Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Civil-Law-Proper.pdf

Civil-Law-Proper.pdf

Ratings: (0)|Views: 71 |Likes:
Published by Gerry Micor

More info:

Published by: Gerry Micor on Jan 22, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/08/2013

pdf

text

original

 
E
FFECT
ND
PPLICATION OF
L
AWS
 
I.
 
EFFECT
 
AND
 
APPLICATION
 
OF
 
LAWS
 
1
U
 
N
 
I
 
V
 
E
 
R
 
S
 
I
 
T
 
Y
 
O
 
F
 
S
 
A
 
N
 
T
 
O
 
T
 
O
 
M
 
A
 
S
 
Facultad de Derecho Civil
 
A
CADEMICS
 
C
HAIR
:
 
L
ESTER
 
J
AY
 
A
LAN
 
E.
 
F
LORES
 
II
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIRS
 
F
OR
 
A
CADEMICS
:
 
K
AREN
 
J
OY
 
G.
 
S
ABUGO
 
&
 
J
OHN
 
H
ENRY
 
C.
 
M
ENDOZA
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIR
 
FOR
 
A
DMINISTRATION
 
AND
 
F
INANCE
:
 
J
EANELLE
 
C.
 
L
EE
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIRS
 
FOR
 
L
AY
O
UT
 
A
ND
 
D
ESIGN
:
 
E
ARL
 
L
OUIE
 
M.
 
M
ASACAYAN
 
&
 
T
HEENA
 
C.
 
M
ARTINEZ
 
A.
 
WHEN
 
LAW
 
TAKES
 
EFFECT
 
Q:
 
When
 
did
 
the
 
Civil
 
Code
 
take
 
effect?
 
A:
 
August
 
30,
 
1950
 
Q:
 
When
 
do
 
laws
 
take
 
effect?
 
A:
 
Laws
 
take
 
effect:
 
GR:
 
 After 
 
15
 
days
 
following
 
the
 
completion
 
of 
 
its
 
publication
 
in
 
the
 
official
 
gazette
 
or
 
newspaper
 
of 
 
general
 
circulation.
 
Note:
 
“after 
 
15
 
days” 
 –
 
Law
 
shall
 
take
 
effect
 
on
 
the
 
16
th
 
day
 
from
 
date
 
of 
 
publication
 
XPN:
 
unless
 
otherwise
 
provided
 
by
 
the
 
law.
 
Q:
 
What
 
is
 
meant
 
by
 
the
 
phrase
 
“unless
 
it
 
is
 
otherwise
 
provided”
 
in
 
the
 
provision
 
on
 
effectivity
 
of 
 
laws?
 
A:
 
15
day
 
period
 
may
 
be
 
lengthened
 
or
 
shortened
 
by
 
Congress.
 
The
 
exception
 
refers
 
to
 
the
 
15
day
 
period,
 
not 
 
the
 
requirement
 
of 
 
publication,
 
publication
 
being
 
mandated
 
by
 
due
 
process.
 
Note:
 
No
 
one
 
shall
 
be
 
charged
 
with
 
notice
 
of 
 
the
 
statutes
 
provision
 
until
 
the
 
publication
 
is
 
completed
 
and
 
the
 
15
 
day
 
period
 
has
 
expired.
 
The
 
law
 
produces
 
no
 
effect
 
until
 
and
 
unless
 
it
 
completes
 
the
 
requirement
 
of 
 
publication.
 
Q:
 
When
 
will
 
the
 
law
 
take
 
effect
 
if 
 
it
 
is
 
made
 
to
 
take
 
effect
 
“immediately”?
 
A:
 
It
 
shall
 
take
 
effect
 
immediately
 
after
 
publication.
 
The
 
15
 
day
 
period
 
after
 
publication
 
is
 
dispensed
 
with
 
but
 
publication
 
is
 
not.
 
Q:
 
When
 
will
 
the
 
law
 
take
 
effect
 
if 
 
it
 
states
 
that
 
it
 
shall
 
be
 
“effective
 
upon
 
approval”?
 
A:
 
The
 
clause
 
"unless
 
it
 
is
 
otherwise
 
provided"
 
refers
 
to
 
the
 
date
 
of 
 
effectivity
 
and
 
not
 
to
 
the
 
requirement
 
of 
 
publication
 
itself,
 
which
 
cannot
 
in
 
any
 
event
 
be
 
omitted.
 
