_______ R RAPERE Rape.

To seize with violence and to have carnal knowledge of a woman by a man against her will. ( Cited in People v. Padre-e, 249 SCRA 422) RAPTOR One who seizes by force, a robber, abductor. ( Cited in U. S. v. Alvarez, 1 Phil. 351 ) RATIHABITIO AEQUIPARATUR MANDATO Ratification is equivalent to a mandate. ( Cited in Government of P.I. v. Standard Oil Co. of New York, 20 Phil. 30 ) RATIOCINATIO An exercise of the reasoning power, calm reasoning. RATIO DECIDENDI Rationale of reaching a decision. The reasoning which explains the principle of law articulated in a case. The ground of decision, the point in a case which determines the judgment. “The reason for deciding.” There are two steps in ascertaining the ratio decidendi: 1.

It is necessary to determine all the facts of the case as seen by the judge. It is necessary to discover which of those facts were treated as material by the judge. ( Cited in: U.S. v. Pico, 18 Phil. 386, Director of Prisons v. Judge of First Instance of Cavite, 29 Phil. 265, Sision v. Yap Tico, 37 Phil. 584, Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, 39 Phil.660, J. Northcott & Co. v. Villa-Abrille, 41 Phil. 462, People v. Moran, 44 Phil. 387, Costas v. Aldanese, 45 Phil. 345, Asia Banking Corporation v. Herridge, 45 Phil. 580, Central Azucarera de Tarlac v. De Leon, 56 Phil. 169, Kare v. Locsin, 61 Phil. 541, Cecilio v. Tomacruz, 62 Phil. 689, Santos v. Castillo, 64 Phil. 211, People v. Vera, 65 Phil. 56, Campomanes v. Municipal Council of Sariaya, 65 Phil. 158, Zandueta v. De la Costa, 66 Phil. 615, Manila Gas Corporation v. Collector of Internal Revenue, 71 Phil. 513, The Texas Company (Phil) v. Alonzo, 73 Phil. 330, Lu v. Fauco, 74 Phil. 287, People

v. Jose, 75 Phil. 612, Vera v. Avelino, 77 Phil. 365, Mabanag v. Vito, 78 Phil. 1, Krivenko v. Register of Deeds, 79 Phil. 461, Lim Toco v. Fay, 80 Phil. 166, Coronel v. Tan, 82 Phil. 81, Abriol v. Homeres, 84 Phil. 525, Pardo v. Republic, 85 Phil. 323, Perfecto v. Meer, 85 Phil. 552, People v. Del Rosario, 86 Phil. 163, Mejoff v. Director of Prisons, 90 Phil. 70, Lacson v. Roque, 92 Phil. 456, Garcia v. De los Santos, 93 Phil. 683, University of the East v. City of Manila and Aquino, 96 Phil. 316, People v. Liggayu, 97 Phil. 865, Edwards v. Arce, 98 Phil. 688, Sison v. Teodoro, 100 Phil. 1055, Gorospe v. Penaflorida, 101 Phil. 886, People v. Lingad, 103 Phil. 980, Millare v. Millare, 106 Phil. 293, Segarra v. Maronilla, Jr., 108 Phil. 1086, Chambers of Agriculture and Natural Resources of the Philippines v. Central Bank of the Philippines, 14 SCRA 630, Buenaventura v. Court of Appeals, 22 SCRA 462, Teresa Realty Inc. v. Potenciano, 5 SCRA 211, In re: Gutierrez, 5 SCRA 661, Register of Deeds v. Philippine National Bank, 13 SCRA 46, Lagumbay v. Commission on Elections, 16 SCRA 175, De las Alas v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-38006, May 16, 1978, Aguinaldo v. Commission on Elections, 102 SCRA 1, Del Rosario v. CAR, 205 Phil. 352, Rabuco v. Villegas, 55 SCRA 656, Heirs of Juan Presto v. Galang, 78 SCRA 534, Centerio v. Court of Appeals, 79 SCRA 264, Villegas v. Commission on Elections, 99 SCRA 582, Singco v. Commission on Elections, 101 SCRA 420, Arcenas v. Commission on Elections, 101 SCRA 437, Philippine National Bank v. Philippine National Bank Employees Association (PEMA), 115 SCRA 507, Pelejo v. Court of Appeals, 116 SCRA 406, Febular v. Court of Appeals, 119 SCRA 329, Director of Lands v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 146 SCRA 409, Budget Investment & Financing Inc. v. Mangoma, 153 SCRA 630, Mutual Security Insurance Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 153 SCRA 678, Tropical Homes, Inc. v. Fortun, 169 SCRA 81, International School Inc. v. Minister of Labor and Employment, 175 SCRA 450, Philippine National Bank v. De los Reyes, 179 SCRA 619, People v. Monteiro, 192 SCRA 548, Wong v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 200 SCRA 792, People v. Ong, 204 SCRA 927, Tayag v. Court of Appeals, 209 SCRA 665, People v. Lovendino, 211 SCRA 36, Ola v. Court of Appeals, 213 SCRA 329, Cruz, Jr. v. People, 233 SCRA 439, Aniag, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, 237 SCRA 424, International School of Speech v. National Labor Relations Commission, 242 SCRA 382, Olivarez v. Sandiganbayan, 248 SCRA 700, Equatorial Realty Dev. Inc. v. Mayfair Theater, Inc., 264 SCRA 483, Suntay v. Cojuangco, 300 SCRA 1, Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Desierto, 317 SCRA 272, Militante v. Court of Appeals, 330 SCRA 318, Lagon v. Hooven Comalco Industries Inc., 349 SCRA 363, Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 377 SCRA 539, Mercado v. People, 392 SCRA 687, Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, 403 SCRA 1, People v. Geral, 405 SCRA 104, Heirs of Timoteo Moreno & Maria Rotea v. Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority, 413 SCRA 502, Romualdez v. Sandiganbayan, 435 SCRA 371, Abellana v. Ponce, 437 SCRA 531, Nava v. NBI, Regional Office No.

VI, Davao City, 455 SCRA 377, R. N. Symaco Trading Corporation v. Santos, 467 SCRA 312) RATIO EST LEGIS ANIMA; MUTATA LEGIS RATIONE MUTATUR EX LEX Reason is the soul of law; the reason of law being changed, the law is also changed. RATIO EST RADIUS DIVINI LUMINIS Reason is a ray of the divine light. RATIO ET AUTOCRITAS DUO CLARISSIMA MUNDI LUMINA Reason and authority are the two brightest lights in the world. RATIONE CESSANTE, CESSAT IPSA LEX When the reason for the law ceases, the law itself ceases. ( Cited in: U.S. v. Sarmiento, 11 Phil. 474, Icard v. Masigan, 71 Phil. 419, C & C Commercial Corporation v. Committee on Awards, 62 O.G. 8660, Lonaria v. De Guzman, 21 SCRA 349, Yao v. Commissioner of Immigration, 41 SCRA 292, People v. Plateros, 83 SCRA 401, Llorin v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103592, February 4, 1993, Griffith v. Court of Appeals, 379 SCRA 94, Abarquez v. Court of Appeals, 408 SCRA 500 ) RATIONE IMPOTENTIAE On account of inability. RATIO LEGIS EST ANIMA The reason of the law is its soul. ( Cited in City Government of Makati v. Civil Service Commission, 376 SCRA 248, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Seagate Tech (Phils.), 451 SCRA 132) RATIONE MATERIAE By reason of the subject matter involved. ( Cited in Seivert v. Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 692, Gascon v. Arroyo, 178 SCRA 582 ) RATIONE PERSONAE By reason of the person concerned; from the character of the person. ( Cited in Reinsurance Company of the Orient v. Court of Appeals, 198 SCRA 19 ) RATIO LEGIS

Singson v. 1008.. 210 SCRA 256.. REBELLATIO A renewal of hostilities. Tensuan. REBUS SIC STANTIBUS At this point of affairs.The reason or occasion of the law.) Inc. Caltex (Phils. RE-CLAMO To cry out against. re-unite. rebellion. Uy v. 926. Inc. in these circumstances. 230 SCRA 351. 109 Phil. SED RATIO VERA ET LEGALISET NON APPARENS Where the law is deficient. . RATIO POTEST ALLEGARI DEFICIENTE LEGE. reconcile. 104 Phil. Court of Appeals. RECTUS IN CURIA Upright in court. exclaim against. the reason can be alleged. This is the basis for a property right in bees. 342 SCRA 91 ) RECLAMATIO A cry of opposition or disapprobation. Santos III v. Bank of the Philippine Islands. RE-CONCILIO To bring together again. RECORDA SUNT VESTIGIA VETUSTATIS ET VERITATIS Records are the vestiges of antiquity and truth. 27 SCRA 287 ) RATIONE SOLI By reason of the land. ( Cited in: Belen v. Northwest Orient Airlines. Manila Motor Co. ( Cited in: De Villaruel v. v. Palomar. Philippine National Construction Corporation v. Naga Telephone Company. A concept in property law by which ferae naturae (wild animals) belong to the person who owns the land upon which they (the animals) live. but it must be true and lawful and not merely apparent. one who has an honest case. 272 SCRA 183. This maxim is the basis of Article 1267 of the New Civil Code. revolt.

23 Phil. 97471. Nos. Laurente. Mendoza. a method of establishing a proposition by showing that its contradictory involves impossible consequences.. disproving a proposition by showing that its consequences are absurd. 55 SCRA 153. Vera. 1981. 254 SCRA 61. February 17. Amadora v. People v. RECUSATIO TESTIS Rejection of a witness on the ground of incompetency. Tan Teng. Commission on Elections. v. People v. Francisco.RECURRENDUM EST AD EXTRAORDINARIUM QUANDO NON VALET ORDINARIUM Resort must be made to the extraordinary when the ordinary does not succeed. Ramos. v. ( Cited in: People v. out of what he had before granted. 312 SCRA 751. G. 145. the words should be taken distributively. 56. Juganap v. Inc. Umil v. King v. or let each be put in its proper place. Ignacio. Laurente. 78 SCRA 245 ) REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM A leading-back to absurdity. People v. People v. Puno. 65 Phil. No. that is. 4 SCRA 792. 160 SCRA 315. REDENDO SINGULA SINGULIS Referring each to each. Jr. Development Bank of the Philippines v. People v. superfluously. People v. 255 SCRA 543. ( Cited in: U. L-53062-53345. . 233 SCRA 1. Court of Appeals. REDUNDANTER Redundantly.R. Corona. Hernaez. referring each phrase or expression to its appropriate object. Tamani. Fortich v. March 29. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng Manggagawang Pilipino.S. 78 Phil.R. G. In logic. ( Cited in Alejandro v. G. People v. 202 SCRA 251. 286. 373 SCRA 356 ) REDUCTIO AD IMPOSSIBLE Reduction to the impossible. 219 SCRA 85. People v. Commission on Audit. April 24. 1993. 16734. A phrase from the discipline of logic indicating that an argument is so structured as to lead to a logically inconsistent or absurd result. the method of disapproving an argument by showing that it leads to an absurd consequence. Lopez. 415 SCRA 44) REDDENDUM The technical name of that clause in a conveyance by which the grantor creates or reserves some new thing to himself.R. Geraldez. 1996. No. Pano.

after its decision thereon. v. Baron. 206 SCRA 28. Serra.R. April . Cuyugan v.. Blanco. but that his ignorance of fact will not. Inc. Carino v. ( Blacks Law Dictionary. Manila Gas Corporation. Chavez v. JURIS QUIDEM IGNORATIAM CUIQUE NOCERE. R. 63 Phil. G. 18 SCRA 183. 24 SCRA 663. v. 511. ( Cited in: Mota v. to the court from whence the appeal came. 47 Phil. 827) RENUNTIATIO NON PRESUMITUR They are deemed not to have waived any of their rights. in order that the case may be tried anew or that the judgment may be entered in accordance with the decision on appeal. Inc. REI PUBLICAE In matters of the state. Delgado Brothers. Polytrade Corporation v. 47 Phil. Court of Industrial Relations. or execution be issued. Cabangis. 110 Phil. Court of Appeals. REMITTITUR The returning or sending back by a court of appeal of the record and proceedings in a cause. 670.REGULA EST. 43 Phil. 464. Ocampo v. 626. B. Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration. 6th Ed. Blossom & Co. L-23357. Manila Oil Refining & ByProducts Co. Court of Appeals. 444 ) RELIQUIAE Remains. Inc. 67 SCRA 22. RELICTA VERIFICATIONE A confession of judgment after defendant has entered his plea or made his defense against the complaint. Sebastian Enterprises. v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals... REI TURPIS NULLUM MANDATUM EST The mandate of an immoral thing is void. cited in Heirs of Clemente Celestino v. or any other necessary action to be taken in the court below. ( Cited in Philippine National Bank v. FACTI VERO IGNORANTIAM NON NOCERE The rule is that a person’s ignorance of the law may prejudice him. Mercury Drug Company. 30 SCRA 187. REGULA FIDEI Rule of faith. 15 Phil. v. No.

Lopez v. opposition. v. Philippine Banking Corporation v. De la Rosa. Marcos v. May 21. Inc. 350 SCRA 341. Court of Appeals. May 17. 290 SCRA 489. 248 SCRA 146. 229 SCRA 252. Vda. REQUIESCANT IN PACE May they rest in peace. Sherman. 1034. the crime of bribery or extortion committed by a public officer. 208 Phil. Del Rosario. 23. Reparations Commission. Dosch v. 1984. 1975. 1974.R. 18 SCRA 450. Mesina v. v. Chae Kyung Lee. 390 SCRA 223. Zulueta.30. No. REPUGNANTIA A resistance. Great Southern Maritime Services Corporation v. G. Enriquez. L-28649. REPUBLICAE UT SIT FINIS LITIUM It is to the interest of the state that there should be an end to litigation. Director of Lands. 69 SCRA 556. The Asiatic Petroleum (P. 452 SCRA 422 ) REPETUNDARUM CRIMEN Bribery. Yusingco v. Venturanza. 47 Phil. 1980. 267 SCRA 1. 69 Phil. Quico.R. Vano. Nos. Babst v.R.. Federation of Free Workers. Court of Appeals. 54 Phil. 912.R. May 20. Nicolas v. v. Republic v.) Ltd. 213 SCRA 207. 17 SCRA 322. 1990. No. G. G. 138. 88 Phil. Court of Appeals. Tensuan. Carandang v. De la Cruz v. Meer. L-74848.R. 29 Phil. Intermediate Appellate Court. Daquera. Talosig v. 750. v. ( Cited in: Henson v. L-25660. 230 SCRA 413. 198 SCRA 44 ) . No. Vencilao v. No. National Labor Relations Commission. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation v. L. 259. November 21. AFP Mutual Benefit Association Inc. 426 SCRA 494. Ong Hing Lian. 43 SCRA 472. Director of Lands. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. 189 SCRA 179. ACD Investigation Security Agency. v. G. 1987. De Nieba. Johnlo Trading Co. Paras.I. Lopez Sugar Corp. De Ramos v. Perkins v. ( Cited in: Chuidian v. AAFP-MBAI-EV. 176 SCRA 331. Venturanza. Inc. 383 SCRA 625 ) REPUDIUM Breaking of marriage contract. 42 SCRA 589. Government of the Philippines v. February 23. National Labor Relations Commission. Court of Appeals. 31. 93 Phil. G. v.41940. Rayray v. Acuna. Supena v. Court of Appeals. L-39140 & 39145. Allied Banking Corporation v. JMM Promotions & Management. Anino v. 433. Sahagun v. 37 Phil. RES Object. Ibaao v. National Labor Relations Commission.

no fixed time from the main occurrence can be arbitrarily set in order to determine what shall be part of the res gestae. RES ACCESSORIA SEQUITUR REM PRINCIPALEM The accessory follows the principal. non-existent. excited utterances. in fact. the declaration sought to be proved as part of the res gestae must be contemporaneous with the events established as to the principal act. While as a general rule. statements concerning the declarant’s physical condition. Whether specific statements are admissible as part . RES EXTINCTA The subject matter of an agreement which is. RES GESTAE Things that have been done. it is better to give than to receive. RES EST MISERA UBI JUS ESWT VAGUM ET INCERTUM It is a sorry state of affairs when law is vague and mutable. during which interval. Modern rules of evidence characterize the types of statements that used to be called res gestae as present sense impressions.RES ACCEDENT LUMINA REBUS One thing throws light upon others. The factual situation in each instance will set its own pattern of time in their respect. Whether a declaration is a part of the res gestae depends upon whether the declaration was the facts talking through the party or the party talking about the facts. Courts have used this term to refer to certain types of statements that are either exceptions to hearsay or not hearsay at all. thing in question. The phrase res gestae today is mostly of historical interest. RES EST INGENIOSA DARE It is a noble thing to give. or statements regarding present mental or emotional state. RES CONTROVERSA Matter of controversy. The term “res gestae” comprehends a situation which presents a startling or unusual occurrence sufficient to produce a spontaneous and instinctive reaction. certain statements are made under such circumstances as to show lack of forethought or deliberate design in the formulation of their content. The marked trend of decisions is to extend rather than narrow the scope of the doctrine admitting declarations as part of the res gestae.

Magallanes. Manigbas v. Ner. People v. 188 SCRA 175. People v. Macuti. Silvestre. People v. 236 SCRA 565. De Linao. Ruzol. People v. People v. Garma. 271 SCRA 504. 151. 592. Taneo. Antud. 577. Nuestro. Hernandez v. McCoy. Court of Appeals. 8. Pajarit. People v. 23 SCRA 374. Tiozon. 90 Phil. People v. U. Gondayao. 228 SCRA 629. People v. 805. Inc. People v. 147 SCRA 92. People v. 48 Phil.S. U. 225 SCRA 324. Anciro v. the determination of which is ordinarily conclusive upon appeal in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion. People v. Tumalip. Monleon. Bing. Piccio. 170. 157 SCRA 686. 224 SCRA 477. People v.S. Goles. 271 SCRA 517. Hu v. 825. People v. 314. 192 SCRA 663. 169 SCRA 838. 106 Phil. Nartea. Topacio v. Lungayan. Pantranco North Express. Tulagan. 220 SCRA 389. Court of Appeals. People v. Gaspar. Bautista. People v. 290 SCRA 257. Sotelo. David v. People v. 28 SCRA 1151. 204. 26 Phil. People v. Diva. Gado. Hubilo. 228 SCRA 429. Gonzales. People v. Aguirre. Tolentino. 151 SCRA 495. People v. 40 Phil. Ilocos Norte Electric Company v. People v. Olondriz. Javier v. 270 SCRA 650. 78 Phil. 34 SCRA 401. People v. v.. 18 SCRA 197. People v. People v. 92 Phil. Navarro. 286 SCRA 629. Ornoza. 240 SCRA 221. Tidong. People v. v. Bravo. Hernandez. 102 Phil. People v. People v. 175 SCRA 160. 1 SCRA 931. People v. Roca. 284 SCRA 705. Jose. 24 Phil. 3 Phil. 143 SCRA 107. 466. 55 Phil. 244 SCRA 479. 74 Phil. De Gracia. v. 49 Phil. Bocatcat. 985. 227 SCRA 285. 104 Phil. 39 Phil. 179 SCRA 5. Masangkay. People v. Sr. People v. 205 SCRA 313. 208 SCRA 589. 231 SCRA 155. Villapa. 37 SCRA 450. 396. 296 SCRA 353. People v. Ebrada. Tiongson. 81 Phil. Alitao. 194 SCRA 120. 69 Phil. 2 Phil. Balmori. People v. People v. Palamos. People v. Diokno. 63 Phil. Salangoste. People v. People. People v. Jr. People v. 265 SCRA 472. Avila. 537. 213 SCRA 70. Bergante. People v. People v. 53 SCRA 54. People v. 108 Phil. People v. People v. 188 SCRA 422. v. 83 Phil. 98 Phil. 818. Peralta. 538. Toledo. 47 SCRA 279. Dianos. Sampang. Diaz. Manhuyod. People v. People v. People v. People v. Reyes. People v. Ricaplaza. Talingdan. People v.S. People v. Perez. Portento. Naranja. 601. Marra. 971. 37 SCRA 697. U. People v. People v. People v. People v. People v. 363. El Pueblo de Filipinas v. People. Mendoza. People v. 225 SCRA 1. Antonio.. People v. People v. Israel. Cloud. 54 Phil. Reunir. Villagracia. 83 Phil. 16 SCRA 531. 248 SCRA 139. 601. People v. 89. People v. Jr. 100 Phil. 298 SCRA 466. People v. 23 SCRA 332. 85. U. 157 SCRA 320. 66. Luna. 128. People v. People v. People v. Valero. Court of Appeals. 77. 221 SCRA 136. People v. People v. People v. 53 Phil. People v. Durante. People v. People v. . Paredes. People v. Vda de Cabangahan. 781. 162 SCRA 696. Santos. People v. 72 SCRA 184. People v. Ramirez. People v. Quinlob. 52 Phil. Lazarte. 30 SCRA 226. Ducay. Baluyot. Devaras. 143 SCRA 572.of the res gestae is a matter within the sound discretion of the court. 297 SCRA 191. Board of Election Inspectors v. 182 SCRA 675. 556. 150. 198 SCRA 368. Agripa. People v. 297 SCRA 351. 116. 215 SCRA 190. 578. Medios v. 238. Cornel. 152 SCRA 65. ( Cited in: Pastro v. 214 SCRA 678. People v. David. 18 Phil. 52 Phil. Torres. Tamiana. 237 SCRA 218. 218 SCRA 494. People v. 196 SCRA 459. People v. 189.S. Dusepec v. v. 216 SCRA 647. 51 Phil. 112 SCRA 661. 74 SCRA 263. People v. 60 SCRA 303. People v. 36 Phil. 191 SCRA 333. 91 Phil. People v. 226. 58 Phil. v. Abboc. Berame. 23 Phil. Esquilona. Nakpil. Alfaro. Macabenta. Nadres. Alban. Sanchez. People v. People v. Court of Appeals. People v. People v. Baguio. 218 SCRA 337. Vda de Gregorio v. People v. 200 SCRA 361. 760. De la Pena. People v. 237 SCRA 587. Pagal. 162 SCRA 100. People v. 119 SCRA 130. Court of Appeals. Caludio. 272 SCRA 443. People v. 720. Maguikay. People v.

