligent in leaving the horses in the manner
described by the evidence in this case. It chH. Applicability of virt
appears that the horses which caused damage
were gentle and tractable; that the cochero was
experienced and capable; that he had driven
one of the horses several years and the other al law li
five or six months; that he had been in the habit,
during all that time, of leaving them in the