This
 
clause
 
does
 
not
 
mean
 
that
 
the
 
legislator
 
may
 
make
 
the
 
law
 
effective
 
immediately
 
upon
 
approval,
 
or
 
on
 
any
 
other
 
date
 
without
 
its
 
previous
 
publication.
 
Publication
 
is
 
indispensable
 
in
 
every
 
case,
 
but
 
the
 
legislature
 
may
 
in
 
its
 
discretion
 
provide
 
that
 
the
 
usual
 
fifteen
day
 
period
 
shall
 
be
 
shortened
 
or
 
extended.
 
Inasmuch
 
as
 
the
 
law
 
has
 
no
 
specific
 
date
 
for
 
its
 
effectivity
 
and
 
neither
 
can
 
it
 
become
 
effective
 
upon
 
its
 
approval
 
notwithstanding
 
its
 
express
 
statement,
 
following
 
Article
 
2
 
of 
 
the
 
Civil
 
Code
 
and
 
the
 
doctrine
 
enunciated
 
in
 
Tanada,
 
supra,
 
it
 
took
 
effect
 
fifteen
 
days
 
after
 
its
 
publication.
 
(Umali 
 
 
Estanislao,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
104037,
 
May 
 
29,
 
1992,
 
[citing
 
Tanada
 
v.
 
Tuvera,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
L
63915,
 
Dec.
 
29,
 
1986])
 
RULES
 
ON
 
PUBLICATION
 
Q:
 
Are
 
all
 
laws
 
required
 
to
 
be
 
published?
 
A:
 
GR:
 
Yes.
 
Publication
 
is
 
indispensable.
 
XPN:
 
1.
 
Municipal
 
Ordinances
 
(governed
 
by
 
the
 
Local
 
Government
 
Code
 
not
 
the
 
Civil
 
Code)
 
2.
 
Rules
 
and
 
regulations
 
that
 
are
 
internal
 
in
 
nature.
 
3.
 
Letters
 
of 
 
Instruction
 
issued
 
by
 
administrative
 
supervisors
 
on
 
internal
 
rules
 
and
 
guidelines.
 
4.
 
Interpretative
 
regulations
 
regulating
 
only
 
the
 
personnel
 
of 
 
administrative
 
agency.
 
XPN
 
to
 
the
 
XPN:
 
Administrative
 
rules
 
and
 
regulations
 
that
 
require
 
publication:
 
1.
 
The
 
purpose
 
of 
 
which
 
is
 
to
 
implement
 
or
 
enforce
 
existing
 
laws
 
pursuant
 
to
 
a
 
valid
 
delegation;
 
2.
 
Penal
 
in
 
Nature;
 
3.
 
It
 
diminishes
 
existing
 
rights
 
of 
 
certain
 
individuals
 
Q:
 
Honasan
 
questions
 
the
 
authority
 
and
 
 jurisdiction
 
of 
 
the
 
DOJ
 
panel
 
of 
 
prosecutors
 
to
 
conduct
 
a
 
preliminary
 
investigation
 
and
 
to
 
eventually
 
file
 
charges
 
against
 
him,
 
claiming
 
that
 
since
 
he
 
is
 
a
 
senator
 
with
 
a
 
salary
 
grade
 
of 
 
31,
 
it
 
is
 
the
 
Office
 
of 
 
the
 
Ombudsman,
 
not
 
the
 
DOJ,
 
which
 
has
 
authority
 
and
 
 jurisdiction
 
to
 
conduct
 
the
 
preliminary
 
investigation.
 
DOJ
 
claims
 
that
 
it
 
has
 
concurrent
 
 jurisdiction,
 
invoking
 
an
 
OMB
DOJ
 
Joint
 
Circular
 
which
 
outlines
 
the
 
authority
 
and
 
responsibilities
 
among
 
prosecutors
 
of 
 
the
 
DOJ
 
and
 
the
 
Office
 
of 
 
the
 
Ombudsman
 
in
 
the
 
conduct
 
of 
 
preliminary
 
investigations.
 
Honasan
 
counters
 
that
 
said
 
circular
 
is
 
ineffective
 
as
 
it
 
was
 
never
 
published.
 
Is
 
OMB
DOJ
 
Circular
 
No.
 
95
001
 
ineffective
 
because
 
it
 
was
 
not
 
published?
 
 
UST
 
G
OLDEN
N
OTES
2011
A:
 
No.
 
OMB
DOJ
 
Circular
 
No.
 