ALIIS NON NOCET The acts and declarations of third parties cannot harm others. 377 SCRA 99. Alvarez. Bolinao Electronics Corporation v. People v. Bituon. People v. People v. Commission on Elections. 158 SCRA 524. RES INTER ALIOS ACTA. 172 SCRA 262. A thing done between others. August 31. Arcangel. 218 SCRA 337. Court of Appeals. Quimson. People v. or between third parties or strangers. 402 SCRA 299. Ragas. Esteniel v. 365 SCRA 238. 204 SCRA 719. Blanza v. 338 SCRA 371. Lobrigas. 21 SCRA 1. v. 366 SCRA 98. Sandiganbayan. Intermediate Appellate Court. Belvis III v. 412 SCRA 311. Tolentino. 423 SCRA 237 ) RES INTEGRA/RES NOVA An undecided question. 52 SCRA 432. 404 SCRA 564. 245 SCRA 569.A. Vda. Espayos. Seng v. 394 SCRA 170. People v. No. . v. 153. Pena. 1961. Jorolan. 477. De San Agustin v. National Labor Relations Commission. 213 SCRA 722. Fernandez. Francisco. Garillo. People v. People v. 222 SCRA 350.S. People v. People v. People v. People v. This maxim expresses the central precept of res judicata. People v.. People v. G. Tulagan. 179 SCRA 303. 30 Phil. 13 Phil. 44 SCRA 152. People v. Banzagales v. 400 SCRA 584 ) RES INTER ALIOS ACTA ALTERI NOCERE NON DEBET Statements made or matters accomplished between two parties cannot prejudice a third party ( Cited in Blanza v. L-13817. 374 SCRA 618. Mellon Bank. Court of Appeals. People v. 143 SCRA 107. Gonzales. People v. 84 SCRA 537.R. v. Arcangel. Janson. Galman. De la Cruz. v. 407 SCRA 367. Cabrera.. People v. Morende. 412 SCRA 503. People v. People v. ( See also Alzua v. Guillermo. 420 SCRA 326. 371 SCRA 446. Johnson. 190 SCRA 633. 2 SCRA 1109. Geraldez v. Iguas. 218. 189 SCRA 201. ( Cited in: Compana General de Tabacos v. 315 SCRA 114. People v. Court of Appeals. National Power Corporation v.N. Mateo. Ganson. 376 SCRA 639. U. Anondrin. People v. Macondray & Co. People v. Bulan. Palmones. 186 SCRA 598. 203 SCRA 383. C. 272 SCRA 704. Taer v. Hodges v. Inc. Mapino. 37 Phil. People v. 323 SCRA 74. 217 SCRA 49. Inc. People v. Valla. People v. Melosantos. Also cited in: Aldecoa & Co. 167 SCRA 324. People v. 11 SCRA 486. 364 SCRA 802. 98 Phil. ought not to injure those who are not parties to them. People v. Pinon. 21 Phil. Pilipinas Bank v. People v. Barnes & Co. 456. 366 SCRA 581. 95 Phil. National Labor Relations Commission. Cavite. ALIIS NEQUE NOCERE NEQUE PRODESSEE POTEST A thing done between some is neither able to injure nor benefit others. People v.312 SCRA 214. 230 SCRA 320. 336 SCRA 80. People v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Caparas. 21 SCRA 179 ). Pineda. RES INTER ACTOS ALIA. Latayada. Garcia. 215 SCRA 750. Jimenez. Jr. Macondray & Co. Warner. Pinon. v. Valencia. 42 SCRA 436. N. Deloso v. Samaniego. 197. People v. Soriano. 308. Castillo. Genato v. People v.

254 SCRA 491. Sarmiento Trucking Corporation. In re: Wenceslao Laureta. 161 SCRA 83. Layuhan v. Fernandez v. Castro.P. v. Gines. People v. RTC. v. Constantino. Calumpit. Tirona-Liwag. Court of Appeals. v. Court of Appeals. Defensor-Santiago v. A. Batiquin v. 302 SCRA 92. 173 SCRA 719. It can only be invoked when and only when. Court of . Padilla v. 237 SCRA 1. 26551. Branch 57. Moral. Villanueva. Court of Appeals. 236 SCRA 469. 273 SCRA 607. Sarmiento Trucking Corporation. G. Caltex (Phils. Castro. Rosewood Processing. Camiling. Manila Prince Hotel v. Metro Manila. Cebu Shipyard & Eng. v. Camat. Pascasio. 116. Works. June 9. See also Garcia-Rueda v. 323 SCRA 218. 256 SCRA 52. No. Court of Appeals. 39 Phil. Galman v. Court of Appeals. FGU Insurance Corp. 143 SCRA 657. Government Service Insurance System. Intermediate Appellate Court. Roque v. People v. MTC. Pasig and Makati v. Limpin. Inc. 16 SCRA 175.A. Court of Appeals. Calderon. 267 SCRA 408. v. La Suerte Bus Co. Florendo-Flores. 341 SCRA 277. Commodities Sales Corporation v. Court of Appeals. Taganas v. Palijon. Dizon. Makati. 290 SCRA 58. Radio Communications of the Philippines. ( Cited in Islamic Directorate of the Philippines v. Babida v. Richards v. Prudential Bank v. 290 SCRA 408. People v. 158 SCRA 127. Inc. Tejada. 149 SCRA 570. National Labor Relations Commission. 164 SCRA 731. Sarmiento v. 152 SCRA 45.. 294 SCRA 751. 58 Phil. 79. 385 SCRA 364. Estoya v. Valenzuela. ( Cited in: Martinez v. 171 SCRA 509. Lagumbay v. 144 SCRA 43. 18 Phil. There is no need for further evidentiary hearings. 386 SCRA 312. Ruiz v. People v. Dizon. People v.People v. Abraham-Singson. 190 SCRA 834. People. Ramos. v. 265 SCRA 248. Bulacan. People v. 419 SCRA 101. Court of Appeals. Richards v. Jr. People v. v. FGU Insurance Corporation v. 452 SCRA 577) RES INTER FACIUNT ALIOS JUDICATAE NULLUM ALIIS PRAEJUDICIAUM Matters adjudged in a cause do not prejudice those who were not parties to it. Medrano v. Tizon. 272 SCRA 454 ) RES IPSA LOQUITUR The thing speaks for itself. Gallardo. 306 SCRA 762. Prudential Bank v. 167 SCRA 363. Inc. People v. 410 SCRA 237. 155 SCRA 604. People. 258 SCRA 334. 278 SCRA 769. Cruz v. Inc. Asoy. Asuncion v. 423 SCRA 520. 386 SCRA 312. In re: Petition for the Dismissal from Service and/or Disbarment of Judge Baltazar R. Africa v. People v. Louis Vuitton S. 343 SCRA 486. De Linao. 170 SCRA 497. 253 SCRA 559. 1987. Buan. 414 SCRA 164. 21 SCRA 642. 216 SCRA 121. Jr. People v. G.) Inc. Racquel. 552. Pilipinas Bank v. Bautista. 424 SCRA 698. 178 SCRA 204. Sandiganbayan. Sabalones. Buskirk. Asoy.S. Court of Appeals. Office of the Court Administrator v. Commission on Elections. Inc. ( Rodriguez v. Inc. Enuslan. 401 SCRA 122 ). Cruz & Co. P. under the circumstances involved. 16 SCRA 448. People v. direct evidence is absent or nor readily available. 155 SCRA 604. Cabrido. Acting Registrars of Land Titles & Deeds of Pasay City. Bon v. Inc.. 293 SCRA 239.. U. F. Lazo v. Civil Service Commission. Gaudia. 390 SCRA 201. 363 SCRA 96. Re: Leave of Absence without approval of Judge Eric T. F. v. v. People v. C. First Nationwide Assurance Corporation v. William Lines. People v. 135 SCRA 712. Intermediate Appellate Court. 201 SCRA 577. 184 SCRA 622. Globe Telecom. People.. 224 SCRA 261. Silan.

65 SCRA 13. 45 SCRA 288. 650. Reyes. Dy Pac Pakaiao Workers Union v. Vamenta. 33 SCRA 569. Valle. 44 SCRA 198. Mariano. 43 SCRA 503. Senoro v. Monte de Piedad and Savings Bank. 5 SCRA 29. Lee. Manalo v. Court of Appeals. Dampschiffs Geselschaft. Romero v. v. Filipino Legion Corporation v. 423. v. v. Mojica. Estipona. 14 SCRA 115. Andres v. 413. Jr. Inc. 56 SCRA 674. Macasantos v. Larion. 29 SCRA 638. Development Bank of the Philippines. Labitoria. 72 SCRA 509. Rivera. Sarabia v. 28 SCRA 449. Paderanga. 29 Phil. De la Cruz v. Franco v. 39. Vda. Ltd. Havana v. Ferrer. 26 SCRA 703. 42 SCRA 589. 429. 303. 323 SCRA 348. Robiso v.. 48 SCRA 361. 21 SCRA 1374. 434. 30 SCRA 454. v. Reyes v. Zook v. Pichay v. Yusingco v. Loyola v. 314. Sumerariz v. 587. 406 SCRA 658. 8 SCRA 157. (2) the first court issued a final judgment on the merits. Sta. ( Cited in: Lanuza v.. Rivera. 12 SCRA 424. 65 SCRA 69. De Villa. Vda. rule that final judgment or decree on merits by court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of rights of parties or their privies in all later suits points and matters determined in a former suit. 436 SCRA 369. DeutchAustralische. 39 Phil. Narrades. Poso v. Bumanglag v. Inc. 21 Phil. Republic Bank v. Tuazon. Cordova. 534.Appeals. Mangino. 25 SCRA 55. Tiongson v. 38 SCRA 263. Court of Appeals. Lavarro v. another court (other than an appropriate appeals court) cannot decide the same claim or issue a second time if: (1) the issue or claim in the prior adjudication was identical with the one presented in the action in question. Maginoo. People v. Ramirez. 10. Kairuz. 66 SCRA 61. Malig v. Casenas v. Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Pfleider. Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank v. 405 SCRA 521. 54 Phil. Tan v. Court of Appeals. People v. 351 SCRA 25. Misamis Lumber Co. 318 SCRA 589. Baraoidan. 453 SCRA 47) RES JUDICATA A thing which has been decided. Santos v. Sisters of Mercy Hospital. Consulta. 34 SCRA 396. 6 SCRA 469. 341 SCRA 760. De los Reyes. and (3) the party against whom the plea is asserted is a party or in privity with a party to the prior adjudication. Municipality of . Inc. Cruz v. Velarde. Jr. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Dioneda. 56 Phil. Santos v. Fernandez v. Rejuso v. Cabungcal v. 387 SCRA 485. Santiago v. 69 SCRA 556. Dy Pac & Co. De Rivas v. Verzola. 15 SCRA 19. 407 SCRA 475. 45 Phil. Gibbs v. Comilang v. Penalosa v. Permanent Savings & Loan Bank v. Court of Appeals. Ipekdjian Merchandising Co. A matter adjudged. Beltran. 11 SCRA 578. National Power Corporation v. De Luna v. Valdehueza. Zurbito. Varsity Hills. Bush. 69 SCRA 80. 19 SCRA 462. Court of Appeals. 788. A thing judicially acted upon or decided. Rosales. 41 Phil. People v. Inc. De los Santos v. Wildvalley Shipping Co. Bayot v. 13 SCRA 685. Paras. Court of Tax Appeals. 22 Phil. Ong Hing Lian. v. Gonzales. Villanueva v. Pingol. Baguingito v. When one competent court has already ruled on a specific issue or claim. Lobo. Del Val v. Court of Industrial Relations.. 70 SCRA 272. Republic v. a thing or matter settled by judgment. 49 SCRA 429. 342 SCRA 312. Alas. 17 Phil. 399 SCRA 296. 24 Phil. Gabo. Wise & Co. 9 SCRA 72. Ana v. Emiliano Townhouses Homeowners Assn. Del Val. Navarro. v. Coker. 2 SCRA 54. 67 SCRA 248. Compagne-Franco-Indochinese v. Tingo v. 10 SCRA 480. 439 SCRA 1. 7 SCRA 660. 54 Phil. Pimentel. Gabriel. Mijares. 34 Phil. Manio v. Gaddi.

139 SCRA 558. Ramos v. M & M Management Aids. v. Court of Appeals. 146 SCRA 24. Intermediate Appellate Court. Reyes. Republic v. 157 SCRA 131. Golden Gate Relaty Corporation v. Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank. Jardiel v. Marapao v. Court of Appeals. Ramirez. v. Republic v. Inc. 159 SCRA 308. David v. Court ofAppeals. Venturanza. 144 SCRA 259. 150 SCRA 76. Subido. 155 SCRA 186. 77 SCRA 387. Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. Masagana Telamart. Arboleda. 120 SCRA 186. Carreon v. Secretary of Labor. 130 SCRA 225. Ogan v. Llorana v. Testate Estate of Adriana Maloto v. BF Northwest Homeowenrs Association. Island Steel. 135 SCRA 593. Bayang v. 148 SCRA 677. Arguson v. Navarro. Albano. Inc. Inc. 152 SCRA 103. Salamanca v. Court of Appeals. Estate of the late Anita de Leon. Court of Appeals. Pablo. Cabral v. Inc. 118 SCRA 233. Macagba. 130 SCRA 498. 158 SCRA 152. Guanzon. Mayuga v. . v. Paredes v. 118 SCRA 399. 149 SCRA 342. 158 SCRA 194. 115 SCRA 839. Angela Estate. Commissioner of Customs v. Jr. Calimlim v. Intermediate Appellate Court. 108 SCRA 1. 136 SCRA 694. Bringas v. 154 SCRA 723. Vlasons Enterprises Corporation v. Ruque. Gamboa v. Zansibarian Residents Association v. Ogan-Occena. Bulacan v. Festin v. Municipality of Makati. 79 SCRA 170. De Sta. Vda. 157 SCRA 154. 148 SCRA 9. 135 SCRA 235. Ramos. Filinvest Credit Corporation v. 143 SCRA 417. 134 SCRA 341. Hernando. Sy v. 158 SCRA 345. FEU-Dr. 129 SCRA 70. 151 SCRA 53. 115 SCRA 244. 126 SCRA 526. Deang v. Ibabao v. Denore v. Commision on Elections. Intermediate Appellate Court. Court of Appeals. Bandin. Carreon. Director of Lands v. Pulido v. 116 SCRA 573. Caparas. Lazaro. Court of Appeals. Sangalang v. Dianala. Bringas v. Alvarez. Republic v. 119 SCRA 97. Cour to fAppeals. 112 SCRA 257. Municipality of Antipolo v. 120 SCRA 220. Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Drilon v. Bacolod-Murcia Milling Co. Banez. Ramirez v. Zapanta. Ramos v. Court of Apeals. Leonidas. 117 SCRA 588. 146 SCRA 5.. 124 SCRA 650. 118 SCRA 330. Castano. Intermediate Appellate Court. Court of Appeals. Re: Atty. Bleza. Jr. Dominguez. Inc. Lorenzana v. 152 SCRA 725. 153 SCRA 374. Lopez v. 76 SCRA 179. 135 SCRA 678. Legarda v. 144 SCRA 482. v. 117 SCRA 16. Savellanao. 105 SCRA 430. 116 SCRA 648. 106 SCRA 426. Vda. Immaculata v. Pangasinan Transportation Company. Paderanga. 132 SCRA 245. Intermediate Appellate Court.. Vergara v. 158 SCRA 107. 135 SCRA 225.F. 111 SCRA 1. Gonzales v. 132 SCRA 302. Mallari v. Trajano. Ramos v. Inc. Nicanor Reyes Medical Foundation. Guia. Inc. Compania Martima v. Sy Kao v. Geralde v. Hernando. 80 SCRA 89. Guarana. Asian Steel and Insurance Co. People v. Aquino. Grospe. 158 SCRA 451. Court of Appeals. 103 SCRA 377. 133 SCRA 820. 73 SCRA 507. Koh v. Court of Appeals. Guy. 154 SCRA 250. v. Valera v. Inc. Tuvera. 149 SCRA 140. Court of Appeals. B. National Labor Relations Commission. de Barroga v. 152 SCRA 684. Vda de Buncio v. 106 SCRA 187. Mendoza. v. Gula v. Intermediate Appellate Court. Estenzo. 154 SCRA 309. Court of Appeals. 131 SCRA 160. Miclat. North Express.. 133 SCRA 344. Pulido v. Ocampo v. 144 SCRA 346. Intermediate Appellate Court. 78 SCRA 312. 156 SCRA 352. 148 SCRA 383. Court of Tax Appeals. 150 SCRA 543. Court of Appeals. Pablo. Government Service Insurance System v. 145 SCRA 238. Santos v. Martinez v. 74 SCRA 345. Cuano v. Salas. Heirs of Luisa Valdez v. Laroza v. Tac-An Dano v. Wenceslao Laureta. Filipinas Integrated Services Corporation. Carandang v. Inc. Court of Appeals. v.Hagonoy. Dacasin v. National Labor Relations Commission. v. 158 SCRA 345. Inc. Mapa III v. 137 SCRA 803. Romana v. v. 132 SCRA 501. 159 SCRA 332. Potenciano.

Court of Appeals. Ponce-Enrile v. Court of Appeals. Pacific Banking Corporation v. 169 SCRA 627. 165 SCRA 386. National Labor Relations Commission. K. MOntilla v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Suson v. 179 SCRA 728. v. 185 SCRA 642. Eternal Gardens Memorial Parks Corporation v. Naitonal Labor Relations Commission. Intermediate Appellate Court. Mainit Lumber Development Company Workers Union-United Lumber and General Workers of the Philippines. 166 SCRA 39. Commission on Elections. Arica v. Inciong. 166 SCRA 140. Court of Appeals. 161 SCRA 167. Republic v. Ramos v. Courtof Appeals. Tiburcio v. Jr. Jr. v. 175 SCRA 171. 191 SCRA 150. Lat. Molina. 189 SCRA 792. De Denoso v. Inc.) Inc. 193 SCRA 765. 166 SCRA 714. Capulong. Escarte. De la Pena. Smith Bell & Co. 192 SCRA 459. Office of the President. Wolverine Worldwide. Delfin v. Court of Appeals. 181 SCRA 285. Court of Appeals. Investors Finance Corporation v. Vallangca v. v. Commercial Credit Corporation of Cagayan De Oro v. 159 SCRA 355. Wee Sit v. 195 SCRA 659. Province v. Jr. Inc. 183 SCRA 691. White Plains Association. Nabus v. 176 SCRA 1. Workmen’s Compensation Commission. Africa v. Go v. Court of Appeals. 169 SCRA 259. 184 SCRA 80. Court of Appeals. 182 SCRA 245. v. Reyes v. Vano. 160 SCRA 666. 161 SCRA 634. 183 SCRA 82. Legaspi. Ysmael. 190 SCRA 673. 197 SCRA 409. Court of Appeals. Puma Sportschufabriken Rudolf Dassler. 161 SCRA 583. Court of Appeals. 192 SCRA 649. Mendoza. 165 SCRA 439. Castro. National Association of Free Trade Union v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation v. Gutierrez v. Intermediate Appellate court. Smith Bell and Company (Phils. MOntelibano v. De la Cruz v. v. Cachero v. de Cruzo v. v. 183 SCRA 639. Court of Appeals. Estate of George Liton v. Marzan. Amin. 197 SCRA 853. Court of Appeals. De Villa v. v. Obana v. Courtof Appeals. 182 SCRA 491. Laron. Labo. v. 172 SCRA 70. v. Inc. 176 SCRA 240. 163 SCRA 246. 163 SCRA 286. Segura. United Housing Corporation v. 182 SCRA 879. 199 SCRA 814. Segura v. Boiser v. Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. Bautista v. Inc. Republic v. 203 SCRA 412. 193 SCRA 437. Court of Appeals.G. Minister of Labor and Employment. v. Court of Appeals. 163 SCRA 683. Gerardo v. RTC. Deputy Executive Secretary. Madayag. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. 187 SCRA 592. 165 SCRA 515. 163 SCRA 132. Court of Appeals. Mendoza v.. 168 SCRA 709. Ebarle. 165 SCRA 507. Mendoza. Vancilao v. 198 SCRA 811. Castro. Court of Appeals. Vda. Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. Peralta. Stasa. De la Rosa. Macaraeg v. Court of Appeals. Inc. 163 SCRA 60. 175 SCRA 808. 167 SCRA 303. Lao Lim v. Republic Planters Bank v. & Co. Sebastian. Court of Appeals. Dayrit. Inc. Board of Commissioners v. 169 SCRA 198. v. 193 SCRA 183. 169 SCRA 1. 170 SCRA 776. 190 SCRA 362. v. v. 192 SCRA 151. Maglalang v. v. Pauli. Inc. 192 SCRA 1. 197 SCRA 201. World machine Enterprises v. Branch 90. Filipinas Investment & Finance Corp. 201 SCRA 343. 177 SCRA 93. Vda. v. Jr. Inc. Quezon City. Presidential Commission on . Ramos v. Carriaga. 185 SCRA 504. 192 SCRA 598. Heirs of the Late Santiago Maningo v. Apostolic of the Mountain Province v. Catholic Vicar of the Mr. Mariano. Filcon Manufacturing Coproration v. Santiago Syjuco. 174 SCRA 330. American Inter-Fashion Corporation v. 173 SCRA 42. Valencia v. Ebarle. National Telecommunications Commission. Intermediate Appellate Court. Suarez v. 172 SCRA 867. Office of the Presdient.Goodrich Philipines. Japan Airlines. Jacob. Monica Industrial and Development corporation v. Nasipit Lumber Co. Bugnay Construction and Development Corporation v. 196 SCRA 601. Amberti v. 193 SCRA 732. 187 SCRA 165. National Labor Relations Commission. Inc. Inc. Varsity JHills.

Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Register of Deeds of Quezon City. Inc. 256 SCRA 217. 263 SCRA 638. Boyles. Sandiganbayan. Philippine American General Insurance Company. Layug. 268 SCRA 307. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Andresons. Pte. Islamic Directorate of the Philippines v. 267 SCRA 567. 207 SCRA 600. Court of appeals. Inc. Santos v. Zaldarriaga v. Government Service Insurance System v. De Ramos v. 259 SCRA 371. 246 SCRA 365. Diwa v. Villa v. 231 SCRA 88. 260 SCRA 122. Ltd. Veloso. Manila Golf &Country Club. 213 SCRA 812. PH Credit Corporation. Court of Appeals. 211 SCRA 692. VDA Fish Broker v. Veridiano II. Sunflower Umbrella Manufacturing Co. First Philippine International Bank v. Republic v. 265 SCRA 493. National LaborRelations Commission. 258 SCRA 492. Court of Apeals. v. National Labor Relations commission. R. 252 SCRA 259. 215 SCRA 136. 222 SCRA 10. Intermediate Appellate Court. University of the Philippines v. 264 SCRA 703. v. Remirez v.. 270 SCRA 9. Court of Appeals. 208 SCRA 215. Intermediate Appellate Court. 213 SCRA 253. 263SCRA 275. 246 SCRA 540. 247 SCRA 570. Sold Homes. Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. Antonio v. Court of Appeals. 250 SCRA 218. Commission on Elections. Benito. Court of Appeals. Inc. Pundogar. v. 226 SCRA 630. Del Rosario v. Cokaliong Shipping Lines. v. Gabuya v. Guimba. Court of Apeals. Court of Appeals. RTC. Makati. Court of Appeals. 207 SCRA 59. Register of Deeds of Quezon City. Sumaoang v. Caina v. 228 SCRA 681. Calalang v. Buan v. Allied Banking Corporation v. Inc. Ybanez v. Mangoma v.Good Government. National Labor Relations Commission. 239 SCRA 252. Philippine Airlines. Concepcion v. Mesina v. Agana. 229 SCRA 252. Ilasco. 216 SCRA 485. Court of Appeals. v. 208 SCRA 371. Director of Lands v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. 222 SCRA 155. Javier v. 214 SCRA 437. Court of Appeals. 218 SCRA 718. 223 SCRA 371. Jr. Jr. 223 SCRA 551. Court of Appeals. 211 SCRA 114. Court of Appeals. Dulay v. Meliton v. Minister of Natural Resources. Abalos v. Lucero v. Blue Bar Coconut Phils. Nueva Ecija. Regional Trial Court. v. De Leon. Court of Appeals. Branch XXXI. De la Rosa v. Court of Appeals. National Labor Relations Commission. Amin. Godoy. Court of Apeals. Lelnares v. Tengco. 237 SCRA 565. 209 SCRA 457.. Sanpiro Finance Corporation v. 218 SCRA 118. People v. 224 SCRA 704. Dinsay v. Allied Banking Corporation v. Inc. Baguioro v. 216 SCRA 214. 255 SCRA 254. Guevarra v. National Labor Relations Commission. v. Mercado. Javelosa v. Inc. Laguesma. 220 SCRA 517. 234 SCRA 103. 234 SCRA 608. 228 SCRA 413. 247 SCRA 767. Court of Appeals. Inc. Court of Appeals. v. Salud v. Court of Appeals. Transport Corporaton v. Eriks. Sandiganbayan. 211 SCRA 236. Villa Esperanza Development Corporation v. 218 SCRA 233. Branch 63. Inc. Court of Appeals. Calalang v. v. 266 SCRA 423. 218 SCRA 401. 217 SCRA 517. De Kilayko v. 226 SCRA 314. Court of Appeals. Development Bank of the Philippines v. Intermedaite Appellate Court. Heirs of George Bofill v. 237 SCRA 207. Basa. Inc. Contech Construction Technology & Development Corporation v. Roa v. 234 SCRA 208. Jr. Court of Appeals. Morato. Militante v. Madayag. Court of . Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Filinvest Credit Corporation v. Valencia v. Rosete v. Neri. Esguerra v. Inc. Court of Appeals. 271 SCRA 157. v.. v. Javier v. 233 SCRA 384. 237 SCRA 153. 243 SCRA 64. 241 SCRA 21. Enriquez v. Diaz. v. Cioco. 213 SCRA 207. Swan v. 235 SCRA 424. 253 SCRA 540. Victrionics Computers. 205 SCRA 39. Kilosbayan. 267 SCRA 380. Tobias v. 237 SCRA 451. 218 SCRA 562. 227 SCRA 826. 261 SCRA 196. Court of Appeals. v. Court of Appeals. Republic v. 208 SCRA 283. Donato. Court of Appeals. Vda. 264 SCRA 147. Mendiola v. 226 SCRA 666. Nacuray v.

Court of Appeals. 367 SCRA 17. City of Legaspi. Valenzuela v. 318 SCRA 416. 351 SCRA 12. Cagayan de Oro Coliseum. Court of Apeals. Br. Inc. 295 SCRA 536. Thrmphil. Vda. 292 SCRA 678. Court of Appeals. Rambaua.C. Santos v. 334 SCRA 172. National Elecrification Administration v. Inc. Court of Appeals. 288 SCRA 15. 322 SCRA 294. Madarieta v. Court of Apeals. 285 SCRA 264. 290 SCRA 223. Mirpuri v. De Villanueva v. Inc. Republic v. Ruiz. Court of Appeals. Inc. 28. 357 SCRA 626. 326 SCRA 479. 345 SCRA 617. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. 276 SCRA 420. Canlas. 281 SCRA 155. Intermediate Appellate Court. 357 SCRA 112. Valles v. Cruz v. De Salanga v. Manalo v. Cabrigos. v. 360 SCRA 322. Assset Privatization Trust v. Quezon Province v. Court of Appeals. Arenas v. Galardo. Padillo v. Pro Line Sports Center. Magalit. Court of Appeals. 358 SCRA 335. Court of Appeals. Commission on Audit. Firestone Ceramics. Camara v. 324 SCRA 581. Stilianopulos v. Court of Appeals. National Labor Relations Commission. 359 SCRA 555. 343 SCRA 658. Inc.. Roxas v. 370 SCRA 56. National Power Coproration v. 273 SCRA 521. Court of Appeals.Tirona v. Court of Appeals. 316 SCRA 488. 301 SCRA 637. Court of Appeals. Pepito.G. Court of Appeals. Calos. 302 SCRA 331. 363 SCRA 207. 271 SCRA 157. 366 SCRA 752. Perez v. 350 SCRA 568. Court of Appeals. Gallardo-Corro v. 274 SCRA 102. v. 279 SCRA 711. 303 SCRA 176. Leyson. Court of Appeals. 320 SCRA 731. Court of Appeals. Inc. 332 SCRA 747. 298 SCRA 526. Bangko Silangan Development Bank v. 310 SCRA 608. Court of Appeals. Carlet v. Serdoncillo v. Court of Apeals. Alejo. Court of Appeals. Jr. Jeirs of Grace M. Ocho v. Alagar. Court of appeals. Antiporda. Development Bank of the Philippines v. 300 SCRA 579. v. Macahilig v. Cebu INternaitonal Finance Corporation v. 363 SCRA 155. 341 SCRA 583. Mayfair Theater.. Herras v. Court of Appeals. 337 SCRA 543. 293 SCRA 239. 296 SCRA 487. Golden Donuts. Camiguin. 313 SCRA 522. 313 SCRA 465. 345 SCRA 478. 329 SCRA 652. Court of Appeals. 280 SCRA 199. Laguesma. Realty Corporation. Casil v. Mjunicipality of San Juan. A. Court of Appeals. 280 SCRA 13. Court of Appeals. Nery v. . Severina realty Corporation. 363 SCRA 779. 363 SCRA 473. Mambajao. Saura. 297 SCRA 448. Manalo v. Development Corporation v. 332 SCRA 356. Inc. 368 SCRA 400. Court of Apeals. So v. 275 SCRA 97. Sandiganbayan. Municipality of Paranque v. v. Sendon v. v. Sandoval Shipyards. Avisado v. 335 SCRA 728. Cacho v. Sempio v. Jr.Appeals. National Labor Relations Commission. 316 SCRA 523. Alejandrino v. Cruz v. Esperas v. J. 324 SCRA 560. Court of Appeals. Mata v. Court of Apeals. 309 SCRA 714. Lopez & Associates. Inc. Saura v. v. Court of Appeals. 279 SCRA 506. Calalas v. Commission on Elections. 310 SCRA 318. 318 SCRA 516. Sta. De Knetch v. 281 SCRA 162. Salvador v. Inc. 344 SCRA 838. 316 SCRA 43. United Pepsi-Cola Supervisory Union (UPSU) v. Lucia Realty and Development. v. Equatorial Realty Development. Calusin v. Court of Appeals. Bachrach Corporation v. Court of Appeals. Philsec Investment Corporation v. 291 SCRA 304. Court of Appeals. 336 SCRA 12. 339 SCRA 429. Court of appeals. Barretto v. 364 SCRA 472. Inc. Quinsay v. v. Rizla Surety & Insurance Company v. Court of Appeals. Metro Manila v. Court of Appeals. Espiritu v. Linzag v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Siapian v. 284 SCRA 580. v. 327 SCRA 11. V. Cruz v. Court of Appeals. 358 SCRA 715. Orosa v. Court of Appeals. Marte. Court of Appeals. RTC. Court of Appeals. II. v. Vda. Court of appeals. Aldovino v. Traders Royal Bank v. Court of Appeals. Benolirao. 339 SCRA 232. Inc. Court of Appeals. Toledo-Banaga v. Ortoll. 354 SCRA 245.M. Canlas. Progressive Development Corporation. Court of Appeals. 369 SCRA 682. Dames. v. 368 SCRA 145. De Asis v.

Isip. Court of Appeals. Rodriguez. 403 SCRA 1. v. Cooperative Development Authoirty v. Court of Appeals. Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation. Court of Appeals. 420 SCRA 84. Bundalian. De Castro. Emuslan. Basilla v. National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia v. Court of Appeals. 396 SCRA 627. 433 SCA 195. Gocotano. 391 SCRA 176. Inc. v. Yuchengco. 374 SCRA 262. 407 SCRA 165. De Roxas v. Mendiola. Gocotano v. Tan v. v. London v. INtramuros Administration v. Tolentino v. Court of Appeals. Lanuza v. Heirs of Antonio Pael v. Public Estates Authority. National Housing Authority v.. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank. Jr. 380 SCRA 315. 426 SCRA 309. Allied Banking Corporation. Ocampo. Court of Appeals. v. 371 SCRA 413. 437 SCRA 86. Inc. Rovel’s Enterprises. Romero v. Malayan Insurance Company. v. 469 SCRA 328 ) RES NULLIUS A thing of no one. Page-Tenorio v.. 454 SCRA 130. Dolefil Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative. 415 SCRA 451. 379 SCRA 621. 419 SCRA 422. . Court of Appeals. Solilapsi.. Delta Motors Corporation. Velasquez. Court of Appeals. Inc. jewels which have never before excavated). ( TADI) v. University of the Philippines. This term refers to things which have never before been owned by anyone (e. Roehr v. 447 SCRA 402. State Investment Trust Inc. Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas v. 424 SCRA 42. 448 SCRA 340. Corrado. Heirs of Trinidad De Leon Vda. Cancio. 437 SCRA 300. Land Car. 394 SCRA 269. 416 SCRA 273. Court of Appeals. Solidbank Corporation. 405 SCRA 264.. Integrated Silicon Philippines Corporation. Inc. Abragan.. Canero v. 413 SCRA 445. v. Inc. 382 SCRA 552. Bardillon v. Tenorio. Inc. wild animals. Chavez v. 402 SCRA 440. 431 SCRA 526. 427 SCRA 593. 454 SCRA 54.g. Inc. 401 SCRA 704. Concept Placement Resources. Santos. Lanuza. 398 SCRA 629. 393 SCRA 278. Taganas v. 397 SCRA 431. v. Court of Appeals. 391 SCRA 393..) Ltd. 377 SCRA 459. Philippine Nails and Wires Corporaiton v. fish. Pinakamasarap Corporation. Inc. Keng Seng. v. T’boli Agro-Industrial Development. Funk.371 SCRA 27. v. Baguio Country Club Corporation. 424 SCRA 155. Philippine Blooming Mills. San Antonio v. Inc. occupatio.. v. Inc. Young v. Agilent Technologies Singapore (Pte. Cancio. Baello. provides that a person acquires ownership of a res nullius by taking possession and by intending to retain its possession. v. Philippine Consumers Foundation. 446 SCRA 264. 376 SCRA 172. Manila Electric Company v. Lopez. Jr. Carmel Development. 435 SCRA 500. Jr. 400 SCRA 509. 443 SCRA 560. Becamon. Court of Appeals. Pagkatipunan v. Genova v. Court of Appeals. 391 SCRA 393. 387 SCRA 549. Velarde v. The ancient Roman concept. 426 SCRA 10. Marcopper Mining Corporation v. Court of Appeals. Laguna. Contacto. Paradero v. Natawaran. 432 SCRA 360. 404 SCRA 495. 404 SCRA 518. Tan. Kaakbay Finance Corporation. v. Republic v. Custodio v. Macarrubo v. Cayana v. Barbacina v. Dapar v. Jr.. Oropeza Marketing Corporation v. Biascan. Evangelista. Jr. Matsuura. Inc. Malayang Samahan ng Manggagawa sa Balanced Food v. 422 SCRA 317. Republic v. De la Rama v. Jr. Delgado v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. Serrano v. 390 SCRA 618. Tala Realty Services Corporation v. TF Ventures. 441 SCRA 472. 424 SCRA 108. 410 SCRA 237. 422 SCRA 101. Court of Appeals. Inc. Barangay Masili of Calamba. Heirs of Juana Gaudianne v. 439 SCRA 179. Montemayor v. 402 SCRA 581. Lucente v. Macarrubo. 371 SCRA 536. Isip. 437 SCRA 630. 417 SCRA 307. Bachelor Express. Martillano v. 425 SCRA 295.

G. August 8. 987. 580. Flores. 87 Phil. U. 67 SCRA 18 ) RESPONDEAT RAPTOR. No. Pampanga. No. No. Soriano. Warner Barnes & Co. 87 Phil. Inc. 193 SCRA 694. Lepanto Consolidated Mining. or because it has never been appropriated by any person. 6 SCRA 785. ( Cited in: De Leon v. Yu v. 1000. U. 1982. v. Sy. the right granted is extinguished. 1 Phil. Flores. 113 SCRA 752. v. 1993 ) RES PERIT DOMINO SUO The loss of property must be borne by its owner. 193. Republic v. A thing which has no owner. ( Cited in: Saul v. Sia v. Philippine Trust Co. Inc. September 16. De los Reyes. QUI IGNORARE NON POTUIT QUOD PUPILLUM ALIENUM ABDUXIT Let the ravisher answer.R. 326 SCRA 90 ) RES PERIT DOMINO The loss of property falls upon its owner. G. May 13.. v.R. December 19.The property of nobody. Villaruz. ( Cited in: Lizares v. Gayte. 275. v. Warnes Barnes & Co. clamors for its owner. R. either because a former owner has finally abandoned it. L-55684. U. Norkis Distributors. ( Cited in: Yu v. 1 SCRA 881. Corporation v. Ltd. 12. 1994. v. In the matter of the proceedings against M.. 46 Phil. 504. Court of Appeals. Ltd. Sy.S. No. Hernaez. 76 Phil. G. De Leon v. 1 SCRA 1018.S. Bachrach v. G. Commercial Union Assurance Co. v.. Aguas for Contempt in the CFI. July 30. Inc. 76 Phil. The owner of a chattel may recover it from the person in whose possession it may be. Court of Appeals. 1 SCRA 1018. 1000. 981. Phil. 102970. v. 40 Phil. Trust Co. 1901 ) . 473. Yacapin v. 43 Phil. 6 SCRA 785. v. RES UBICUMQUE SIT PRO DOMINO SUO CLAMANT A thing wherever it is. People v. v. Ltd. Guzman. he who could not be ignorant of the fact that he has traduced the word of another. 1 SCRA 881. 43 Phil. No. Bachrach v. 193. L-55684. Lara. 1902 ) RESOLUTO JURE DANTIS RESOLVITUR JUS ACCIPIENTIS The right of the grantor being extinguished. Court of First Instance of Misamis Oriental. Yuchengco. Court of Appeals.R. or because it is not susceptible of private ownership. Hawkins. Obejera v. Gayte. Soriano. Alejano. Chrysler Phils. G. De Lara. 54 Phil. Velayo. 580.S.R. ( Cited in: Cordovero. Obejera v.

amusing. RES SUA One’s own goods. response. Cuison v. of the Philippine Islands. Court of Appeals. Mendoza v. Yu-tibo. Macaraeg v. 18. Bermudez. Arlegui-Hernandez. RIDICULUS That excites laughter. Rural Bank of San Miguel. REVOCATUR It is recalled. when the employee was acting within the scope of his/her employment. lest all may perish. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co.) “Let the superior make answer. promise or engage in return. Norton & Harrison Co. Amadora v. 33 Phil. 2 Phil. 424 SCRA 135 ) RESPON-SUM An answer. Court of First Instance of Pangasinan. 160 SCRA 315. set aside. 24 ) RE-STIPULOR To stipulate. ( Cited in Alejandra v. Reyes v. Fontanilla. Inc. RIGOR JURIS Strictness of law. 19 SCRA 289. ( Cited in Cortes v. 508. ( Cf.RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR Let the one above reply. annulled. 34 Phil. 106 SCRA 658. (The tort law doctrine which holds an employer responsible for the torts committed by its employee. 85 SCRA 599. Ramos v. Also cited in: Aberca v. . laughable. De Leon. 160 SCRA 590. RESTITUTIO IN INTEGRUM Restoration to the original position. Bulacan. 377 SCRA 516... Torio vs. ET PEREAT UNUS NE PEREANT OMNES One person guilty of treason shall die. Santos v. 55 Phil. funny. 404 ) REUS CRIMINIS MAJESTATIS. Ver.” The doctrine holding an employer or principal liable for the employees or agents’ wrongful acts committed within the scope of the employment or agency. reply.

LICET FALSUM. 46 Phil. TAMEN NON COMMITTIT PERJURIAM . People v. 205 SCRA 676. 124 ) _______ S SACRAMENTUM Oath. 163 SCRA 313. Devaras. 155 SCRA 463. Gerolaqa. Silva. Nonato. v. Zapata. ROGATOR One who proposes a law to the people. 193. RUMOR The talk of the many. 100 Phil. 328. 105 Phil. rumor. Dulay. Balili. Guialil. 171 SCRA 75. People v. 100 Phil. Colinares. ( Cited in: People v. Bandali. People v. De la Cruz. 428 SCRA 504) RISOS ABUNDANT IN ORE STULTORUM Too much hilarity means foolishness. JUSTITITA ET JUSTICIUM IN JUDICE An oath has in it three components – truth. de Ramos. People v. 624. 57 Phil. Manila Trading Supply Co. 379 SCRA 717. 241. Del Rosario. People v. JUSTITIAM ET JUDICIUM. People v. People v. justice and judgment in the judge administering the oath. SACRAMENTUM HABET IN SE TRES COMITES-VERITATEM. Rubio. Fraga. Masinag Vda. People v. People v. SACRAMENTUM SI FATUUM FUERIT. People v. 384. 323 SCRA 589. Gelin. Brioso. People v. 204 SCRA 320. rigidity of a corpse. 29 Phil. 1122. People v. Zuela. ( Cited in Villavicencio v. the proposer of a law. 263 SCRA 143. 109 Phil. Sabert. People v. justice and judgment. People v. 17 SCRA 892.RIGOR MORTIS Stiffness of death. People v. 812. 217 SCRA 132. stiffening of a muscular tissue and joints setting in a few hours after death. 403 SCRA 167. presenter of a bill. hearsay. Yatar. Philippine Labor Union. Taruc. common talk.S. Acuna. Estate of P. 96 Phil. People v. People v. truth in the party swearing. People v. 248 SCRA 668. People v. 71 Phil. People v. 387 SCRA 77. VERITAS HABENDA EST IN JURATO. 419. 591. 107 Phil. Kiel v. Lardizabal..

v. De Alvarez. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawa ng Pilipinas. Agricultural Credit and Cooperative Financing Administration v. 503. Pena. Calalang v. Presidential Commission on Good Government v. Alfanta v. National Labor Relations Commission. No. 238 SCRA 77. U. City of Manila. 102. JMM Promotion & Management Inc. 90 Phil. 159 SCRA 566. De Guzman. Commission on Elections. v. Jr. Inc. Tan Chat v. Court of Appeals. Noe. 260 SCRA 319. S.R. 78 Phil. Municipality of Iloilo. v. People v. SACRILEGIUM Theft of sacred things. Oro Enterprises. v. Lim v. Director of Prisons. v. Phil. G. does not give rise to perjury. 50999. Williams. Francisco. March 23.. Inc.A foolish oath. Pacquing. 726. 143 SCRA 480. 39 Phil. 21 Phil. Co. 415 SCRA 44) SALVA VERITATE Saving the truth. RES INTER ALIOS JURIDICATAS ALLIS NON PRAEJUDICARE It has often been decided that matters adjudged between others ought not to prejudice those who are not parties. Confederation of Unions in Government Corporation and Offices. Bataan Shipyard & Eng. Cayat. SALARIUM Compensation for services rendered. 756. 150 SCRA 181. Inc. In re: Marcial Edillon. 132. 227 SCRA 747 ) SALUS POPULI EST SUPREMA LEX The welfare of the people is the supreme law. People v. Inc. National Labor Relations Commission. 1990. SAEPE CONSTITUTUM EST. National Labor Relations Commission. 84 SCRA 554. Duplicators. Bernardo. 240 SCRA 649. v. Presidential Commission on Good Government. Bautista v. 53 SCRA 76. 30 SCRA 649. SALVE Hail! Welcome! . Herras v. 465. 68 Phil. 12. 70 Phil. ( Cited in: Songco v. 486. Santos v. 60 Phil. Salaveria. ( Cited in: Fabie v. although false. 76 Phil. 414 SCRA 299. Villacorta v.

So also the commission of acts similar to that involved may be relevant as bearing on the probability of the act in issue having been committed. Carillo. People v. Cu Unjieng. People v. Statutes and common law formulations often refer to the knowledge requirement as scienter. S. especially as a ground for civil damages or criminal punishment. giving of security. 230 SCRA 70. 236. more than enough. ordinance. SAPIENTIA LEGIS NUMMARIO PRETIO NON EST AESTIMANDA The wisdom of the law cannot be computed in money value. consciously. SATIS SUPERQUE Enough and too much. ordaining or decreeing as inviolable under penalty. SANCTIO An establishing. Pineda. 456. Most crimes and many civil wrongs entail a mental element. a learned conversation. disputation. debate. ( Cited in: U. SCIENTER Knowingly. 369 SCRA 394 ) SCIENTIA INTUITIVA Intuitive knowledge. dissertation. therefore he is not liable. In many circumstances the law will require that a person have knowledge of certain facts before legal sanctions follow. fraudulent acts similar to those charged and done at or near the same time. 61 Phil. v. 236 SCRA 22. may be shown. decree. SCHOLA Leisure given to learning. People v. A degree of knowledge that makes a person legally responsible for the consequences of his or her act or omission: The fact of an act having been done knowingly. People vs. where it is necessary to prove scienter. In actions based on fraud and deceit. 37 Phil. Jumao-as. Estrada v. Aranda. . SATISDATIO The satisfaction of a creditor. 226 SCRA 562.SALVO PUDORE Without offense to modesty. sanction. Sandiganbayan.