95
001
 
is
 
merely
 
an
 
internal
 
circular
 
between
 
the
 
two
 
offices
 
which
 
outlines
 
the
 
authority
 
and
 
responsibilities
 
among
 
prosecutors
 
of 
 
the
 
DOJ
 
and
 
of 
 
the
 
Office
 
of 
 
the
 
Ombudsman
 
in
 
the
 
conduct
 
of 
 
preliminary
 
investigations.
 
It
 
does
 
not
 
contain
 
any
 
penal
 
provision
 
nor
 
prescribe
 
a
 
mandatory
 
act
 
or
 
prohibit
 
any
 
under
 
pain
 
of 
 
penalty.
 
Further,
 
it
 
does
 
not
 
regulate
 
the
 
conduct
 
of 
 
persons
 
or
 
the
 
public,
 
in
 
general.
 
As
 
such
 
therefore,
 
it
 
need
 
not
 
be
 
published.
 
(Honasan,
 
II
 
v.
 
The
 
Panel 
 
of 
 
Investigating
 
Prosecutors
 
of 
 
the
 
Department 
 
of 
 
 Justice,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
159747,
 
 Jun.
 
15,
 
2004)
 
2
C
IVIL
 
L
AW
 
T
EAM
:
 
A
DVISER
:
 
A
TTY
.
 
E
LMER
 
T.
 
R
ABUYA
;
 
S
UBJECT
 
H
EAD
:
 
A
LFREDO
 
B.
 
D
IMAFELIX
 
II;
 
A
SST
.
 
S
UBJECT
 
H
EADS
:
 
K
AREN
 
F
ELIZ
 
G.
 
S
UPNAD
,
 
L
AMBERTO
 
L.
 
S
ANTOS
 
III;
 
M
EMBERS
:
 
P
AUL
 
E
LBERT
 
E.
 
A
MON
,
 
A
LSTON
 
A
NARNA
,
 
O
ZAN
 
J.
 
F
ULLEROS
,
 
C
ECILIO
 
M.
 
J
IMENO
,
 
J
R
.,
 
I
SMAEL
 
S
ARANGAYA
,
 
J
R
.;
 
C
ONTRIBUTORS
:
 
L
OISE
 
R
AE
 
G.
 
N
AVAL
,
 
M
ONICA
 
J
UCOM
 
Q:
 
What
 
is
 
the
 
effect
 
of 
 
non
publication
 
of 
 
the
 
law?
 
A:
 
The
 
law
 
shall
 
not
 
be
 
effective.
 
It
 
is
 
a
 
violation
 
of 
 
due
 
process.
 
Q:
 
What
 
must
 
be
 
published
 
in
 
order
 
to
 
comply
 
with
 
the
 
publication
 
requirement?
 
A:
 
Publication
 
must
 
be
 
in
 
full
 
or
 
it
 
is
 
no
 
publication
 
at
 
all
 
since
 
its
 
purpose
 
is
 
to
 
inform
 
the
 
public
 
of 
 
the
 
contents
 
of 
 
the
 
laws…the
 
mere
 
mention
 
of 
 
the
 
number
 
of 
 
the
 
presidential
 
decree,
 
the
 
title
 
of 
 
such
 
decree,
 
its
 
whereabouts,
 
the
 
supposed
 
date
 
of 
 
effectivity,
 
and
 
in
 
a
 
mere
 
supplement
 
of 
 
the
 
Official
 
Gazette
 
cannot
 
satisfy
 
the
 
publication
 
requirement.
 
This
 
is
 
not
 
even
 
substantial
 
compliance.
 
(Tañada
 
v.
 
Tuvera,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
L
63915,
 
Dec.
 
29,
 
1986)
 
Q:
 
Judicial
 
decisions
 
form
 
part
 
of 
 
the
 
law
 
or
 
the
 
legal
 
system
 
of 
 
the
 
land.
 
Is
 
compliance
 
with
 
the
 
publication
 
requirement
 
for
 
effectivity
 
of 
 
laws
 
necessary
 
for
 
 judicial
 
decisions
 
to
 
be
 
effective?
 
A:
 
No.
 
The
 
term
 
“laws”
 
do
 
not
 
include
 
decisions
 
of 
 
the
 
Supreme
 
Court
 
because
 
lawyers
 
in
 
the
 
active
 
law
 
practice
 
must
 
keep
 
abreast
 
of 
 
decisions,
 
particularly
 
where
 
issues
 
have
 
been
 
clarified,
 
consistently
 
reiterated
 
and
 
published
 
in
 
advance
 
reports
 
and
 
the
 
SCRA
 
(Roy 
 
v.
 