S. Tan v.S. 144. v. 416. 14 Phil. Bustos. March 31. In other words. Aldanese. 235. ( Cited in: People v. 25 Phil. Lansang v. Samonte. 107. De Leon. 844. Fianza v. 151. Sui v. Servicewide Specialists. Addison. 70 Phil. Moreno. People v. v. 116.S. 83 Phil. L-2189. 20 Phil. 54 Phil. People v. Ziguenza v. U. 826. 14 Phil. 375. 581. Raymundo. Province of Albay. Boquilon. 212 SCRA 436 ) SCILICET That is to say. Martinez v. 33 Phil. Babiera. 138. 186. Olmedillo. 374. U. Caguioa v. 690. v. Cavives. 42 Phil. 52 Phil. 59 Phil. 70 SCRA 65. Zapanta. Maria Cristina . Allen v. Delgado. 42 Phil. 77 Phil.SCIENTIA SCIOLORUM EXT MIXTA IGNORANTIA The knowledge of superficial persons is scrambled ignorance. v. Paredes. 50 Phil. Municipality of Hinigaran. U. The Insular Collector of Customs. 257. 895. U. Joaquin v. to wit: ( Cited in Duran v. Jacinto v. not even a tiny spark to shed light on the issue. 85 Phil. 62 Phil. Province of Pampanga. Court of Industrial Relations. v. v. Garcia.S. Garciano v. 635.S. Burgos. Manayao. Ocampo. In re: Vicente Sotto. 42 SCRA 448. Court of Appeals. 713. 82 Phil. Municipality of Mariquina. 434. Peralta. 99 Phil. v.S. ( Cited in: Batarra v. People v. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp.S. People v. 217. 30 Phil.S. 75 Phil. De la Cruz. Rafferty. Aldanese. 410 ) SCINTILLA A particle of fire. Intermediate Appellate Court. Mandac v. 416. Vera v. 8 SCRA 472. 75 Phil. U. Gongora. 156. 410. for the plaintiff voluntarily participated in the act. 14 Phil. 13 Phil. 29 Phil.R. Abad Santos. 35 Phil. 44 Phil. People v. 7 Phil. 179 SCRA 5. Lim. 78 Phil. People v. 661. De Guzman. Borja v. 400. Worcester v. 201 Phil. G. 81 Phil. 66 Phil. Mananquil. U. Cildo. Reavis. 1 SCRA 21. v. 33 Phil. People v. 93 Phil. 1950. 1. Williams. 7 Phil. v. Co v. 79 Phil. 539. Central Bank of the Philippines. Insular Collector of Customs. 56 SCRA 597. 75 Phil. 508. Hernane. 28 SCRA 796. Ormoc Sugar Co. 383. 54 Phil. 69 Phil. 174 SCRA 80. 90. Paulino. Philippine Labor Union. Tuazon v. 18 Phil. People v. 845. 567. 721. 103 Phil. Avelino. 19 SCRA 784. v.S. Inc. 30 Phil. People v. People v. Ang Tibay v. 59 Phil. Cabigao v. Crame. U. Salao v. Santiago. SCIENTI ET VOLENTI NULA FIT INJURIA NEQUE DOLOS A person who by an act or omission causes damage to another where there is fault or negligence shall be obliged to repair the damage so done. 9 Phil. 610. v. No. U. Garay v. v. 291. 10 Phil. Manila Trading and Supply Co. 554. 42. v. Mateo v. 4. Court of Appeals. 808. Chay v. Navarro. Rivera. Marcos. 495. 33 Phil. Fajardo. 218. Tow v. Mendoza v. Sy v. 706. 595. Salao. Inc. Calderon. Rivera. Carreon v. Cildo. v. v. Ilocos Norte Electric Co. Cauilan. spark. 514. 9. Abad Santos. Ching v. U. Osco Workers Fraternity Labor Union.S. Medina v. Duran v. 32 Phil. 22 Phil.S. Garcia. U. Roa v. Kalim. Judges and lawyers occasionally say that there is not a scintilla of evidence to show something. 365. v. 272. 97. 23 Phil. U. 70 SCRA 570. 46 Phil.

Periquet v. COCOFED v. Court of Appeals. 225. SCRUTINIUM A search. Navarro. Tayag. Sunga. Bien.R. 227 SCRA 227 SCRA 169. G. Republic v. L-43179. v. Court of Industrial Relations. show cause” A writ requiring a person against whom it is issued to appear and show cause why some matter of record should not be annulled or vacated. 83 SCRA 56. “cause to know”) why the moving party should not prevail. Ynson v. Trajano. or why a dormant judgment against that person should not be revised. 2033. May 9. Castillo v. 68 Phil. 29 Phil.Fertilizer Plant Employees v. but their force and power. June 22.R. June 27. Court of Appeals. People v. Manila Railroad Co. A. SCITUM An ordinance. 164 SCRA 431. e. a written document. Tandayag. v. Court of Appeals. decree. SCIRE FACIAS May you bring [it] about to know.R. SECTA QUAE SCRIPTO NITITUR A SCRIPTO VARIARI NON DEBET A suit which is based upon a writing ought not to vary from the writing. National Power Corporation v. inquiry. 1989. Court of Appeals. 220 SCRA 432. Garciano. G. G. 421. Court of Appeals. Reyes v. 102 SCRA 611. Literado. April 18. Ramos v. Gemelo. stature. SCRIPTUM Something written. 257 SCRA 411 ) SCINTILLA JURIS A spark of right or interest. People v. 565. 75 Phil. 209 SCRA 319. January 31.. G. No. Omar v. Geeslin v. 91298. Aldeguere v. 241 SCRA 362. 1989. People v. No. Lumang. 205 SCRA 529. 213 SCRA 133 ) SCIRE LEGES NON HOC EST VERBA EARUM TENERE. 202 Phil. 515. Martinez. Santos v. Juma. No. investigation. . No. ( Cited in: Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas v. 1963. 46127. 1990. “You are to make know.C. De la Rosa v. Fernandez. Commission on Elections. SED VIM AC POTESTATEM To know the laws is not to observe their words alone. 27 SCRA 1190. scrutiny. L-18389. Crisologo. 1990. This is the name of a writ at common law that directs the person to whom it is directed to explain (i.R. National Labor Relations Commission. 177 SCRA 435. No. Berenguer v.

SEDITIO An insurrectionary separation. insurrection. 282 SCRA 602. mutiny. 302 SCRA 708 ) SEDENTE ANIMO With settled purpose. 97 Phil. SED QUAERE But inquire. De los Angeles. Belandez v. SEMEL MALUS SEMPER PREASUMITUR ESSE MALUS IN EODEM GENERE Whoever is once bad is presumed to be so always in the same kind of affairs. SECUNDUM AEQUUM ET BONUM According to what is just and right. 730.SECRETUM Something secret. 41 SCRA 422. 89 Phil. Ortuzar. a mystery. seduction. SECUNDUM RATIONEM According to reason.. secret conversation. 107 SCRA 352. Republic v. Lopez Sugar Central Mill Co. Cruz. 88 Phil. Inc. 236. 32005-R. sedition. dissention. SEDUCTIO A leading or drawing aside. Court of Appeals. according to established custom. ( Cf. ( Cited in: Del Mar Domestic Enterprises v. Ramon v. Castillo. Hayco v. . Federation of Free Farmers v. Associated Labor Unions-TUCP v. 1971 ). Salvante v. Court of Appeals. examine this further. National Labor Relations Commission. November 4. 100. National Labor Relations Commission. According to what is alleged and proved. SECUNDUM ALLEGATA ET PROBATA In conformity with the pleadings and the proof ( Cited in: Guevarra v. civil discord. 138 SCRA 227 ) SECUNDUM BONOS MORES According to good usages.

413 SCRA 132 ) SEMPER SPECIALIA GENERALIBUS INSUNT Special expressions or provisions are always included in general ones. Florendo. 43 Phil. Perido v. 200 SCRA 323. SEMPER PRAESUMITUR PRO MATRIMONIO A presumption always exists in favor of the validity of marriage. 129 SCRA 594. v. U. opinion. In re: Of Mora Adong v. Court of Appeals. 139 SCRA 230. SEMPITERNUS Everlasting. perpetual. ( Cited in: Manila Public School Teachers Association v. Sy Quia. Padilla v. SENSIBILIS That can be perceived by the senses. Corpuz v. ( Cited in: Villanueva v. Laguioro. Administrator. Tomas.S. People v. Mawallil. 62 ) SEMPER PARATUS Always prepared. Sto. People v. Corpus v. 265 SCRA 198. 8 Phil. 74 SCRA 189. ( Cited in: Sy Joc Lieng v. 43. judgment. 42 Phil. 85 SCRA 567. . 243 SCRA 155 ) SEMPER FIDELIS Always faithful. Corpus. 85 SCRA 567. 197. Malabago.SEMPER ET UBIQUE Always and everywhere. SENTENTIA A way of thinking. 63 SCRA 97. City Government of Tacloban. 693. 16 Phil. Perido. decisio0n. Fule v. SEMPER IDEM Always the same. SEMPER NECESSITATAS PROBANDI INCUMBIT ILLI QUI AGIT Each party must prove his own affirmative allegation. People v. Alavado v. sensible. De la Torre. eternal. Cheong Seng Gee. Tioco.

Mendoza v. 257 SCRA 528. Talaboc. Hermanos. SI A JURE DISCEDAS. 242. 74 Phil. 18 Phil. one by one. separately. 69 Phil. SEQUESTRATIO A depositing in the hands of a third party. v. Insular Collector of Customs. SENSUS VERBORUM EST ANIMA LEGIS The meaning of words is the spirit of the law. Ornum. ( Cited in: Chavez v. 703. National Labor Relations Commission. you will go astray and everything will be in a state of uncertainty to everyone. Bishop of Nueva Caceres v. SEQUETAS NUNQUAM CONTRAVENIT LEGIS Equity must never be against the law. People v. 41 SCRA 143 ) SERMO INDEX ANIMO Speech is the index of the mind. Robles v. 21 SCRA 1465. broadly speaking. Lasala. People v. Tumalad v. SI ALIQUID EX SOLEMNIBUS DEFICIAT. Commission on Elections. 72 Phil. Moya v. 256 SCRA 441. Demafiles v. UM AEQUITAS POSCIT SUBVENIENDUM EST . 199. 230. SERVITUS SERVITUTIS ESSE NON POTEST There cannot be an easement upon an easement.SENSU LATO In the broad sense. Commission on Elections. 50 Phil. successively. a sequestration. Bonto Perez. ET ERUNT OMNIA OMNIBUS INCERTA If you depart from the law. SENTENCIA FACIT JUS Judgment creates right. Vicencio. Del Fierro. Santos. 70 Phil. individually ( Cited in: Kuttner v. Sumulong v. 387. Rubio. severally. 242 SCRA 81. 461. 289 SCRA 51 ) SERIATIM In series. VAGUS ERIS.

425 SCRA 295. Office of the Court Administrator v. Iloilo. 427 SCRA 336. 3 Phil. Case v. 24 SCRA 288. No. 71. Matute v. 400 SCRA 458. 421 SCRA 468. 60 Phil. Court of Appeals. 430 SCRA 130. U. 448 SCRA 329. The Executive Secretary v. Delfin v. Escritor. ( Cited in: Salonga v. Ynot v. 7595. G. 400 SCRA 181. it should be applied. v. No. Ortillas. so. Portugal-Beltran. Court of Appeals. A maxim of property law which holds that a person is free to use his or her property in any way she or he sees fit so long as s/he does not harm others (or the property of others). 468 SCRA 471 ) SICARIUS An assassin.If anything is deficient in formal requisites. 191 SCRA 195. 28 Phil. Chat v. v. 250. SI VIS AMARI. 20 Phil. Lalica. Dumalahay. Court of Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. Araneta v. COGNOSCE If you judge. It is a mere begging of the question. People v. 422 SCRA 324. 579. v. 467 SCRA 184. 24 Phil. when equity requires it. 78 Phil.. SIC UTERE TUO UT ALIENUM NON LAEDAS Use your own [property] in such a way that you do not harm another. 408 SCRA 1. Ros v. Zafra. Aquino v. Union Bank of the Philippines. Municipal Rural Bank of Libmanan (CS) Inc. Philippine Journalists. S. People v. 22 Phil. Sanahon. 74457. 429 SCRA 81 ) . Inc. March 20. ( Cited in: Case v. it assumes the very point in controversy. 419 SCRA 131. Domingo. 388 SCRA 558. 260 SCRA 319. People v. Director of Lands v. 398 SCRA 9. 428 SCRA 659. Development Bank of the Philippines v. G. Pacquing. love! SIC Thus. Concepcion. 213. Albano v. Portugal v. first understand. 345. Tira. 1987. Evangelista v.l Scheer. People v. Various comments have been made on this. Alvarez. 369 SCRA 343. 240 SCRA 649. Jr. 426 SCRA 336. Nogoy. La Junta de Sanidad de Manila. Andamo v. 1913. Lim v. Sumarago. Alonzo v. JMM Promotion & Management Inc. February 4. Manese. 503. Department of Agrarian Reform. Estrada v. 117. Heirs of Juana Gaudiane v. People v. People v. Santos v. Concepcion. Agtarap. R. Isip. Court of Appeals. 14 Phil. Intermediate Appellate Court. SI JUDICAS. La Junta De Sanidad De Manila. Court of Appeals. 563. Nicolas.. Juda v. 380 SCRA 37. 4 Phil. AMA If you wish to be loved. Montelibano. Clayton. 201 SCRA 508. murderer. 465. Arafiles v. Domingo v. in such manner. 26 SCRA 768. Besa. Binay v.R.

v. Pua Te Ching. SINE CURA Without charge. without ceremony. SINE DAMNO Without damage.S. SINE ACTIONE AGIS Without bringing any action. 150 SCRA 37. Raquiza v.” SIMPLICITA EST LEGIBUS AMICA. ( Cited in: U. ( Cited in Chinese Chamber of Commerce v. 2 Phil. without care. Republic v. ET NIMIA SUBLITAS IN JURE REPROBATUR Simplicity is favorable to the laws and too much subtlety in law is to be reprobated. Sandiganbayan. “Without assigning a day for further meeting or hearing. . 407 SCRA 10 ) SIMPLEX COMMENDATIO NON OBLIGAT A mere recommendation is not binding. 75 Phil. This phrase is used when courts or legislative bodies adjourn their proceedings without designating a specific time to reconvene (i. Luzon. in a summary manner. 50 ). SIMULACRUM Likeness. SIMPLICITER Simply.e. “The power of law is suspended during the war. copy of an original. 16 Phil.. ( Cited in: Republic v. image.SILENT LEGES INTER ARMA Laws are silent amidst arms. 409 ) SINE ANIMO REVERTENDI Without the intention of returning. Bradford. SINE DIE Without a day. “without a day” designated to meet again). Peralta. 380.

Tolentino v. Gabatin. Matute v. v. Bautista. 17 SCRA 540. 25 SCRA 550. PROCEDERE NON POTEST Prescription cannot exist without possession. Molo. 9 SCRA 493. Inc. the old form of a judgment for the defendant. Leonard. that he go without a day.S. 1976. 24 SCRA 411. Jose v. Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines. v. G. 62 Phil. Quod eat sine die. Conwi-Omega v. . 26 SCRA 768. 47 Phil. 345. Dirije v. Biranya.Hence. L41818. “An indispensable requisite or condition”. Legal writers often use this phrase to denote the crucial component part without which a whole would not exist. 12. ( Cited in: Aytona v. 383. 451 SCRA 275) SINE MORA Without delay. Perez v. the decedent is said to have died sine prole. for example. a judgment discharging the defendant from any further appearance in court. 790. Pons. i. 235 SCRA 630 ) SINE DUBIO Without doubt. Commission on Elections. SINE ODIO Without hatred. Tolentino v. 19 SCRA 691. One might say. Marina.R. Chingan v. (Cited in Cortez-Estrada v. final dismissal of cause. February 18. Lopez v. De los Reyes. Barretto v. v. Urbana v. SINE NUMERO Without number or limit. ( Cited in: Lim v. G. 72 Phil. Cabrera. Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija.R. Bernardo. Uy Tam. Heirs of Domingo Samut. 55 Phil. No. Feliciano v. U. 30 Phil. City of Manila. SINE PROLE Without issue. 113 SCRA 187. 17 SCRA 840. La Guardia. Polistico. Castillo. Secretary of Finance. Gonzalo Puyat & Sons.e. Court of Appeals. SINE QUA NON Not without which. 60 Phil. Fuguso. No. Inc. Samson. Continental Cement Corporation. v. a final adjournment. 1916. SINE POSSESSIONE USUCAPIO. Gella. 4 SCRA 358. Altajeros v. that consideration is the sine qua non of every enforceable contract. 7 SCRA 970. 11530. v. Aug. 752. 518. When a person dies without having had any children (and without any children having been conceived prior to death). 170. 37 Phil. 471. Borlazas v. 41 SCRA 702.

Enriquez. National Labor Relations Commission. De los Angeles. Dulay v. Kalaw Katigbak. Drilon. National Labor Relations Commission. Inc. 246 SCRA 673. People v. People v. Inc. Sr. Del Bros Hotel Corporation v. Civil Service Commission. 219 SCRA 1. Vallez. People v. Cobb-Perez v.. Jr. De la Rosa. Bayocot. v. Workmen’s Compensation Commission. 110 SCRA 259. 100 SCRA 702. Ferrer. Cagayan Valley Enterprises Inc. 202 SCRA 179. 228 SCRA 538. 27 SCRA 439. Overseas Employment Administration. Rodis. 243 SCRA 666. Animos v. Commission on Audit. Inc. 216 SCRA 257. Mathay. National Labor . Paciente. Intermediate Appellate Court. Mercado v. 100 SCRA 465. Civil Service Commission. Home Insurance & Guaranty Corp. 137 SCRA 717. 245 SCRA 594.Salunga v. Bleza. Heirs of Pedro Pinote v. Court of Appeals. 239 SCRA 207. Franco v. Court of Appeals. Ramirez. Court of Appeals. National Labor Relations Commission. 221 SCRA 108. Court of Appeals. Ramos. v. Sandiganbayan. 236 SCRA 300. 225 SCRA 456. 23 SCRA 637. People v. Inc. Pineda. 74 SCRA 306. Santos. 45 SCRA 396. Ramie Textiles. v. Sr. v. Sayo. Zamora. Intermediate Appellate Court. National Labor Relations Commission. Jr. 43 SCRA 535. 218 SCRA 1. Agbayani v. San Antonio v. 187 SCRA 12. Luzon Rubber & Manufacturing Co. v. v. Moles v. 217 SCRA 653. 157 SCRA 203. Campos. 95 SCRA 755. Leviton Ind. Sy v. 173 SCRA 534. Continental Cement Corporation v. 910 of Associate Justice Ramon B. 243 SCRA 220. Tancinco v. People v. Soliven v. 89 SCRA 586. Discaya. Inc. 220 SCRA 148. Natalia Realty Corporation v. Villanueva v. 245 SCRA 356. 181 SCRA 702. Pharma Industries. Court of Appeals. 21 SCRA 216. Britanico of the Intermediate Appellate Court. Lee Chuy Realty Corporation v. 174 SCRA 285. Republic v. Commission on Elections. (HIGC) v. Inc. Pimentel v. 247 SCRA 183. v. San Juan v. 209 SCRA 105. Pajarillaga. Office of the Court Administrator v. Court of Industrial Relations. Nakpil v. Intermediate Appellate Court. United Paracale Mining Co. Agravante. Torno v. Occena v. v. People v. 214 SCRA 227. Estaris. 193 SCRA 270. 166 SCRA 742. 196 SCRA 69. 42 SCRA 23. Villanueva. Court of Appeals. Campos Rueda. Salas v. Dulay. 172 SCRA 783. 79 SCRA 649.. 250 SCRA 596. v. Danville Maritime. Nitto Enterprises v. Gonzales v. Eugenio v. 227 SCRA 100. 169 SCRA 777. v. Stellar Industrial Services. Office of the President of the Philippines. People v. 189 SCRA 58. Salvador. v. Escudero v. Tuazon. Court of Industrial Relations. 222 SCRA 196. People v. 104 SCRA 295. Trajano. Boniao. 174 SCRA 214. Re: Application for Retirement under R. People v. National Labor Relations Commission. Collector of Internal Revenue v. 84 SCRA 423. Singer Sewing Machine Co. People v. Commission on Elections. Prudential Bank v. v. 248 SCRA 654. 184 SCRA 571. Florida. 89 SCRA 699. 222 SCRA 557. 216 SCRA 198. Soliman. Workmen’s Compensation Commission. Lecaroz. Puloc. Escareal v. 250 SCRA 359. Court of Appeals. v. Tuvera. Court of Appeals. Inc. 213 SCRA 472. 178 SCRA 331. Supangan. Brent School. Bagatsing v. 136 SCRA 196. v. Maquinay v. Gementiza. v. 179 SCRA 218. 210 SCRA 86. Agustin. 591. Standard Mineral Products. Castro. Sunset View Condominium Corporation v. Court of Appeals. 93 SCRA 238. Director of Lands v. 173 SCRA 421. 210 SCRA 33. Phil. Jr. PVAO. People v. Intermediate Appellate Court. 175 SCRA 701. Lantin. Madrigal v. Consolidated Workers Union v. Bondoy. Revidad v.A. People v. Commission on Elections. Court of Appeals. Inc. Besa v. 191 SCRA 20. 181 SCRA 378. 209 SCRA 47. 100 SCRA 339. Gutierrez. 166 SCRA 618. Tanada v. 199 Phil. Intermediate Appellate Court. Tiglao v. Montilla v. 230 SCRA 146. People v. 146 SCRA 501. 52 SCRA 391. The Conference of Maritime Manning Agencies. Garcia v.

People v. Fabia v. v. Austria v. Basadre. Rural Bank of Francisco Balagtas (Bulacan). Se. Simbahon. Lucena v. People v. Court of Appeals. 401 SCRA 410. Republic v. Sevillano. National Labor Relations Commission. Mendoza v. Chavez. People. Masagana Concrete Products v. Del Rosario v. Ltd. Inc. 350 SCRA 198. Brillantes. 358 SCRA 537. Express Telecommunication Co. 358 SCRA 810. Francisco v. 252 SCRA 323. Rabanal. 381 SCRA 359. Rubiso. People v. Reapor. 389 SCRA 389. Court of Appeals. Paddayuman v. Ansowas. People. People v. Esponilla. 312 SCRA 410. Vda. Estonia v. 416 SCRA 245. Jr. 419 SCRA 82. People v. People v. Uy v. Secretary of Justice. v.. International Trading Commission v. People v. 393 SCRA 488. 270 SCRA 227. Court of Appeals. 401 SCRA 76. Quimen v. No. 384 SCRA 340. People v. 253 SCRA 573. Guerrero. Velarde. People v. 261 SCRA 436. Lumacang. 256 SCRA 396. Piedad. Vigilar. Court of Appeals. Javier. San Miguel Corporation v. 397 SCRA 27. Kimura. v. 397 SCRA 84. 430 SCRA 492. 264 SCRA 619. People v. 398 SCRA 415. 405 SCRA 112. 354 SCRA 566. Government of the United States of America v. Mollaneda v. Balanuevo v. 401 SCRA 94. 2003. 353 SCRA 452. v. People v. Tapdasan. 128871. Chas Realty & Devevelopment Corporation v. Inc. Professional Regulations Commission. Office of the Ombudsman ( Visayas). Rimano v. 392 SCRA 641. 312 SCRA 772. Manila Banking Corporation. People v. 255 SCRA 485. 375 SCRA 188. 313 SCRA 47. Mamalayan.. Court of Appeals. 366 SCRA 604. Jr. 419 SCRA 480. 389 SCRA 623. Litton Mills. 359 SCRA 608. People v. 402 SCRA 612. 429 SCRA 439. 400 SCRA 267. 324 SCRA 139. People v. People v. De la Cruz. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company. Marcos v. 420 SCRA 128. 266 SCRA 627. v. 396 SCRA 159. People v. 363 SCRA 427. Reyes. Cruz v. Phil. v. People v. People v. Jr. Inc. Escarlos. Umacob. 394 SCRA 227. 402 SCRA 321. 349 SCRA 655. 406 SCRA 508. People v. 266 SCRA 242. 332 SCRA 747. 313 SCRA 576. Philippine International Air Terminal Co. Court of Appeals. Adlawan. 406 SCRA 156. 428 SCRA 52. Court of Appeals. Servano. 425 SCRA 247. Inc. Luna v. People v. 377 SCRA 300. 410 SCRA 463. Commission on Audit. Desierto. 392 SCRA 335. Real. 432 SCRA 269. Balamban. Lacson. Court of Appeals. Delmindo. Peralta. 369 SCRA 386. Insular Life Assurance Co. Navarro. Bodallo v. Asset Builder Corporation. 257 SCRA 380. 418 SCRA 254. De la Cruz. March 18. Montemayor. People v. 416 SCRA 569. National Labor Relations Commission. People v. People. Benitez v. Galang v. 425 SCRA 725. Development Bank of the Philippines v. Lacsina. Jr. 312 SCRA 77. Catbagan. 324 SCRA 254. National Labor Relations Commission. Jr. 423 SCRA 535. 256 SCRA 696. 429 SCRA 546. People v. Barba. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. EPG Construction Company v. People v. People v. People v. Loreto. Choa. 343 SCRA 755. Philippine Retirement Authority v. Echegaray v. People v. 257 SCRA 163. Farinas v. Bracamonte. 398 SCRA 448. 376 SCRA 210.. 407 SCRA 221. Court of Appeals. People v. National Labor Relations Commission. Wong. 373 SCRA 316. Tangan v. Enfectana. Marcos. Sandiganbayan. Choa v.. 422 SCRA 148.. 299 SCRA 188. Enemecio v.R. Navarro v. Manuel. Agan. Pajuyo v. 374 SCRA 278. 301 SCRA 96. People v. Court of Appeals. Santos v. Sandiganbayan. 308 SCRA 215. People 373 SCRA 119. G. Court of Appeals.. Ruiz v. Estrada v. Provident Insurance Corporation v. Bunag. Court of Appeals. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co. Commission on Audit. 340 SCRA 289. . Barba v. 369 SCRA 79. People v.Relations Commission. Almeida. People v. 422 SCRA 459. De Jacob v. 409 SCRA 186. People v. Commission on Elections. Hernandez. Jr. Yau v. Talavera. Republic v. Purganan. 404 SCRA 421. People v. People v. 253 SCRA 509. Lim v. Lazaro v. Court of Appeals.

43 Phil. v. Lee v. Ortega. Court of Appeals. ( Cited in: Villa Rey Transit. v. 453 SCRA 548. Meatmasters International Corporation v. International Communications Corporation. Ortega. Court of Appeals. Sepulveda. 457 SCRA 301. Social Security Commission v. SITUS The particular position occupied by a thing. he should be removed from his guardianship. Inc. Republic v. Lawyers often refer to the situs of property or the situs of a contract. Chua v. Sandiganbayan. 664 ) SINE STIPULATIO Without stipulation. 469 SCRA 561) SINE QUIBIS NON Those without which. Court of Appeals. 433 SCRA 251. v. Eastern Telecommunications Phils.. Toledo v. 459 SCRA 657. 46 Phil. Barriga v. Readycon Trading & Construction Corporation. Bustos. Court of Appeals. Borja. Samahang . Wenceslao & Associates. 452 SCRA 278. People.S. Hantex Trading Co. ( Cited in: Veloso v. Sr. Inc. Corpus v. v. Reyes v. People. Heirs of Primitivo Hernaez.D. Lanuza v. Cayago v. Acance v. 458 SCRA 265. Primicias v. 450 SCRA 302. personal property has its taxable “situs” in that state where owner of it is domiciled. Court of Appeals. 618. 439 SCRA 239. Sandiganbayan. A TUTELA REMOVENDUS EST If any guardian commits a fraud against his ward. 3 Phil. “Situs” of trust mean place of performance of active duties of trustee. v. 468 SCRA 77. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Cadungog v. 449 SCRA 29. ( Cited in: U. 288 SCRA 447 ) SINE RE Without the thing. Inc. Inc. Ochotorena. Sangguniang Panlalawigan ng Pampanga. Osmena v. 25 SCRA 845. 434 SCRA 365. Guan v. 604. 466 SCRA 120. Edroso v. 454 SCRA 54. 452 SCRA 626. 71. Lunsod v. Lelis Integrated Development Corporation. Estate of Salvador Serra v.M. Enriquez v. People v. Enriquez. v. 37 Phil. Lina. Ferrer. 25 Phil. 81 Phil. Naguit. 454 SCRA 301. Mary Abigail’s Food Services. Yap. Commission on Elections. 439 SCRA 94. Sablan. 435 SCRA 55. Sandiganbayan. 739. 443 SCRA 259. Pelaez. 467 SCRA 52. Borja v. Fugoso. Flores v. Often the principles of conflict of laws must determine the situs property or agreements. Court of Appeals. Estate of Ballad. indispensable conditions. 360 SCRA 159. ( Cited in Lacoste v. 460 SCRA 146. Court of Appeals. 295. Commission on Elections. 440 SCRA 662. 286 SCRA 24 ) SI QUIS CUSTOS FRAUDEM PUPILLO FECERIT. 460 SCRA 291. Cruz v. People v. “Generally. Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines v. 435 SCRA 446. It can also refer to the situs of a crime. Inc.

De la Cruz. 237 SCRA 324. Flores. No. Visperas. 410 SCRA 162. Filoteo v. People v. Sandiganbayan. People v. Jr. 433 SCRA 591 ) SI VIS PACEM. People v. 454 SCRA 72) SITUS CRIMINIS Location of the crime. PARA BELLUM If you want peace. 215. 429 SCRA 9.. 400 SCRA 401. 895. v.R. 222 SCRA 538. be prepared for war. 108 Phil. People v. 410 SCRA 373. Del Rosario. 416 SCRA 612. Inc. Cea. Buntag. Delim. People v. stupidity. 425 SCRA 627. 408 SCRA 442. People v. Dagpin. Caballero. Murillo. Posadas. 352 SCRA 105. Sumarago. People v. 398 SCRA 132. People v. Collector of Internal Revenue. 402 SCRA 153. People v. People v. Allawan. People v. Sanchez. 368 SCRA 53. 1935. Hernandez. 298 SCRA 48. People v. 400 SCRA 424. People v. 186 SCRA 76. Bustarde. 90 Phil. G. Caballero. Castillano. 422 SCRA 661. People v. 426 SCRA 108. Cantre. SOLA AC PER SE SENECTUS DONATIONEM TESTAMENTUM AUT TRANSACTIONEM NON NITIAT Old age does not alone and of itself vitiate a will. Sabardan. 392 SCRA 335. silliness. 395 SCRA 647. 398 SCRA 415. Perez v. People v. People v. Vasquez. People v. 427 SCRA 180. People v. Manufacturers Life Insurance Company. November 2. Moriles. Grefaldia. 100. Ocampo. 432 SCRA 104. 426 SCRA 358. 227 SCRA 375. 855. People v. 429 SCRA 364. People. Caabay. People v. Alicnas. People v. Perez. . People v. Almazan. 416 SCRA 368. People v. 406 SCRA 439. 56 Phil. Tapdasan. U. Pamilar. 459. People v. ( Cited in: People v. Iluis. People v.. 401 SCRA 498. People v. 430 SCRA 52. Paculan v Rodas. People v. 182 SCRA 554. De la Cruz. People v.Magsasaka. Jr. People v. SOCORDIA Weak-mindedness. People v. 263 SCRA 222. 400 SCRA 424. Parreno. 36 Phil. People v. 173 SCRA 607. Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Maestro. People v. 404 SCRA 275. Abut. People v. Tan v. 406 SCRA 620. Laxa. 396 SCRA 386. 78 Phil. People v. People v.. People v. 226 SCRA 1. 42091.. Luna. Ilagan. Leon v. People v. Prieto. People v. 422 SCRA 324. SOIT FAIT COMURE IT EST DESIRE Let it be as it is desired. People v. Ejandra. 62 Phil. Bocalan. 419 SCRA 326. Pagalasan. Remollo. Pigon. 409 SCRA 486. Jr. 431 SCRA 643. People v. Ostia. People v. 670. 395 SCRA 128.S. v. 404 SCRA 421. Dayrit. Jr. Manila Gas Corporation v. Esponilla. People v. Aquinde.

. Gonzalo Puyat & Sons. No. Cabrera.R. Republic v. R. Inc. Ramie Textiles. 377.. Power Commercial and Industrial Corporation v. Lim. Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas. Inc. Garcia. 217 SCRA 347. No. New Civil Code). loneliness. 774. Mathay. 51593. G. Francisco v. No. G. an obligation to return the thing arises.. SOLUTIO INDEBITI A quasi-contract whereby. 90 Phil. De Padilla. if something is received when there is no right to demand it. Manila Surety and Fidelity Company v. 1968. February 26. No. Victorias Milling Co. 73 Phil 630. June 30. ( Arts. and 2) that the payment or delivery was made by reason of an essential mistake of fact. Requisites under Art. Serrano v. De Leon v. Nestle Philippines. G. L. Court of Appeals. CIR. The term solutio indebiti is here used in very wide senses and includes also the case where one performed labor for another or assumed to pay a debt for which he was not bound. Co. Central Bank. 225 SCRA 562. National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority v. 108 Phil. March 31.R. Hawaiian Phil. 2 SCRA 626. Balzarza. Municipality of Opon v. Pasicolan. Court of Appeals. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Corp. 478. December 17. 558. under the impression that he was legally bound to do so. L-116524.R. v. 1967. Olizon v. Air Philippines Corporation v. or if payment is made by reason of a mistake in the construction or application of a doubtful or difficult question of law. 1964. L-17874. April 30. August 31. Court of Appeals. v. City of Cebu v. In re: Concepcion Paterno Vda. as if he had lent it. 1963. L17798. 771. 74 Phil. October 25. G. 274 SCRA 597. National Development Co. v. Andres v. Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer Corporation.R. Piccio. Caltex (Phils. 105 Phil. Sr. 1992. Inc. L-17392. 360 SCRA 575. When one has erroneously given or performed something to or for another.R. Cebu City. 110 Phiol. 177 SCRA 618. 1966. for which he was in no wise bound.) Inc. De Castro. 2154 and 2155. Auditor General of the Philippines. 23 SCRA 286. De Padilla v. November 5. 438 SCRA 51 ) . G. or relinquished a right or released a debt. v. Genova v. Belman Compania Incorporada v. Philippine National Bank v. No. 311. Davao Fruits Corporation v. International Business Aviation Services Philippines. G. v. he may redemand it. Central Bank. Commissioner of Customs v. G. and it was unduly delivered through mistake. 1979.. No. 93 Phil. Quezon City. ( Cited in: Velez v. SOLITUDO Being alone. Syjuco. No. Associated Labor Unions. Inc. 2154 of the New Civil Code: 1) that he who paid or delivered was not under obligation to do so.18440.R. L-21853. 7 SCRA 970. 1965. 106 Phil. City of Manila. G. Inc.SOLEMNITAS JURIS SUNT OBSERVANDE The formalities of the law should be observed. Central Bank of the Philippines. solitary. L-32364. No. 437 SCRA 452. 407 SCRA 165. solitude. 553.R. National Shipyards & Steel Corporation v. v. Soriano v.

SOLUTUS Freed from confinement. critical. SONTICUS Dangerous. serious. contemptuous. SPES ACCRESCENDI Hope of surviving. Bernas v. showing contempt. 225 SCRA 119 ) SPECTEMUR AGENDO Let us be judged by our deeds. Court of Appeals. looker-out SPECULUM VITAE Mirror of life. 2 SCRA 804 ). SPES HOMINIS Hope of man. SPECIALIA GENERALIBUS DEROGANT Specific or special provisions limit general ones. SOLVITUR AMBULANDO It is proved as one goes along. set at liberty. 50 Phil. SPES RECUPERANDI . SPECULATOR An explorer. ( Cited in: Barretto v. such as the foetus ( Cited in Geluz v. Tuason. SPERNAX Despising. SPES EST VIGILANTIS SOMNIUM Hope is the dream of the vigilant. Court of Appeals. 888.

1. courts resolve the cases presently before them in the same way that cases with similar facts have been resolved in the past.S. Moreno. Takonaka. 89. 397. 73 Phil. Yatco. 73 Phil. Rey. 597. Michell. Evangelista. 48 Phil. 77 Phil. The doctrine that. To hold otherwise is to infringe the deeply rooted legal principle of stare decisis. 45 Phil. 845. 72 ) SPONDEO To promise solemnly. 521. Ynchausti & Co. Mallari. Vilo. 30. Orozco. Under this principle of common law. 812. 674. In re: Max Shoop. Vito. Moncada v. Barretto v. 585. 74 Phil. Barretto. Summers. 59 Phil. Property cannot be considered abandoned under the law and the possessions left vacant for the finder until the spes recuperandi is gone. 866. v. 58 Phil. 517. 2 Phil. 178 ). Philippine Shipowners Association v. People v. 500. This is the complete maxim from which the shortened phrase stare decisis comes. People v. Dougherty v. 59 Phil. 26 Phil. STARE DECISIS To stand firmly by things that have been decided (and not to rouse/disturb/move things at rest). 47 Phil. v. Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur. 850. 62. 78 Phil. 60 Phil. 12 Phil. Pho. 41 Phil. 28 Phil. Torres v. Trust Co. People v. Lichauco v. SPOLIATUS DEBET ANTE OMNIA RESTITUI A party despoiled ought first of all to be restored. Pascual v. ( Cited in: U. Director of Lands. 82 . 672. 47 Phil. 98. Frank v. 10 Phil. 78 Phil. 518. People v. Chong v. 75 Phil. 69 Phil. SPES SIBI QUISQUE Each man must rely upon himself. 41 Phil. 80 Phil. 272. 37. ( Cited in Falcon v. 206. to bind. 887. it will adhere to that principle and apply it to all future cases where the facts are substantially the same. engage or pledge one’s self.. Rodriguez. v. 51 Phil. STABIT PREASUMPTIO DONEC PROBETUR IN CONTRARIUM A presumption will stand good till the contrary is proved. 8 Phil. v. Cui. Santiago v. 59 Phil. 377. Koppel v. 254. Kimura.Hope or expectation of recovery or recapture ( Cited in: U. Llorente v. 213. Co. Diaz. 7 Phil. 79 Phil. People v. Erana v. Valenzuela. Aquino v. 34 Phil. Phil. Villaflor v. Fortuno. Vera. Tiamco v. 39 Phil.S. McMicking v. Gonzales. Erlanger & Galinger v. Perfecto. Del Rosario v. 1. El Tribunal del Pueblo. 549. 249. Secretary of Labor. Viola v. Chim. Mabanag v. 43 Phil. People v. Swedish East Asiatic. when the court has once laid down a principle of law as applicable to a certain state of facts. De la Paz. 849. Kosuyama. 165. Lerma. Wright.

Tuazon & Co. No. 226. Banco Filipino Savings & Mortgage Bank. Lepanto Consolidated Mining Co. People v. Inc. Torillo v. 34. 227 SCRA 655. Maritime Building Company. G. Mayfair Theater. 377 SCRA 509. 3 SCRA 590. Province of Lanao del Sur. 91 Phil. J. Dioquino v. 82 Phil. Canton. Gabatin v. No. 342 SCRA 40. People v. 366 SCRA 266. 467 SCRA 433 ) STAT PRO RATIONE VOLUNTAS POPULI The will of the people takes the place of reason. Court of Appeals.. 19 SCRA 401. Reyes v. Estrada v. 219 SCRA 610. v. Boya v. Tung Chin Hui v. Secretary of Education. Court of Appeals. 219 SCRA 1.Phil. Land Bank. Quijada. v. Olaguer v. July 2. 410 SCRA 419. L-39990. G..R. Cruz. 85 Phil. 1978. STATUS QUO .R. Inc. 1975. National Power Corporation v. 202 Phil. Osmena v. Ayala Corporation v. Villa v. Inc. Philippine National Bank v. 1963. Nielson & Co.. Sanchez v. People v. Kilosbayan. Tala Realty Services Corporation v. 340 SCRA 765. Inc. No. Jr. 259 SCRA 296. Inc. October 23. Subido. 35. Rodriguez v. Lepanto Consolidated Mining Co. Leogardo. 246 SCRA 540. statue. Castillo v. Cebu Country Club. Development Bank of the Philippines v. ESSO Standard Eastern. Tuazon. 445 SCRA 655. Equatorial Realty Development. L-21601. G.. Inc. 86 SCRA 305. Jr. Commission on Elections. Inc.. Abad v. 456 SCRA 300. 391 SCRA 700. Visarra v. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank. Republic.R. Olegario. Court of Appeals. 289 SCRA 647. G.. No. Gan Tsitung v. Pines City Educational Center v. Leuterio. L-20508. Court of Appeals. Chavez. v. People v. Brugada v. Reyes v. 211 Phil. Inc. 197 SCRA 471. 375 SCRA 390. National Labor Relations Commission. Rosa-Diana Realty & Dev. Acosta v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. 127. Morato. Secretary of Education. People v. 346 SCRA 663. v. 150 SCRA 144. Miraflor. Pepsi Cola Products Phils. 482. Hacienda Bino/Hortencia Starke. 288 SCRA 447. 374 SCRA 365. No. 57 SCRA 531. L-27916. Desierto. 1975.R. Commission on Elections. 450 SCRA 224. 286 SCRA 355. National Labor Relations Commission. People. 204 SCRA 377. Collector of Internal Revenue. 415 SCRA 533. Benin v. v. Querubin v. Daganio. 444 SCRA 176. National Labor Relations Commission. STATUA An image. 524.R. Culture and Sports v. 1966. Court of Appeals. Inc. Procter & Gamble Philippines Manufacturing Corporation. L-33140. Felipe v. December 17. The Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the DOJ. Rodriguez. People v. G. 260 SCRA 539. De Mesa v. January 9. G. Mariano. Commissioner of Customs v. v. M. August 21..R. Alonzo v. 259 SCRA 191. Culture and Sports. People v. Honasan v. v. 394 SCRA 478. Sandiganbayan. 334 SCRA 486. 427 SCRA 46. Pinlac v. 1987.. Corp. Aquino. Tecson v. Esparas. Pineda. Court of Appeals. Inc. May 16. No. Melo v. 421 SCRA 415. Military Commission No. 162 SCRA 512. v. Inc. August 31. 1976. 370 SCRA 56. 424 SCRA 277. Lyceum of the Philippines. 264 SCRA 271. Licera. Cuenca. L-57757. L-29078. Luzon Brokerage Company. Manila Electric Co. G.R. No. 242 SCRA 59. Court of Appeals. Republic v. 766. 334 SCRA 114. Tala Realty Services Corporation v. Commission on Elections. Inc. Court of Appeals.