CA,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
80718,
 
 Jan.
 
29,
 
1988)
 
Q:
 
Publication
 
must
 
be
 
made
 
in
 
a
 
newspaper
 
of 
 
general
 
circulation
 
or
 
in
 
the
 
Official
 
Gazette.When
 
is
 
a
 
newspaper
 
of 
 
general
 
circulation?
 
A:
 
1.
 
It
 
is
 
published
 
within
 
the
 
court’s
 
 jurisdiction
 
2.
 
Published
 
for
 
disseminating
 
local
 
news
 
and
 
general
 
information.
 
3.
 
It
 
has
 
a
 
bona
 
 fide
 
subscription
 
list
 
of 
 
paying
 
subscribers
 
4.
 
Not
 
merely
 
caters
 
to
 
a
 
specific
 
class
 
of 
 
persons.
 
5.
 
It
 
is
 
published
 
at
 
regular
 
intervals.
 
B.
 
IGNORANCE
 
OF
 
THE
 
LAW
 
Q:
 
Differentiate
 
mistake
 
of 
 
law
 
from
 
mistake
 
of 
 
fact.
 
A:
 
MISTAKE
 
OF
 
FACT MISTAKE
 
OF
 
LAW
 
Want
 
of 
 
knowledge
 
of 
 
some
 
fact
 
or
 
facts
 
constituting
 
or
 
relating
 
to
 
the
 
subject
 
matter
 
in
 
hand.
 
Want
 
of 
 
knowledge
 
or
 
acquaintance
 
with
 
the
 
laws
 
of 
 
the
 
land
 
insofar
 
as
 
they
 
apply
 
to
 
the
 
act,
 
relation,
 
duty,
 
or
 
matter
 
under
 
consideration.
 
When
 
some
 
facts
 
which
 
really
 
exist
 
are
 
unknown
 
or
 
some
 
fact
 
is
 
supposed
 
to
 
exist
 
which
 
really
 
does
 
not
 
exist.
 
Occurs
 
when
 
a
 
person
 
having
 
full
 
knowledge
 
of 
 
the
 
facts
 
come
 
to
 
an
 
erroneous
 
conclusion
 
as
 
to
 
its
 
legal
 
effects
 
Good
 
faith
 
is
 
an
 
excuse
 
Not
 
excusable,
 
even
 
if 
 
in
 
good
 
faith
 
Note:
 
Ignorance
 
of 
 
a
 
foreign
 
law
 
is
 
a
 
mistake
 
of 
 
fact
 
Q:
 
Tina
 
charged
 
Eduardo
 
with
 
bigamy.
 
He
 
invokes
 
as
 
defense
 
good
 
faith
 
and
 
that
 
he
 
did
 
not
 
know
 
that
 
there
 
was
 
still
 
a
 
need
 
for
 
a
 
prior
 
declaration
 
of 
 
nullity
 
of 
 
marriage
 
before
 
he
 
can
 
contract
 
a
 
subsequent
 
marriage.
 
Is
 
his
 
defense
 
tenable?
 
A:
 
No.
 
Eduardo
 
is
 
presumed
 
to
 
have
 
acted
 
with
 
malice
 
or
 
evil
 
intent
 
when
 
he
 
married
 
Tina.
 
As
 
a
 
general
 
rule,
 
mistake
 
of 
 
fact
 
or
 
good
 
faith
 
of 
 
the
 
accused
 
is
 
a
 
valid
 
defense
 
in
 
a
 
prosecution
 
for
 
a
 
felony
 
by
 
dolo
;
 
such
 
defense
 
negates
 
malice
 
or
 
criminal
 
intent.
 
However,
 
ignorance
 
of 
 
the
 
law
 
is
 
not
 
an
 
excuse
 
because
 
everyone
 
is
 
presumed
 
to
 
know
 
the
 
law.
 
Ignorantia
 
legis
 
neminem
 
excusat.
 
(Manuel 
 
v.
 
People,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
165842,
 
Nov.
 
29,
 
2005)
 
Q:
 
Eduardo
 
was
 
married
 
to
 
Ruby.
 
He
 
then
 
met
 
Tina
 
and
 
proposed
 
marriage,
 
assuring
 
her
 
that
 
he
 
was
 
single.
 
They
 
got
 
married
 
and
 
lived
 
together.
 