Mendoza v. Philippine National Bank. 312 SCRA 266. v. Reyes v. 16 Phil. 508. Prado v. v. Existing condition. Inc. 52 Phil. Los Banos Rural Bank. 405 SCRA 363. Reyes v. Court of Appeals. v. 329. 35 Phil. II. 190 SCRA 295. Enriquez. Intermediate Appellate Court. Rivas v. Presidential Commission on Good Government. 38 Phil. Bank of the Philippine Islands. 22 SCRA 539. Flores. Court of Appeals. Manila Public School Teachers Association v. 741. 480. 87 Phil. Pasong Bayabas Farmers Association. Inter Fashion Inc. v. Ramos v. Commission on Elections. 602. Estate of the Heirs of the Late Ex-Justice Jose B. Commission on Elections. v. 417 SCRA 183. Securities and Exchange Commission. Estrella v. Court of Appeals. Republic Telecommunications Holdings. Manila Trading & Supply Co. Ateneo de Manila University v. Lee v. Pastor v. Molina v. 221 SCRA 285. National Labor Relations Commission. v. Padua. Court of Appeals. Department of Education. 49. Commission on Elections. 76 Phil. 13 SCRA 285. ( Cited in: A. Brett v. Rodolfa v. 408 SCRA 267. Court of Appeals. 110 Phil. 314 SCRA 207. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. 220. 284.Standing at which. Jr. Commission on Elections. 76 Phil.. 365. 225. 301 SCRA 572. Court of Appeals. Young Men Labor Union Stevedores v. Lizares v. 124. Dee v. Court of Industrial Relations. 424 SCRA 267. 387 SCRA 149. 204 SCRA 429. Cafuin. Pacis v. 599. Lim. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawa ng Pilipinas. Pleyto v. Johannesburg Packaging Corporation v. Martinez v. 829. Ibanez. Court of Appeals. Ramirez v. Naredo v. 100 SCRA 314. Sunflower Neighborhood Association v. Court of Appeals. 445. Inc. National Labor Relations Commission. Guantia v. 200 SCRA 323. Phil.S. Ltd. 246 SCRA 175. Samonte. The Executive Secretary v. Alfonso. 63 Phil. Hernandez v. 429 SCRA 109. 415 SCRA 44. Labor Union. Court of Appeals. Villa. 406 SCRA 156. 78 Phil. Vales v. 422 SCRA 551. Court of Appeals. 66 Phil. . Ubiadas. 460. 302 SCRA 403. Inc. Versoza v. Garcia v. 420 SCRA 113. 88 Phil. Africa v. Director of Prisons. 14 Phil. Francisco. 534. Mendoza v. Celis v. 24 Phil. Labrador.L. Yatco. A phrase to explain that matters will remain as before. 83 Phil. v. Unciano Paramedical College. Court of Appeals. Inc. 421 SCRA 397. 80 Phil. v. 659. Rava Development Corp. Federation of Land Reform Farmers of the Philippines v. Zamora. Tiaco. 216 SCRA 439. 211. Jr. Consolidated Bank and Trust Company v. Iloilo Provincial Warden. De Garcia v. 39 Phil. De Guzman v. 104 SCRA 619. 216 SCRA 806. 203 Phil. Commission on Elections. 194. Africa. Laxina. Cabuhat v. Capulong. 82 Phil. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. Harden v. 137 SCRA 590. 428 SCRA 325. Coingco v. Borre v. City of Manila. Villanueva v. Isip. General Milling Corporation v. v. Inc. Mojica. Watson & Co. Ligaya v. De la Cruz v. 554. 299 SCRA 100. 422 SCRA 514. 81 Phil. Moya. Concepcion. 418 SCRA 448. Montemayor. Tatoy. 222 SCRA 644. Lorenzo v. 205 SCRA 38. Laguio. 664. 416 SCRA 283. 301 SCRA 278. Roldan. Phil. Kintanar. Pelayo. 405 SCRA 607. Gonzales v. v. 1 Phil. 633. 79 Phil. Calo v. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals. 163 SCRA 583. 159 SCRA 47. Baltazar v. Gordillo v. 769. Quesada v. 311 SCRA 224. Ong. Lim v. Tiu v. Jr. Court of Appeals. Jr. Commission on Elections. Malonzo v. Veridiano. v. 190 SCRA 585. Talabon v. 86 Phil. Rosario. 97. v. Bandala v. 191 SCRA 687. 77 Phil. Gonzales. 408 SCRA 560. 23. Gonzales v. 71 Phil. 429 SCRA 81. Court of Appeals. Jr. 384 SCRA 535. Forbes v.. Cordillera Administrative Region.. Santos. Court of Appeals. Samson. In re: McCulloch Dick. Dungog v. Culture and Sports. 410 SCRA 318. Capistrano. 211 SCRA 144.

It was the most solemn and formal of all the contracts in Roman law. It may be divided into two classes: where the stipulation is intended for the sole benefit of such person. Northern Motors Inc. Gothong Lines. Villa v. Mendoza. Court of Appeals. Calingin v. 435 SCRA 209. Court of Appeals. 469 SCRA 681 ) STATUS QUO ANTE BELLUM The state of things before the war. 184 SCRA 622 Grand Boulevard Hotel v. Leonard.) Inc. and the like. “promitto”. 450 SCRA 315. Levi Strauss (Phils. Bank of the Philippine Islands v. STIPULATIO Verbal contract. Fil Metals Corporation v. Vogue Traders Clothing Co. Lakas Manggagawa sa Filcon-Lakas Manggagawa Labor Center. 806. Inc. Heirs of Domingo Samut. 119850. 30 Phil. 468 SCRA 95. Jr. v. Court of Appeals. v. RTC. 406 SCRA 688. Kaufman v.. “promitis”. G. by the parties both being present at the same time and usually by such words as “spondes”. It was entered into by question and corresponding answer thereto. “spondeo”. ( Cited in: Acting Registrars of Land Titles & Deeds of Pasay City. 432 SCRA 329. Resurreccion. Manalac. 433 SCRA 348. Carlos A. 30 Phil. Pasig and Makati v. Inc. Sr. Court of Appeals. 463 SCRA 616. Mora. Sesbreno v. 407 SCRA 497) STATUTA PRO PUBLICO COMMODO LATE INTERPRETANTUR Statutes are made for the public good ought to be liberally construed. Office of the Ombudsman v. ( Cited in: Uy Tam v. Metro Manila. 76 Phil. Tugade. 222 SCRA 466.Lomboy. Inc. Restaurant and Allied Industries (GLOWHRAIN). 462 SCRA 52.R. v. Makati. Prince Line. 452 SCRA 714. Bonifacio Bros. 42 Phil. 650.. A provision in a contract in favor of a third person not a party thereto. ( Cited in: Dilag v. 182. No. Court of Appeals. 53 Phil. Quezon City Government v. Philippine Savings Bank v. 460 SCRA 243. Cortez-Estrada v. and where an obligation is due from the promisee to the third person which the former seeks to discharge by means of such stipulation. Roces v. 434 SCRA 173. v. Genuine Labor Organizaiton of Workers in Hotel. Hidden View Homeowners. Leonard. v. June 20. Borbajo v. Hijos. Dacara. Court of Appeals. 451 SCRA 275. 1996 ). ( Cited in Uy Tam and Uy Yet v. Filcon Manufacturing Corporation v. 253. House Representatives Electoral Tribunal.. Joson v. 457 SCRA 203. 471 ) STIPULATION POUR AUTRUI A stipulation in favor of or for the benefit of a third person. PNB. 471. DTI. Branch 57. 107 Phil. Secretary. 20 SCRA 266 ) STREPITUS JUDICIALIS .

Lacson v. Resins. 92 Phil. Auditor General. ( See also: National Marketing Corporation v. v.). 301 SCRA 152. Acting Commissioner of Customs. 25 Phil. Marcos. Mitsubishi Metal Corporation. v. 102 Phil. Marquez. 204 SCRA 377. Kroll & Co. Jr. 83 Phil. Procter & Gamble Phil. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Tax Appeals. Intermediate Appellate Court. 870. Republic v. 456. 975. 104 Phil. Collector of Internal Revenue v. 7 SCRA 670. Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Toh v. 322 SCRA 639. according to strict law. Johnson & Sons. Court of Appeals. Atkins. Municipality of Pililla. Inc. Paseo Realty & Development Corporation v. Province of Tarlac v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. 26 SCRA 722. Court of Appeals. v. Solid Bank Corporation. Visayan Electric Company. 198 SCRA 82. S. v. Inc. 640.. 58 SCRA 170. Ltd. 197 SCRA 771. 28. 360 SCRA 575. Acting Commissioner of Customs v. Inc. 288 SCRA 422. Bataan. Macaraig. 22 SCRA 922.. Inc. Philippine Petroleum Corp. v. Jr. 102 Phil. Seagate Tech (Phils. 457 SCRA 482. Municipality of Balanga. Inc. 792.C. Reyes. 181 SCRA 214. & Loan Association v. 326. Icard v. Guerrero. 84 SCRA 61 ) STRICTISSIMI JURIS Of strictest right. 870.Turbulent conduct in a court of justice. Jr. Court of Appeals. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company v. Everett Steamship Corporation v. Manila Electric Company. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company v. v. 216 SCRA 790. 408 SCRA 544. Rizal. Traders Royal Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. 440 SCRA 235. Maceda v. Maceda v. 105 Phil. City of Davao. Alcantara. 58 Phil. Esso Standard Eastern. 113. 197 SCRA 771. Inc. 455 SCRA 308. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company v. Nestle Philippines. Province of . Yu v.. City of Lipa. 18 SCRA 488. Tuazon. 16 SCRA 978. City of Iloilo.. General Foods (Phils. 99 Phil. 239 SCRA 436. Court of Appeals. Cyanamid Phils. Inc. v. v. City of Cebu.. 192 SCRA 305. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. City of Bacolod. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Calamba Steel Center. v. Lorenzana. Tan Kim Kee v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Appeals. Pacific Tobacco Corporation v. Saldana v. 416 SCRA 436. Manufacturing Corporation. 31 SCRA 520. 23 SCRA 715. Court of Appeals. 196 SCRA 335. ( Cited in Duran v. Republic v. 463 SCRA 528. 25 SCRA 754. 244 SCRA 332. 102 Phil. Tokyo Shipping Co. 399 SCRA 442. Santos Lumber Company v. v. Philippine Surety & Insurance Company v. Inc. Laguio. Intermediate Appellate Court. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.. Republic Flour Mills.) Inc. 302 SCRA 442. Solid Bank Corporation. Municipality of Medina. This is especially applicable in the enforcement and collection of taxes and license fees. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Posadas. City of Manila v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Asturias Sugar Central. 29 SCRA 617. Macaraeg. v. Taylor. Inc. ( Cited in: McCullough & Co. City Council of Baguio. 234. Greater Balanga Development Corporation v. 77 SCRA 469. Cebu Mutual Bldg. 261 SCRA 667). Court of Appeals. Umali. Roque. 309 SCRA 87. Lingad. 451 SCRA 132. 21 SCRA 180. 401 SCRA 545. Royal Oil Products. Palmares v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. STRICTI JURIS Of strict right or law. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Commissioner of Customs. Inc.

Subido. Civil Service Board of Appeals. Pua v. Director of Prisons. 3 SCRA 637. Inc. Ponferrada. De Guzman. Tan. 563. 7 SCRA 158. ( Cited in Rakes v. RESPUBLICA RUIT The state is ruined by the loss of respect for magistrates. Sangilo-Itogon Workers Union. 31 Phil. Matti. ( Cited in Lamb v. Vda.S. 107 Phil. 97 Phil. 95. 91 Phil. 80 SCRA 177. 616 ) SUBLATA VENERACIONE MAGISTRATUM. ( Cited in: Felipe v. 906 ) SUA CUIQUE CULPA NOCET A person’s own fault does harm to himself. De Los Santos v. 456 ) SUB CUSTODIA LEGIS Under the custody of the law. 259. 37.. Phipps. McGirr v. Agcaoili v. 175. Rodriguez v. Aragones v. Maglinti. Corda v. Springer. v. 61 Phil. 310. 99. 50 Phil. Noriega. Philippine Railway Co. 30 Phil. Biscarra v. Republic. insensibility. v. 676. dullness. Filipino Bus Co. 24 SCRA 873. Republic. 88 SCRA 134. 121. Pamil v. de Eustaquio v. Molo. v. 57 Phil. Bilbao v. Rodriguez v. Workmen’s Compensation Commission. 7 Phil. Hebron v. STUPOR Numbness. 48 Phil. 579. Cu Unjieng. Republic. Itogon Suyoc Mines. 68.Laguna. 724. In re: Procopy Moscal v. 24 Phil. Reyes. Hamilton. 86 SCRA 413. ( Cited in Gustilo v. Camus v. without any notice being taken. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. 95 SCRA 248. Teleron. 860. v. U. Kuan.. SUB SILENTIO Under silence. ( Cited in Tua v. Reyes. 96 SCRA 45. Molo v. SUB LITE In dispute. De la . People v. Lapitan. Suguitan. 11 Phil. 104 Phil. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. 27 Phil. Quimson v. 110 Phil. Government of the Phil. 659. Manila Mining Corporation. 90 Phil. 468 SCRA 571 ) STRICTO SENSU In the strict sense. 2 SCRA 370. Vda. 359 ) SUB COLORE OFICII Under color of office. Workmen’s Compensation Commission. People v. 22 Phil. 467 SCRA 93. 54 Phil. 25 SCRA 95.

( Cited in: People v. SUA SPONTE Of one’s own volition. 242 SCRA 482. Phil. with iron hand in velvet glove. Ganzon v. 298 SCRA 839 ) SUB SPE RECONCILIATIONIS In the hope of reconciliation. Luzon Marine Department Union v. v. Divine Word University of Tacloban v. Mialhe. Intermediate Appellate Court. May 29. Abesia. 53 SCRA 317. State Prosecutors v. 211 SCRA 517. Sandiganbayan ( Second Division). 259 SCRA 280. National Labor Relations Commission. 73 SCRA 1. Lawyers use the phrase sub judice to refer to the case that they are currently litigating. 21 SCRA 312. 27 SCRA 780. FORTITER IN RE Gentle in manner. People v. Court of Appeals. 200 SCRA 271. v. Court of Appeals. Fabian v. Scottish Union & National Insurance Co. Muro. L-31503. 235 SCRA 630. As such. R. TRJ-92-876. 1974. Gomez. Dacoy v. 224 SCRA 104. Cornelio. ( Cited in: Jamias v. 86 Phil. McKee v. 1967. 158 SCRA 391. No. December 11. G. SUB JUDICE Under the authority of a judge. 1975. 217 SCRA 633. Tolentino v. 244 SCRA 770. 303. Abano. No. L. Cabero. Claravall v. 288 SCRA 296. Desierto. 637. Roldan. Osaka Shosen Kaisha. Guzman. CFI Lanao del Norte. 213 SCRA 759. Insurance Co. Under consideration. voluntarily. Padica. SUB TITULO Under the title of. 295 SCRA 49 ) SUBTER-FUGIO To flee secretly or by stealth. v. No. People v. 140 SCRA 44. Merchant Marine School.1289. Santiago v. Legarda v. of his/her/its/their own volition. of North America v. Secretary of Labor and Employment. People v. Inc. Secretary of Finance. Codilla. Villasenor v. Republic v. Vazquez. 61 Phil. June 10. People v. to get off.Santa v. Plan. courts often decide to review the question of jurisdiction sua sponte. Court of Appeals. 1971. Insular Veneer. Inc. For example.. G. FEATI University. Tierra. American Home Assurance Co. A. Branch II. 221 SCRA 362. Rodriguez. 121. G. SUAVITER IN MODO. a case which is sub judice should not be discussed so as not to pre-empt the decision of the court. . 81 Phil.R.M. Macandog. without a party raising the issue. v. People v. 88 Phil. L-22345. 222 SCRA 865. 507. Araneta III v. FEATI University Faculty Club v.R. firm in matters. August 15. Baja v. No.

No. 103295. 1969. 1967.R. v. Roberto v. Cui v. G.R. No.R. Salamat. 398. Assad. L-31789. v. Aboitiz & Co. Penera v. Springer. 70 SCRA 611. Hamilton. Subido.R. 151 SCRA 520. L-24303. Verzola. G. Republic. April 18. 31 Phil. October 23. 584-CAR. Maquil v. L-31788 & 31792. Banzon v. September 23. G. No. Workmen’s Compensation Commission.). Villa Esperanza Development Corporation v.R. Fernandez v. Commissioner of Customs v. 1980.e. Nos. Cloribel. 109 Phil. 1972. Agcaoili v. Community Rural Bank of Guimba (N. No. Nolo. De los Angeles v. Mintu v. Maglanoc. G. Dalocanog. 1975. L25698. Heirs of the late Justice Jose B. Rodriguez v. Malecdan v. Victoriano. 207 SCRA 1. G. G. Reyes v. without expressly stating that it was overruling the precedent. September 15. 155. 407 SCRA 356. Bilbao v.S.Macadaeg. Noblejas v. February 24. 90 Phil. Merced v. Jovines will become Jovines v. April 22. No. 455 SCRA 34 ) SUB NOMINE Under the name. Secretary of Justice v. v. People v. 436 SCRA 369. No. 245 SCRA 1.R.. 1967. Flores. People v. 1977. National Development Company v. Court of Appeals. Moscal v.g. March 5. Aragones v. Noriega. Republic v. 239 SCRA 83. G. 676. L-41609. 109 Phil. G. 264 SCRA 467. National Press Club v. Magsanoc.R. Madayag. Macias v. Dionesa. Baes. Nolo v. 157 SCRA 762. October 28. Suguitan. 218 SCRA 401. Basuan v. 428 SCRA 1) SUBLATA CAUSA TOLLITUR EFFECTUS . 245 SCRA 594. January 29. Government of the Philippines v. Republic. Mercado v. January 31. G.R. Vestil.. L-20266.R. No. 421 SCRA 7. 310. Also cited in: U. ( See McGin v. Inc. 338 SCRA 282. 12. No.R. 37. 48 Phil. Court of Appeals. 113930. Request for Live Radio-TV Coverage of the Trial in the Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases Against former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada. i. Occasionally the name of a case changes as the parties’ positions in litigation change (e. Court of Appeals. People v. Tan.E. No. Inc. No. C. Court of Appeals. No. People v. Court of Appeals. 1996. Commission on Elections.R. M. A. 1981. July 19. 30 Phil. A. Morante. 110 Phil. The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee v. 49 SCRA 281. Court of Appeals. PDCP Development Bank v. Talavera. December 26. Cruz. Songcuan. 99. 1976. 259. 563. Majaducon. De Castro v. De la Cruz. 91 Phil. No. Santos on appeal if Santos wins the trial court level). G. a court might overrule a previous case sub silentio. People v. Pekas. 724. 384 SCRA 607. Salas. No. Hervilla.19600.R. Office of the Court Administrtor v. 1968. 1987. L-30052. L. 413-MJ. Valenzuela v. 1974. G. 176 SCRA 354. 1993. For example. June 29. 96 Phil. 891. L-25698. G. 91 Phil. Malig. Court of Appeals. SUB SILENTIO Under shelter of silence. L-45214. August 20. L. 50 Phil. A thing is done sub silentio when it is done without expressly indicating that it has been done. 365 SCRA 62. Diez. Santos v.

upon appearance of the witness.R. 59 Phil. 100. 9 Phil. 12 Phil. Caram v. 1513 MJ. Cruz v. 39 Phil. Dauz v. 49 Phil. No. 424. v. Harding. Jaca. G. U. Narcida v. Cusi. G. Court of Appeals. 26 Phil. Fontanosa. ( Cited in: Concepcion. v. June 29. documents. Order of a court in criminal case for one to appear to testify. April 29. 183. 43 Phil. Presidential Commission on Good Government. June 29. Gonzales. 48 Phil. 1984. 199. A writ by which a person is required to produce documents in evidence. . 385. Marquez. May 27. No. PSBA v. Sison. U. 212 Phil. No. 512. Jr. Bayona. Asia Banking Corporation. A. June 29. the effect is removed. Universal Rubber Products. s/he is subject to sanctions by the court. G. 60. Lorenzo v. G. Reyes. G. 1981. ( Cited in: Finicle v. 16 Phil. Abaya. Baluyot. Serrano v. 701. Philippine Vegetable Oil Co. Rafael. 172.S. 408. L-41171. Villasis v. Liebenow v.R. Office of the Court Administrator v. Lime Corporation of the Philippines v. v. Gatmaitan. 31 Phil. 316. v. 279. you will bring with you. 654. Africa v. 43 Phil. No. 184. papers. Miranda.S. G.S. People v. Galang v. People v. 9 Phil. 365. U. 247. U. Concepcion. 172. Concepcion. Inc. 6 Phil. No. December 17. Ayo v. v. 315 ) SUBPOENA Under penalty. v. Bowen. L-25641. Salazar.S. 90 Phil. No. v.R.. Jarencio. Leano. 113. Madrilejos. No.By doing away with the cause. 101 Phil. Gabriel. 190 SCRA 226. 40 Phil. L-25883. U.S. Ayson. Vera v. 162 SCRA 546. 68 SCRA 99 ) SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM Under penalty. 1963. 220 SCRA 208 ).R. Jr. 54. Chico v.C. Caltex (Phils) Inc. Locsin. Court of Appeals. 106 Phil. People v. A. 23 Phil. Jowe v.S. Labang. v. Court of Appeals. 1966. the court should make a verbal order commanding him to comply with the terms of a subpoena ( Cited in: Salazar v. 13 Phil. Tablizo. Evangelista v. Fortun v. 716. v. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Presidential Commission on Good Government. 1982. 632. Moran. 1969.R. 141. 244. 182 SCRA 739. Abaya v.. A subpoena duces tecum commands the person to whom it is directed to produce books. v.S. 69 Phil. IV. 4 SCRA 1124. U. Caltex Dealers Association of the Philippines Inc. Chanco v. Jones v. Villar-Noor. A witness who fails or refuses to comply with a subpoena duces tecum is guilty of contempt. L-30266. Villegas. M. Pimentel.R. Everette v. 196 SCRA 107. Cojuangco v. Manalo. Such contempt is not committed in the presence of the court even though. ( Cited in Nava v. Flordeliza. Arnaldo v. September 30. Escalona. 9 Phil. Chuy v. 1979. L-38383. G. 1987. If a person who has been subpoenaed does not comply with the terms of the subpoena. 1121. Paterson. 8 Phil. 22 Phil. Herrera v. 175. July 23. Borromeo. Castillo v. 59 Phil. 36 Phil. or other tangible things.. A subpoena is a document which commands a person to appear (usually to testify as a witness) at trial. 356. L-33115. U. 175 SCRA 216. 90 Phil. Harding. Be it noted that prosecutors are not authorized by law to issue subpoena if a criminal cases is pending in court. No. 279. Palattao. 12 SCRA 544.R.

Jr. to be angry. Beltran v. Bureau of Labor Relations. 343 SCRA 377 Esquivias v. Magdaya v. Cadalin v. 725.. 157 SCRA 455. SUCCESSEO To be inflamed by anger. 824. Fernandez. Firestone Filipinas Employees Association v. Fandino. Caballes v. 69 SCRA 132. Quimson v. Vasquez. San Miguel Corporation.. de los Reyes. ( Cited in: Lodovica v. Olondriz. 95367. POEA’s Administrator. . Jr. Mafinco Trading Corporation v. People. Jr. 36 SCRA 26. Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions (PAFLU) v.. Court of Appeals. G. Adille v. Philippine National Bank. 55 Phil. Mercado v.R. 106 SCRA 1 ) SUI GENERIS Of its own kind or class. Concepcion v. Nos. 43 Phil. 61 SCRA 340. 371. 83831. Court of Appeals. 243 SCRA 64. January 30. G. ( Cited in: Pascual v. Lopez v. v. Sandiganbayan. 410. Enrile. May 19. 365 SCRA 279.. 334 SCRA 136. Ojo. L-50581-50617. May 23. 70 SCRA 139. 55 Phil. 48 Phil. 67. Elizalde & Co. v. Court of Appeals. 384 SCRA 152. Harding v. 75. SUCCURRITUR MINORI FACILIS EST LAPSUS JUVENTIS A minor is to be favored. ( Cited in: Teal Motor Co. 155 SCRA 421. enraged. 1982. Gironella. 436 SCRA 677. Villamil v. San Luis v. Inc. in secret. Negros Oriental II Electric Cooperative. Chavez. Cases with unusual or unique facts. 50 Phil. 817. Castro v. Chavez v. 41 Phil. 272 SCRA 803. 87 Phil. Court of Appeals. Jose v. in confidence. SUGGESTIO FALSI EST SUPPRESSIO VERI A suggestion or hint of falsehood. Jose. 1995. Santamaria. PAIC Finance Corporation. 54 Phil. (“one of a kind” in our idiom) are said to be sui generis. Dimayuga v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. 301 SCRA 1 ) SUB VERBO Under the word. L-83113. 452 SCRA 312 ) SUB ROSA Under cover. Court of Appeals. People v. 713. 2 SCRA 319. No. 19 Phil. Tong v. No. youth errs easily. Public Estates Authority. v. La Insular v. Nunez v. 65 SCRA 154. Iglesia ni Cristo v. Government of the United States of America v. v. 47 Phil. 1992..No. 304. Constantino v. Orient Insurance Co. 1992. 59 Phil. 43 Phil. Lantion. irritated. 82. Philippine National Bank.. Inc. Almonte v.. 59 SCRA 183. 248. Orozco. 87 Phil. Gonzales v. G. Godoy. 238 SCRA 721. Baylosis v. Inc. National Leather Co. Sangguniang Panlunsod of Dumaguete. 522. 170. Aquino. United States Life Insurance Co. Asia Life Insurance Co. Borjal v. Secretary of Justice v. Ople.R.R. 202 SCRA 405. January 9. Court of Appeals. Cuadra..

Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawang Pilipino. Adame v. 423 SCRA 329. of the Philippines v. Gabayan. 106 Phil. 46 Phil. The Civil Code provides that persons sui juris cannot avail themselves of the incapacity of those with whom they contracted. The greatest charity is to do justice to every one. De Leon. Godinez v. Pahang v. Barreta. 456 SCRA 538. Meja v. People v. 434 SCRA 297. 562. 24 SCRA 33. L & L Lawrence Footwear. 83. 554. Jian v. 205 Phil. 1975. 63 SCRA 469. Ting. 59 Phil. Barcelona. 402 SCRA 84. Santos. and at any time whenever it may be necessary. Tama. Gallego v. Cruz v. 562. 407 SCRA 154. (Cited in: Dominguez v.. 59 Phil. Quezon City. 438 SCRA 306. Sandiganbayan. Kapisanan Timbulan ng mga Manggagawa. 389 SCRA 623. 90 Phil. 81 Phil. 455 SCRA 499. 76 Phil. v. Lopez v. Central Bank v. SUMMA CUM LAUDE With highest distinction.R. 200 SCRA 554. 26 ). v.. 43 Phil. Garcia. 176. Wright. de Los Reyes. 83 Phil. Aguila. Haw v. Sotto. April 22. No. Pomar. Tagarao v. ET OMNI TEMPORE QUANDO NACERE FUERIT. Igot v. 669. 50 Phil. Luen. Court of Appeals. 436 SCRA 668. Manila Electric Railroad & Light Co. Court of Appeals. SUM-MOLESTUS . University of the Philippines. 866. Lacson. Palma. 612. Lu Chu Sing v. 5. Tuazon.Purganan. Home Development Mutual Fund v. Cojuangco. Say. 415 SCRA 44. Francisco. Ynchausti & Co. 458. Insular Collector of Customs. Berbano v. Court of Appeals. 124. 362) SUMMA SUMMARUM Sum total. v. 170. Inc. Gotauco & Co. Jr. 468 SCRA 393) SUI JURIS In his own right. Court of Industrial Relations. RTC. Ilagan. 455 SCRA 282. Register of Deeds of Tayabas. Cebu Contractors Consortium Company v. Inc. Arienda v. Court of Appeals. Sevilla v. Luzon Stevedoring Company v. Barretto v. 427. 61 Phil. Jr. 410 SCRA 258. 888. PCI Leasing & Finance Corporation. 47 Phil. 41 Phil. Qualified to understand and appreciate the necessity for the exercise of that degree of caution which would have avoided the injury which resulted from a deliberate act ( Taylor v. 288 SCRA 617 ) SUMMA CARITAS EST FACERE JUSTITIAM SINGULIS. 33022. Heck v. 756. Gui. Dinglasan v. 440. ( Cited in Valdez v. 99 Phil. 55 Phil. Lee v. 62 Phil. Tolentino v. Director of Lands. v. Republic v. G. Board of Accountancy. People v. 16 Phil. capable of entering into legal relations. 400 SCRA 267. Branch 85. v. International Hardwood & Veneer Co.

SUMMUM JUS. 410 SCRA 30. of the Philippines. insolent. 12 Phil. discourteous. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawa ng Pilipinas. 140. arrogant. 534. v. In re: Allen. 360. v. SUPERBUS Proud. v. 15 Phil. Corp. 2 Phil. extreme enforcement of law may lead to injustice. SUPRA DICTUS As stated above. 6 SCRA 425. rude. SUPRESSIO VERI . Mitsubishi Motor Phils.S. 14 Phil. 8 Phil. ( See: De Guzman v. ( Cited in Berico v. Monica. 404 SCRA 30. 283. Jr. Corrales. U. Balibag v. 10 Phil. 630. a demanding over and above.S. Above. Forbes v. SUPEREXACTIO An excessive demand. 415 SCRA 44) SUPER ALTUM MARE Upon the high sea. Court of Appeals. 408.S. v. 592. Celis. Tacloban Assn. greatest wrong. rigor of the law. Columbian Rope Co. 433 SCRA 206 ) SUPRA LEGEM Above the law. Legal writers use the word supra to indicate that reference to which they just alluded appears “above” or earlier in their text. Inc. U. 225 SCRA 562 ) SUPRA. International Banking Corporation v. of Laborers and Employees. Tao. v. 1 Phil. ( Cited in Francisco. uncivil. SUMMUM JUS Strict right. Dionisio.. SUMMA INJURIA Greatest right. Alfredo v. Borras. v. Tiaco. Chrysler Philippines Labor Union.Somewhat troublesome or vexatious. Fabie. U.

SYMPOSIUM Banquet. such as contracts. 809 ) SUPLUSAGIUM NO NOCEAT Surplusage does not vitiate a statute. TACTILIS . ( Cited in Arlegui v.. etc. Orient Insurance Co. to put in another’s place. collection of opinions of learned men. SUUM CUIQUE To each one his own. ______ T TABELLO One who draws up written instruments. SUR-ROGO To cause to be chosen in place of another. 59 Phil.A suppression or concealment of truth. 378 SCRA 322 ) SUUM QUIQUE TRIBUERE To render to every man his due. v. Figuratively. TABULA RASA Blank tablet. a tabula rasa is any person who is unlearned and hence. Court of Appeals. wills. ( Cited in Teal Motor Co. TACITA Things unexpressed. SUUM JUS SUMMA INJURIA The abuse of a right is the greatest possible wrong. can be taught. to substitute.

ET NOS IN ILLIS (MUTAMUR) All things change and we also change with them. 279 SCRA 590. impede. Board of Regents of the University of the Philippines. without design. suitable. temporary. TEMPORA MUTANTUR ET LEGES MUTANTUR IN ILLIS Times change and laws change with them. delay. tangible. TEMPUS ENIM MODUS TOLLENDI OBLIGATIONES ET ACITONES QUIA TEMPUS CURRIT CONTRRA DESIDES ET SUI JURIS CONTEMPTORES For time is a means of dissipating obligations and actions. 60 Phil. Maravilla. TEMPORA MUTANTUR. TALIO A punishment similar and equal to the injury sustained. consumer of things. TALLIA Tax. TARDO To make slow. ( Cited in Pangilinan v. opportune. TAMERE By chance. ( Cited in: Mangahas v.That may be touched. EDAX RERUM Time. seasonable. a retaliation in kind. share of income or property. Court of Appeals. TEMPESTIVUS Of or belonging to the right time. because time runs against the slothful and careless of their own rights. TEMPORALIS Temporal. 393 SCRA 156 ) . tribute. 521 ) TEMPUS. Leonardo v. intent or purpose. by accident. timely.

398 SCRA 415. 86 SCRA 413 ) TERTIUS GAUDENS Third party who profits by the disagreement of two others. ( Cited in Pamil v. TESTAMENTUM OMNE MORTE CONSUMMATUR A will is reckoned up/brought to maturity entirely by death. alarm.” Every will is perfected by death . TENACITER Tenaciously. 398 SCRA 508. TERRA FIRMA Firm land or ground. ICC Leasing & Financing Corporation. proof. 60 SCRA 72 ) TEMPUS OMNIA REVELAT Time reveals all. In modern estates practice lawyers say that “a will speaks from the time of death. Yan. terror. 437 SCRA 622) TERRIFICO To frighten. TEMULENTIA Drunkenness. De la Cruz. Sumaway v. terrify. TESTAMEN Evidence. TERTII GANDENTES The happy onlookers. dread. Teleron. Superlines Transportation Company Inc. De Guzman. 269 SCRA 402. People v. testimony. tightly. ( Cited in Medina v. strongly. ( Cited in: Padilla v. TERROR Great fear. intoxication. v.TEMPUS FUGIT Time flies. Court of Appeals.

De Garces. Neri v. 1 Phil. Sarmiento. Consolacion de Florentino. 216. Guevarra. Blas v. 313. 10 SCRA 471. Nery. 11 Phil. Belen v. 66 Phil. 541. 527. 742. 16 SCRA 154. 70 Phil. Pecson v. Caluya v. Sabado v. Garcia. Pecson. Cuevas v. Buganao v. Bona v. . 72 Phil. Baguio Citizens Action. Pardo. Cabang v. Lopez. 4 SCRA 1250. 204 Phil. 47 Phil. 4 Phil. 19 SCRA 85. Torres v. 238. 500. Villamor. 13 Phil. Sahagun v. Tablizo. 922. 509. Tolentino v. 330. Leynes. 88 Phil. 109 Phil. Marin v. 249. 23. 10 Phil. 5 SCRA 333. 185. Puig v. 106 Phil 997. 36 Phil. 465. 7 SCRA 93. De Castro v. Ex Parte Pedro Arcenas. Yap. Teotico v. Enriquez. Javellana v. 39 Phil. 88 Phil. 42 Phil. Nacianceno. Coso v. Briones. Belasco v. 692. Abangan. Delfinado. 461. 276. Tabotabo v. 398. Aranza. 18 Phil. 663. 30. Maninang v. 39 Phil. Martir v. 227. Gonzales. 203 Phil. Hernaez. Soliman v. 93 Phil. 45 Phil. Crosologo v. In re: Apolonio Taboada v. Borromeo. Inc. Court of Appeals. 347. Gago v. del Val. Jocson. Paguio. Amancio v. 104 Phil. 74 Phil. 2 SCRA 515. 134. law students often meet the terms testator (male) and testatrix (female). Perez v. 1 Phil. Yambao v. In re: Sioca. Escuin. Rimando. “to bear witness to. 10 Phil. Habana v. Santos v. Benedicto v. 102 Phil. 13 Phil. 43 Phil. 12 SCRA 576. Borjal. Barrios v. Galvez v. 42 Phil. 38 Phil. Reyes v. Fernandez v. Ubag. Natividad v. Perry v. 10 Phil. 531. 611. Alvarez. 107. 902. 572. 239. 156. Javellana. In re: Butalid. Amata v. Garcia v. Butte v. 489. Lacuesta. 1 SCRA 899. 730. Vano v. De Castro. Rebaca-Potot. 450. Zuniga. 152. 129. 26 Phil. 21 Phil. Menasalvas. Castillo. 40 Phil. Aznar v. Achacoso. 37. 322. Rosal. Akutin. 7 Phil. Gabino. 68 Phil. Court of Appeals. 52 Phil. Deza. 195. to declare. 3 Phil. 72 Phil. 859. 27. Bagtas v. Calvo v. 720. 218. De Claudio v. Suntay. 416. 479. Rodriguez v. Duncan. 98 Phil. 402. Postigo v. 476. Aguilar. 64 Phil. Garcia. 216. Alcala. Bohanan v. 243. 20 Phil. 54 Phil. 291. 95 Phil. 95 Phil. 701. Imbo. 509. Gan v. Molo. 333. Galvez. 48 Phil. 1 SCRA 1157. Policarpio v. Jaboneta v. De la Cerna v. 90 Phil. 807. 116. Bobcock. 130. Molo v. 7 SCRA 913. Vergel de Dios. Guevarra v. Cabacungan. Fernandez. 48 Phil. Echevarria v. 55 Phil. 89 Phil. Medel v. Coronel. Aragon. Icdang. 745. Akutin. Abangan v. Lopez. 18 SCRA 47. Santillon v. Escubin v. Mamuyac. 29 Phil. Manarang. Abadia. Santos v. Versoza. Gil v. 11 SCRA 423. Enriquez v. Gillesania v. Junquera v. 15 Phil. 106 Phil. Santos v. 4 SCRA 491. 57 Phil. Icasiano. 62 Phil. 19 SCRA 656. Banogan. Nayve v. Roxas. 199 Phil. 17 SCRA 590. Dia v. 689. 109 Phil. Martir. Ozaeta v. Icasiano v. 405. 772. 240. Leynes v. 100 Phil. Elio. 641. Neri v. Avera v. 88. Gumban v. Gustilo. 766. ( Cited in: Hernaez v. 90 Phil. Javellana. 46 Phil. Baron. Matias v. Jocson v. 12 SCRA 406. 95 Phil. 27 Phil. Legasto v. 7 SCRA 367. Gorostiza. 73 Phil. Gabriel v. Francisco. 22 Phil. 19 Phil. 332. 88 Phil. 15 SCRA 276.TESTATOR/TESTATRIX One who makes a will. 211. Mateo. Miranda. 627. Suntay v. 52 Phil. 51 Phil. 6 Phil. 1073. 50 Phil. 5 Phil. Guevarra v. Mijares v. 150. Bank of the Philippine Islands. Templeton v. 89. Guevarra. In re: Dioco. Murciano. Santiago. Barreto-Datu. to call to witness. 49 Phil. 260. 485. 209. 197. Barut v. Bernardo v. Roxas v. 87 Phil. 14 Phil. Buenaventura. Romero v. 1008. Domingo. 45 Phil. 700. 640. Araneta. Yangco. Nera v. Uy. Tabotabo. 596. Santos. Penaflorida. From the Latin verb testari. 4 SCRA 526. Martinez v. In re: Jose Riosa.” Since property law necessarily involves the study of property transfers. Cuyugan v. Robles v. Gorecho. Avecilla. In re: Bonilla v. In re: Emil Johnson. 163. Olives. Bohanan. Salamat. 145. 27 Phil. Aznar v. Yangco v. 34 Phil. 74 Phil. 46 Phil. 14 SCRA 563.

206 Phil. NON NUMERANDA Testimony is to be weighed. TESTIMONIUM Testimony. 171. 307) TESTES PONDERANTUR. not counted by the number of witnesses. TESTIS One who attests orally or in writing. Pastor v. in case of conflict of evidence. 211 Phil. TERMINUS AD QUEM Destination. a witness. apprenticeship. Solano v. TESTIS DE VISU PRAEPONDERAT ALIIS An eyewitness is preferred to others. City Council. Court of Appeals. 211 Phil. not counted. TIMENDI CAUSA EST NESCIRE Ignorance is the cause of fear. NON NUMERANTUR Witnesses are weighed. Court of Appeals. TESTE MEIPSO Witness myself. TERMINUS A QUO Departure point. the truth is to be sought by weighing the credibility of the respective witnesses not by the mere numerical preponderance on one side or the other. 758. 296. novice. TITULO .v. 207 Phil. TESTIMONIA PONDERANDA SUNT. Syquia v. That is. Court of Appeals. TIROCINIUM Recruit.

Court of Appeals. ( Cited in Hontiveros v. torment. TRADITIO LOQUI FACIT CHARTAM Delivery gives voice to a deed. diametrically opposed. 212 SCRA 725 ) TRANQUILLO .. TRANSIGERE EST ALIENARE To come to an agreement or to reach an understanding (such as compromise) is equivalent to alienation. TOTO CAELO By the whole sky. Manila Motor Co.To give a title to. 1 SCRA 705. 1955. TOTIS VIRIBUS With all one’s might. L-8300. ( Cited in Visaya v. Suguitan. Lindain v. TORTURA LEGUM PESSIMA The torture or wrestling of the law is the worst kind of torture. 926 ). entitle. Altavas. to call. 104 Phil. TOTIDEM VERBIS In so many words. People v. November 13. indicative of a wide difference of opinion. TRACTUM SUCCESSIVUM Reciprocal and repetitive prestation ( Cited in Villaruel v. Verano. TOUT ES QUE LA LOL NE DEFEND PAS EST PERMIS Everything which the law does not forbid is permitted. TORTO Torture. name. 24 Phil. 632 ) TOTIES QUOTIES As often as occasion shall arise.

To make calm or still. TURPO To make ugly or unsightly. to throw into disorder or confusion. . mangled. deprived of some of its parts. divided or divisible into three parts. dejected. TRISTIS Sad. to slay or kill cruelly. massacre. TRUNCUS Mutilated. dismembered. to deform. TRAVAUX PREPARATOIRES Background of legislation. melancholy. TREPIDATIO A state of confused hurry or alarm. transcribe. to butcher. a sign or memorial of victory. TURBO Agitate. TRANSCRIBO To transfer in writing. TUMULTUATIO Tumult. confusion. sorrowful. TRUCIDO To cut to pieces. trepidation. to defile. threefold. mournful. disfigured. TROPAEUM Trophy. TRIPARTITUS Tripartite. consternation. tranquil.

Insular Life Insurance Co. Tuazon. National Labor Relations Commission.16 SCRA 495 ) TUTIUS ERRATUR EX PARTE MITIORE It is safer to err on the gentler side. v. Marcos v. 312 SCRA 47. Court of Appeals. 48 Phil. People v.TUSSIS Cough. defender. Municipal Board of Manila. ( Cited in Etepha. Director of Patents. however slight. 41 Phil.. Vda. Go Jocco. Soriano v. and of things similar. 531. 85. protector. 82. Barretto v.. 98 Phil. 888. 74 Phil. absolute and perfect candor or openness and honesty. Court of Appeals. Tang v. ( Cited in People v. 322 SCRA 331. ( Cited in: Philippine Manufacturing v. 50 Phil. 52 Phil. TUTIUS SEMPER EST ERRARE ACQUIETANDO QUAM IN PUNIENDO It is always safer to err in acquitting than in punishing. Mapa. Camporedondo v. 25 SCRA 70. Aranilla v. 621. ( Cited in: Qua Chee Gan v. _______ U UBERRIMAE FIDEI Of the highest degree of good faith. Contracts of insurance are traditionally contracts uberrimae fidei. Lizada. Court of Appeals. ( Cited in: Osorio v. Benguet Exploration. 246. 65 Phil. 225 SCRA 708 ) TUTOR A watcher. 25 Phil. Barretto v. there is the same legal disposition. v. Nacionalista Party v. 962. 22 1971. 20. 48 Phil. Secretary of Justice v. 363 SCRA 725 ) UBI EADEM RATIO. Go Jocco. IBI EADEM LEGIS DISPOSITIO Where there is the same reason. Inc. there the same law prevails. IBI DECURRITUR AD . Inc. 37430-R. Liboro v. 631 ) Most abundant good faith. Court of Appeals. 218 SCRA 193 ) UBI CESSAT REMEDIUM EXTRAORDINARIUM ORDINARIUM. Macbul. Sablan. December. Chief of Staff.G. 90 SCRA 236. the absence of any concealment or deception. Osorio. A. Fieldmen’s Insurance Co. ( Cited in Edroso v. v. judgment is similar. Lantion. 89 Phil. Co. Law Union and Rock Inc. 296) Where the same reason exist. 351 SCRA 445. De Songco. Philippine Manufacturing Company v.

Primicias v. . there is the same law. 82. NEC NOS DISTINGUERE DEBEMUS Where the law does not distinguish. Inc. 169 SCRA 517 ) UBI JUS INCERTUM. ET RATIO EJUS GENERALIS. 135 SCRA 712. Inc. 65 SCRA 575. 73 Phil. 244. 267 SCRA 408. 607. Philippine Nut Industry. the judgment is the same. UBI JUS IBI REMEDIUM Where (there is) a right there is a remedy. 456. IBI FORTIA NULLA Where there is no act. Ocampo. GENERALITER ACCIPIENDA EST Where the law is special. Daes v. Acting Collector of Customs v. there is no law. 74 Phil. it is necessary that the cause be just and legal. UBI LEX NON DISTINGUIT. Garcia. Court of Tax Appeals. 45. 278. IBI IDEM JUS. it ought to be construed generally. 102 Phil.. This Latin maxim expresses the notion that if a person possesses a right. ( Cited in: Dominado v. ET DE SIMILIBUS IDEM EST JUDICIUM Where the re is the same reason. and the reason of it general. Go Bio. Perez. Andrin. 49 Phil. 78 Phil. NECESSE EST QUOD CAUSA SIT JUSTA ET LEGITIMA Where the law compels a man to show cause. Lacson v. 93 Phil. UBI LEX EST SPECIALIS. Valenzuela. Government Service Insurance System. We Ko. the violation of that right by another necessarily gives rise to a legal or equitable remedy. 356. UBI EADEM RATIO. there can be no force. we should not distinguish. Gabila v. Standard Brands. recourse must be had to an extraordinary one. 446. Mercado v. 42 Phil. 92 Phil. Derayunan. Roque. UBI FACTUM NULLUM. ( Cited in: Apundar v. there is freedom. People v. Barredo v. UBI LEX ALIQUEM COGIT OSTENDERE CAUSAM. IBI JUS NULLUM Where the law is uncertain. UBI DUBIUM IBI LIBERTAS Where there is doubt.Where the ordinary remedy fails. and where there are similar situations. Manila Prince Hotel v. v.