Tina,
 
upon
 
learning
 
that
 
Eduardo
 
had
 
been
 
previously
 
married,
 
charged
 
Eduardo
 
for
 
bigamy
 
for
 
which
 
he
 
was
 
convicted.
 
Eduardo
 
testified
 
that
 
he
 
declared
 
he
 
was
 
“single”
 
because
 
he
 
believed
 
in
 
good
 
faith
 
that
 
his
 
first
 
wife
 
was
 
already
 
dead,
 
having
 
 
E
FFECT
ND
PPLICATION OF
L
AWS
 
not
 
heard
 
from
 
her
 
for
 
20
 
years,
 
and
 
that
 
he
 
did
 
not
 
know
 
that
 
he
 
had
 
to
 
go
 
to
 
court
 
to
 
seek
 
for
 
the
 
nullification
 
of 
 
his
 
first
 
marriage
 
before
 
marrying
 
Tina.
 
Is
 
Eduardo
 
liable
 
for
 
the
 
crime
 
of 
 
bigamy?
 
A:
 
Yes.
 
Eduardo
 
is
 
presumed
 
to
 
have
 
acted
 
with
 
malice
 
or
 
evil
 
intent
 
when
 
he
 
married
 
Tina.
 
As
 
a
 
general
 
rule,
 
mistake
 
of 
 
fact
 
or
 
good
 
faith
 
of 
 
the
 
accused
 
is
 
a
 
valid
 
defense
 
in
 
a
 
prosecution
 
for
 
a
 
felony
 
by
 
dolo
;
 
such
 
defense
 
negates
 
malice
 
or
 
criminal
 
intent.
 
However,
 
ignorance
 
of 
 
the
 
law
 
is
 
not
 
an
 
excuse
 
because
 
everyone
 
is
 
presumed
 
to
 
know
 
the
 
law.
 
It
 
was
 
the
 
burden
 
of 
 
the
 
Eduardo
 
to
 
prove
 
his
 
defense
 
that
 
when
 
he
 
married
 
the
 
Tina,
 
he
 
was
 
of 
 
the
 
well
grounded
 
belief 
 
that
 
his
 
first
 
wife
 
was
 
already
 
dead.
 
He
 
should
 
have
 
adduced
 
in
 
evidence
 
a
 
decision
 
of 
 
a
 
competent
 
court
 
declaring
 
the
 
presumptive
 
death
 
of 
 
his
 
first
 
wife
 
as
 
required
 
by
 
Article
 
349
 
of 
 
the
 
Revised
 
Penal
 
Code,
 
in
 
relation
 
to
 
Article
 
41
 
of 
 
the
 
Family
 
Code.
 
Such
 
 judicial
 
declaration
 
also
 
constitutes
 
proof 
 
that
 
Eduardo
 
acted
 
in
 
good
 
faith,
 
and
 
would
 
negate
 
criminal
 
intent
 
on
 
his
 
part
 
when
 
he
 
married
 
the
 
private
 
complainant
 
and,
 
as
 
a
 
consequence,
 
he
 
could
 
not
 
be
 
held
 
guilty
 
of 
 
bigamy
 
in
 
such
 
case.
 
Eduardo,
 
however,
 
failed
 
to
 
discharge
 
his
 
burden.
 
(
Manuel 
 
v.
 
People,
 
G.R.
 
No.
 
165842,
 
Nov.
 
29,
 
2005
)
 
3
U
 
N
 
I
 
V
 
E
 
R
 
S
 
I
 
T
 
Y
 
O
 
F
 
S
 
A
 
N
 
T
 
O
 
T
 
O
 
M
 
A
 
S
 
Facultad de Derecho Civil
 
A
CADEMICS
 
C
HAIR
:
 
L
ESTER
 
J
AY
 
A
LAN
 
E.
 
F
LORES
 
II
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIRS
 
F
OR
 
A
CADEMICS
:
 
K
AREN
 
J
OY
 
G.
 
S
ABUGO
 
&
 
J
OHN
 
H
ENRY
 
C.
 
M
ENDOZA
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIR
 
FOR
 
A
DMINISTRATION
 
AND
 
F
INANCE
:
 
J
EANELLE
 
C.
 
L
EE
 
V
ICE
 
C
HAIRS
 
FOR
 
L
AY
O
UT
 
A
ND
 
D
ESIGN
:
 
E
ARL
 
L
OUIE
 
M.
 
M
ASACAYAN
 
&
 
T
HEENA
 
C.
 
M
ARTINEZ
 
Q:
 
What
 
is
 
the
 
rule
 
as
 
regards
 
difficult
 
questions
 
of 
 
law?
 
A:
 
In
 
specific
 
instances
 
provided
 
by
 
law,
 
mistake
 
as
 
to
 
difficult
 
questions
 
of 
 
law
 
has
 
been
 
given
 
the
 
same
 
effect
 
as
 
a
 
mistake
 
of 
 
fact.
 
E.g.
 
Mistake
 
upon
 
a
 
doubtful
 
or
 
difficult
 
question
 
of 
 
law
 
may
 
be
 
the
 
basis
 
of 
 
good
 
faith.
 
[Art.
 
526
 
(3)]
 
C.
 
RETROACTIVITY
 
OF
 
LAWS
 
Q:
 
Do
 
laws
 
have
 
retroactive
 
effect?
 
A:
 
GR:
 
Laws
 
shall
 
have
 
no
 
retroactive
 
effect.
 
XPN:
 
TIN
 
CREEP
 
1.
 
T
ax
 
laws
 
2.
 
I
nterpretative
 
statutes
 
3.
 
Laws
 
creating
 
N
ew
 
Rights
 
4.
 
C
urative
 
Statutes
 
5.
 
R
emedial/procedural
 
6.
 
E
mergency
 
Laws
 
7.
 
When
 
E
xpressly
 
provided
 
8.
 
P
enal
 
laws
 
favorable
 
to
 
the
 
accused
 
 provided,
 
accused 
 
is
 
not 
 
a
 
habitual 
 
criminal 
 
XPN
 
to
 
the
 
XPN:
 
constitutional
 
limits,
 
where
 
retroactivity
 
would
 
result
 
to:
 
IE
 
1.
 
I
mpairment
 
of 
 
obligation
 
of 
 
contracts
 
2.
 
E
x
 
Post
 
Facto
 
Laws
 
Note:
 
In
 
case
 
of 
 
doubt:
 
laws
 
apply
 
prospectively,
 
not
 
retroactively
.
 
Q:
 
May
 
 judicial
 
decisions
 
be
 
given
 
retroactive
 
effect?
 
A:
 
No.
 
When
 
a
 
doctrine
 
of 
 
the
 
Supreme
 
Court
 
is
 
overruled
 
and
 
a
 
different
 
view
 
is
 
adopted,
 
the
 
new
 
doctrine
 
should
 
be
 
applied
 
prospectively
 
and
 
should
 
not
 
apply
 
to
 
parties
 
who
 
had
 
relied
 
on
 
the
 
old
 
doctrine
 
and
 
acted
 
on
 
the
 
faith
 
thereon.
 
(Rabuya,
 
 p.
 
10)
 
D.
 
MANDATORY
 
OR
 
PROHIBITORY
 
LAWS
 
Q:
 
What
 
is
 
the
 
status
 
of 
 
acts
 
which
 
are
 
contrary
 
to
 
law?
 
A:
 
GR:
 
Acts
 
that
 
are
 
contrary
 
to
 
the
 
provisions
 
of 
 
mandatory
 
and
 
proibitory
 
law
 
are
 
void
.
 
(Art.
 
5,
 
NCC)
 
XPN:
 
Where
 
the
 
law:
 
1.
 
Makes
 
the
 
act
 
valid
 
but
 
punishes
 
the
 
violator,
 
e.g.
 
Marriage
 
solemnized
 
by
 
a
 
person
 
not
 
authorized
 
to
 
do
 
so;
 
2.
 
Itself 
 
authorizes
 
its
 
validity;
 
3.
 
Makes
 
the
 
act
 
merely
 
voidable
 
i.e.
 
valid
 
until
 
annulled;
 
4.
 
Declares
 
the
 
nullity
 
of 
 
an
 
act
 
but
 
recognizes
 
its
 
effects
 
as
 
legally
 
existing,
 
e.g.
 
Child
 
born
 
after
 
the
 
annulment
 
of 
 
marriage
 
is
 
considered
 
legitimate.
 
E.
 
WAIVER
 
OF
 
RIGHTS
 
Q:
 
What
 
is
 
a
 
right?
 
A:
 
It
 
is
 
a
 
legally
 
enforceable
 
claim
 
of 
 
one
 
person
 
against
 
another,
 
that
 
the
 
other
 
shall
 
do
 
a
 
given
 
act,
 
or
 
shall
 
not
 
do
 
a
 
given
 
act
 
(Pineda,
 
Persons,
 
 p.
 
23)