Evaristo. Lubguban. Court of Appeals. there is no transgression. Ilarde. Loyola v. 93 Phil. Robertson. QUO AD MUNDUM Where is no law. Aquino v. 45 SCRA 17. 216 SCRA 431. People. Demafiles v. Court of Appeals. Ilar v. UBI VOLUIT DIXIT. Gimenez. 336 SCRA 458. Manglapus. Marcos v. Commission on Elections. Rubber World (Phils. Court of Appeals. 215 SCRA 79. 276 SCRA 518. UBI NON EST LEX. UBI NOLUIT TACUIT One who wants something says it. 212 SCRA 425. Commission on Elections. Tecson v. Secretary of Finance v. Intermediate Appellate Court. Mustang Lumber. Manguerra. v. 157 SCRA 188. Philippine National Oil Company v. National Labor Relations Commission. one who does not want anything is silent. IBI NON ESWT TRANSGRESSIO. 143 SCRA 397. v. 457 SCRA 32. Court of Appeals. 360 SCRA 515. UBI VIS Wherever it may be. Commission on Elections. 451 SCRA 413. Court of Appeals. 290 SCRA 117. VEL PROCEDENDUM AD SIMILIA Where there is no direct law. ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation. Jr. Commission on Elections.Ykalina v. People v. 248 SCRA 400. Intermediate Appellate Court. 103 SCRA 741. National Labor Relations Commission. Pryce. Recana. Court of Appeals. Peralta v. Cebu Institute of Medicine v. 218 SCRA 203. PLDT v. 234 SCRA 255. 456 SCRA 264. 342 SCRA 449. Intod v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Yu Oh v. Gil. 458 SCRA 218. 41 SCRA 548 ) . Colgate Palmolive Phils. Libudan v. 448 SCRA 575. 257 SCRA 430. or references to be made to similar cases. Tongson v. Guerrero v. 1076. everywhere. 305 SCRA 721. 1 SCRA 267. BAYAN v. Brillantes.) Inc. Tomarong v. 169 SCRA 829. Civil Service Commission. Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) v. 245 SCRA 759. 82 SCRA 427. Diaz v. 150 SCRA 520. 21 SCRA 1462. Banco de Oro Savings & Mortgage Bank v. 349 SCRA 363. Inc. v. Magtajas v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. People v. so far as worldly concerns and matters. 403 SCRA 300. 177 SCRA 668. 215 SCRA 52. Sandiganbayan. Vergara. Lalican v. NKL. Magtoto v. Inc. 215 SCRA 426. v. 63 SCRA 4. People v. anywhere. Dolorfino v. Court of Appeals. Commission on Elections. Cebu Institute of Medicine Employees Union. Salenillas v. 245 SCRA 477. Manggagawa ng Komunikasyon sa Pilipinas. Olfato v. PT & T v. Court of Appeals. 269 SCRA 624. Commission on Elections. Court of Appeals. Commission on Audit. Tan v. 191 SCRA 880. Oricio. the decision of the judge is to be taken. STANDUM EST ARBITRIO JUDICIS. Nitafan. Equitable Banking Corporation. 463 SCRA 418 ) UBI NON EST DIRECTA LEX. 424 SCRA 277. Philippine British Assurance Co. v. Zamora. ( Cited in Palisoc v.

ULTIMUM SUPPLICIUM ESSE MORTEM SOLAM INTERPRETAMUR The extremest punishment we consider to be death alone. Acoje Mining Co. Quezon.. 422. 46 Phil. ULTIMA RATIO The last argument. 82. 59 Phil. ULTIMA LICITUM Beyond what is permitted. ULTRA POSSE NON POTEST ESSE. Pallugna. Montelibano v. City of Naga v. 57 Phil. 5 SCRA 36. City of Lipa. 83. Coleman v. 698. 50 Phil. 219 SCRA 69. Republic v. 153. Palanca.. & Trading Co. Bacolod Murcia Milling Co. v. 271 SCRA 546. . 99 Phil. 325.. 5 SCRA 873. Orozco. Raffinan. final reason. Arong v. Laguna v. take vengeance on. 109 Phil. 399. 437 SCRA 565 ) ULTRA PETITA Beyond that which was sought or prayed for. Jr. Horney v. Modern technical designation.. Barretto v. City of Davao. El Hogar Filipino. ULTRA JURISDICTIO Outside of jurisdiction. Pirovano. ( Cited in: Pascual v. 649. Katon v. the end. Municipality of Binan. the law of corporations. Santos v. and the reverse (what cannot exist is not possible) ULTRA VIRES Beyond the powers. v. Ltd. 975.. 98 Phil. 29 Phil. Government of the Philippines v.. City of Manila v. Alejandrino v.ULCISSOR To avenge one’s self on. Yu v. ULTIMA Final events. 4 SCRA 656. Inc. Court of Appeals. ET VICE VERSA What is beyond possibility cannot exist. 750. 323. La Previsora Filipina. The De La Rama Steamship Co. 96 Phil. 96 Phil. of acts beyond the scope of the powers of incorporations as defined by its charter or act of incorporation. Court of Appeals. Baylon. Court of Appeals. Southern Trans. 19 Phil. East Asiatic Co. Hotel France Co. ( Cited in: Chua v.

United States of America v. v. City of Cotabato. 31 SCRA 320. 413 SCRA 572. People v. Salunat. August 11. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Roxas Electric & Construction Co. Alcuaz. Hornilla v. 167 SCRA 450. Fernando. No. 7 SCRA 361. Crisologo-Jose v. 20 SCRA 592. Intermediate Appellate Court. Cebu Institute of Technology (CIT) v. Bautista v. Cabatuando. Villanueva v. Inc. 436 . Reyes v. Mariano. 143 SCRA 480. 19 SCRA 28. Inc. Conte v. Tolentino v. Court of Appeals. Securities and Exchange Commission. 1981. 427 SCRA 46. Court of Appeals. 432 SCRA 157. 161 SCRA 737. Court of Appeals. Court of Appeals.47859. 32 SCRA 231. Civil Service Commission. Miguel v. Court of Appeals. Villaruel. 193 SCRA 282. May 28. Mayor. 177 SCRA 594. 262 SCRA 492. Lumapas. Laron. Court of Appeals. v. 222 SCRA 486. 405 SCRA 220.. Jr. Inc. 74135. 156 SCRA 632. Intermediate Appellate Court. 1975. v. Makalintal. v. Jr. A. Solicitor General v. Cotabato Light and Power Co. Calleja v. Metropolitan Manila Authority. Palma Development Corporation v. Soria. 325 SCRA 99.R. 212 Phil. Roxas. Asiatic Integrated Corporation v.. The Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the DOJ. C. v. Ople. v. Madrona. Sanidad v. 398 SCRA 203. 160 SCRA 503. 394 SCRA 82. Intermediate Appellate Court. Rural Bank of Buhi. Finance Corporation v. Ocfemia. G. Rural Bank of Milaon ( Camarines Sur) v. Woodchild Holdings Inc. v. 26 SCRA 578. 402 SCRA 330. No. Ferrer-Calleja. Inc. Sandiganbayan. G. 412 SCRA 54. Lopez Realty Inc. Gokongwei. G. Inc. R. Court of Appeals. v. City of Ozamis v. Tenants Assn. Heirs of Eugenia V. 67 SCRA 60. 24 SCRA 856. Liang v. L-37187. October 30. v. G. Municipal Board of the City of Manila. Jr. 173 SCRA 581. Commission on Elections. 247 SCRA 183. B. Bacolod City.R. 264 SCRA 19. 194 SCRA 402. Juinio. 60 SCRA 267. Soriano. v. The Dial Corporation v. No. Zaide. C & S Fishfarm Corp. 312 SCRA 91. Ople. Metrobank v. 204 SCRA 837. L-45911. Honasan v. Twin Towers Condominium Corporation v. Alikpala. Alikpala. Fontecha. 235 SCRA 630. Inc. v. Cebu Institute of Technology (CIT) v. Inc. Fontecha. Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board. 6 SCRA 418. 190 SCRA 182. Commission on Elections. 20 SCRA 895. v.R. April 11. San Mauricio Mining Co. Esso Standard Eastern Inc. Municipality of Malangas. Catalino. Perez v. v. 242 SCRA 211. 162 SCRA 288. Phil. Jr. Commission on Audit. Homeowners Association of the Philippines. Rarang. Court of Appeals. City of Baguio v. 184 SCRA 531. Villacorta v. Inc. De Leon. 76801. Zamboanga del Sur. v. Municipality of Kananga v. v. v. Monetary Board. 211 SCRA 112. Ancheta. v. Limketkai Sons Milling. Provincial Board of Antique.N. 329 SCRA 314. 25 SCRA 938. 163 SCRA 716. Inc. 7 SCRA 242. 1979. 65 SCRA 33. Inc. 323 SCRA 692. Intermediate Appellate Court. L. Court of Appeals. Jr. 307. 146 SCRA 294. Cordero v. Phil. 250 SCRA 523. Atrium Management Corporation v. Lopez Realty. 180 SCRA 218. 219 SCRA 192.. Eastern Assurance & Surety Corporation (EASCO) v. Commission on Elections. Quilts & All. v. 176 SCRA 241. v. No. Insular Bank of Asia & America v. Gamefowl Commission v. City of Iloilo. Hodges v. Jr. Samson v. Court of Appeals. Communications Satellite Corp. House International Bldg. v. Reyes. Hipolito. No. 1995. 204 SCRA 449. G. Tantuico. Mathay. People. Blue Bar Coconut Phils. Salva v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. 340 SCRA 506. 413 SCRA 75. Energy Regulatory Board. Bugnay Construction and Development Corporation v. September 15. Acebedo Optical Co. Secretary of Finance. 175 SCRA 149. 151 SCRA 703. Freedom from Debt Coalition v.. Chavez v. v. 26 SCRA 234. Pechueco Sons Co. v.. Court of Appeals.R.Inc. 73 SCRA 333. Jr. Bernardo. Wylie v. 353 SCRA 23. Asiatic Integrated Corporation v. Court of Appeals. 1992. Casino v. Municipality of Iloilo City.

439 SCRA 130. whole. customary. 457 SCRA 730. Office of the Secretary.SCRA 235. 445 SCRA 471. Ledesma. Airspan Corporation. National Liga ng mga Barangay v. Manila International Airport Authority v. USITATUS Ordinary.. ( Cited in Javellana v. UNO ANIMO With one mind. city life. Laguio. UNO ACTU In a single act. DOLE. 455 SCRA 308. USACAPIO CONSTITUTA EST UT ALIQUIS LITIUM FINIS ESSET Prescription was instituted that there might be some end to litigation. City of Manila v. aggregate. UNO EADEM DIE AC TEMPORE IN EADEM LOCO On this same day and time. USU-CAPIO . UNITAS Unity. UNIVERSITAS University. in the same place. familiar. Laguna Autoparts Manufacturing Corporation v. 97 Phil. ) UMBRA Shade. USQUE AD MEDIUM FILUM AQUAE VIAE As far as the middle of the stream or road. Jr. Paredes. common. city fashion. 258 ) URBANITAS Living in the city.

National Labor Relations Commission. . 502) UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT That it may be rendered effective than void. v. to acquire by prescription. principle in international law whereby belligerents hold possession of conquered land. ( Cited in: Javellana v. 761. Paramio. Tolentino v. ( Cited in: Almeda v. Mirasol. 15 SCRA 514. UTI POSSIDETIS As you hold. town. JMM Promotions & Management Inc. v. 40 Phil. 220 SCRA 197. UTILE PER INUTILE NON VITIATUR That which is useful is not impaired by the superfluous. USUFRUCTUARIUS Usufructuary. v. Marsaman Manning Agency. Davao Integrated Port Stevedoring Services v. v. Inding v. Florentino. Florentino. UT SAEPE As often. 15 SCRA 517. Ordonez. one who has the use and profit but not the property of a thing. Sandiganbayan. v. 199 SCRA 373. Intermediate Appellate Court. Inc. 313 SCRA 88 ) That construction is to be sought which gives effect to the whole of the statute. Allied Banking Corp.its every word. 427 SCRA 732. Director of Prisons. USURPATOR Usurper. 228 SCRA 129. 434 SCRA 388 ) URBS City. Inc. Secretary of Finance. Almeda v. Abarquez. 87 Phil. UTI ROGAS I vote as you propose. One who uses or takes possession unlawfully. ( Cited in Sales v. 192 SCRA 246. Radiola-Toshiba Phils. Philippine Employ Services & Resources Inc. National Labor Relations Commission.To acquire ownership of a thing by long use. 235 SCRA 630.

821) UXOR SEQUITUR DOMICILIUM VIRI The wife follows the domicile of her husband. UXOR (UX. holder of anything. security. . without owner. ( Cited in Manzanares v.USQUE AD NAUSEAM To the point of disgust. service. VADIMONIUM Recognizance. VADIUM VIVUM A species of security by which the borrower of a sum of money made over his estate to the lender until he had received that sum out of the issues and profits of the land. _______ V VACATIO Being free from a duty.) Wife. Moreta. unoccupied. bail. sheath. empty. VALET ANCHORA VIRTUS Virtue is an effective anchor. VACANS Vacant. a freeing or exempting dispensation. 38 Phil. VANESCO To disappear. A woman lawfully married. VAGINA The covering. A promise secured by bail for appearance on a particular day before a tribunal. pass away.

ardently. comeliness. elegance. VEL NON Did he devise or not. Turingan. VE-CORS Destitute of reason. VENIAE FACILITAS INCENTIVUM EST DELINQUENDI Facility of pardon is an encouragement to crime. VENERATIO The highest respect. vehicle. grace. silly. VEHICULUM A means of transport. attractiveness. insane. reverence. surety. VAS A bail. VEHEMENTER Vehemently. VENESTUS Loveliness. mad. 282 SCRA 424 ) VENDENS EANDEM REM DUO FALSARIUS EST He is fraudulent who sells the same thing to two persons. charm. VENIA AETATIS Privilege of age. foolish. a carriage. senseless. VENIRE FACIAS DE NOVO . earnestly. veneration. security. ( Cited in People v.VARIUM ET MUTABILE SEMPER FEMINA A woman is always a fickle and changeable creature. beauty. impetuously.

INTELLIGENDA SUNT Words concerning a different matter are to be understood by the matter preceding and not by that following. NON PER POSTERIUS. 44 Phil. Co Tiamco v. 885. 434 SCRA 65. v. Director of Lands v. Francisco. INTELLIGUNTUR DIGNIORI ET POTENTIORI SENSU Equivocal words. 9. 35 Phil. 13 Phil. Burgos. VERBA INTENTIONI. 247. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. 45 Phil. VERBA IN DIFFERENTI MATERIA PER PRIUS. Inc. Payet v. Sotto. VERBA LEGIS The language of the law. v. Yu Cong Eng v. 243 SCRA 165. and such as are put in doubtful sense. 385. 75 Phil. Corro. Cerezo v. Southern Cross Cement Corporation v. 2 Phil. ( Cited in: Julia v. 47 Phil. v. AC IN DUBIO SENSU POSITA. Ocampo. the judgment awards a venire facias de novo. 59 Phil. not the intent to the words. People v. Tecson v. Inc. NON E CONTRA. Diaz. Jr. Enriquez. 15 Phil. A writ directing a new trial after a mistrial. Que Ping. National Food Authority v. 31 Phil. v... 445 SCRA 1. Trinidad. Valdez v. Maccoy.Lorenzo v. 321 ) VENTE AUX ENCHERES An auction. People v. Bustos. Bustos. Lugay v. 84. 690.S. 17. The appeal is a procedure which comes to us from the civil law along with the fundamentals which go to make up the jurisprudence of a court of equity. People’s Law Enforcement Board. 425. 40 Phil. 55 Phil.S. Standard Oil Co. 62 Phil.. U. 425. Inc. Tamayo v. U. 453 SCRA 70 ) VERBATIM Word for word. DAR v. 30 Phil. Osea v. Department of Education and Sports.You may cause to come. 66 Phil. Director of Lands. 34 SCRA 898. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp. Tamparong. 424 SCRA 277. 426 SCRA 217.S. 415 SCRA 44. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawang Pilipino. 559. 74 Phil. Gsell. 375 SCRA 285. 33 Phil. . If error is found. Masada Security Agency. VERBA EAQUIVOCA. 362.. People v. Commission on Elections. Tacalinar v. 228. v. of New York. DEBENT INSERVIRE Words ought to be made subservient to the intent. ( Cited in U. Oanis. are to be understood in the more worthy and effectual sense. Malaya. Enriquez v. Locsin. ( Cited in: Fianza v. Ramos. La Lugal-B’laan Tribal Association. 974. Bonzon v. 375. 33 Phil. Philippine Cement Manufacturing Corporation. 257. 953.

Santos v. 11 SCRA 508.. Sandiganbayan. People v. writings remain. Payopay. Court of Appeals. 847. 403 SCRA 222. People v. Office of the Court Administrator v. Dizon v. 417 SCRA 431. Santiago v. v. 228 SCRA 214. People v. Jimemez v. v. Calamlam. 95 Phil. 217 SCRA 517. 398 SCRA 567. 45 SCRA 16. Diokno. Silvela. 412 SCRA 282. Jr. Laurel v. Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation. Court of Appeals. Inc. Patayek. Inc. National Merchandising Corporation. Electruck Asia. De la Cruz v. Makati. 422 SCRA 356. 152 SCRA 65. 107 Phil. 210 SCRA 107. Vinecario. Jr.Y. Rullepa. Intermediate Appellate Court. 261 SCRA 573. Mendoza v. Primicias v. San Miguel Brewery Corp. 399 SCRA 624. People v. 426 SCRA 485. Secretary of Labor & Employment. Inc.672. Tiu v. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Rayoan v. 24 SCRA 86. People v. 180 SCRA 668. Adaza v. 414 SCRA 395. Rivera v. 773. Sanchez. 215 SCRA 540.. 40 SCRA 625 ) . Basilio. People v. 61 SCRA 265 ) VERBA VOLANT. Commission on Elections. Surtida. 468 SCRA 688 ) VERBATIM ET LITERATIM Word for word and letter for letter. 424 SCRA 63. Inc. Lam v. Liberty Flour Mills. 131. Realty & Development Corporation. Foncardas. 427 SCRA 15. Bautista. Gavina. 203 SCRA 110. Stonehill v. 21 SCRA 1434. 452 SCRA 335. People v. In the matter of the alleged improper conduct of Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Anacleto D. Superable. 322. v. 79 Phil. National Labor Relations Commission. Inc. SCRIPTA MANENT Words pass. Tavora v. Branch 63. 262 SCRA 492. Urbanes. Sarmiento District Corporation. Fugoso. v. Meris. Unicane Workers Union-CLUP v. People v. Sandiganbayan. People v. People v. Republic v. Victrionics Computers. 80 Phil. Tan. 92 Phil. 439 SCRA 409. People v. Angeles v. 157 SCRA 706. 397 SCRA 665. Esparagera v. 417 SCRA 463. Roa. Gulf Resorts Inc. Garcia. Co. 18 SCRA 232. 426 SCRA 29. Badoy. v. 411 SCRA 288. 100 Phil. People v. 421. 1025. Solivel v. 163 SCRA 534. Valdez. Garchitorena. 191 SCRA 671. 405 SCRA 548. Deliva v. Intermediate Appellate Court. 464 SCRA 460. Court of Appeals. Aquizap v. 420 SCRA 280. Sara. Distileria Limtuaco & Co. 242 SCRA 565. 394 SCRA 350. J. Chung Ka Bio v. Liberty Flour Mills Employees v. Calimlim. 187 SCRA 797. Sunga. 421 SCRA 376. 435 SCRA 310. Olondriz. Francisco. Heck v. 170 SCRA 298. Lepanto Consolidated Mining. Inc. v. People v. People v. 84 Phil. Diaz. v. 150 SCRA 329. Go. Fronda. Navarro. Magallanes v. Court of Appeals. 399 SCRA 480. One should not give more weight and reliability to the selfserving testimony of a party bound by their contract than to the contents thereof.. Murillo v. People v. Jr. 395 SCRA 231. Ramos v. Madera. 401 SCRA 46.. Santos. 458 SCRA 550. People v. People v. IFC-Service Leasing & Acceptance Corporation v. Wright. RTC. People v. Rural Progress Administration. Jr. 20 SCRA 383. People. 795. Guerrero. Francisco. National Labor Relations Commission. Tan. v. ( Cited in Development Bank of the Philippines v. Guido v. Maqueda. Mabelin. Agsalog. 103 Phil. ( Cited in Keramik Industries. Chua. 399 SCRA 490. 426 SCRA 624. People v. 71.

VERE DICTUM Truly said. A QUONCUNQUE DICITUR. VERIDICUS That speaks the truth. Commission on Audit. 441 SCRA 532) VERBIS OBLIGATIO Verbal contract. 471) VERBIS STANDUM UBI NULLA AMBIGUITAS Where there is no ambiguity. bashful. the words should be adhered to. 245 SCRA 588. Re: Request of Assistant Court Administrator for Upgrading of their Rank. 298 SCRA 83. 326 SCRA 158. 282 SCRA 256. 1978 ) VERBOSITAS Multiplicity of words. v. diffident. Government Service Insurance System v. 362. 67 Phil. VERECUNDUS Shame faced. National Labor Relations Commission. November 21. there must be no departure. National Federation of Labor v. veridical. Court of Appeals. Leonard. by whomsoever pronounced is from God. Sison v. Fabella v. Salary and Privileges upon the effectivity of RA 9282. ( Cited in Uy Tam v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of First Instance. National Labor Relations Commission. Court of Appeals. 30 Phil. Inc. Enjay. reality. A DEO EST Truth. v. ( Cited in: Cordero v. ( SEC Opinions. Philippine Ports Authority. Commission on Elections. VERITAS LIBERABIT VOS .VERBIS LEGIS NON EST RECEDENDUM From the language of the law. wordiness. Court of Appeals. verbosity. VERITAS. VERITAS Truth. 440 SCRA 16. 253 SCRA 212. 304 SCRA 170. coy.

VETO . VERITAS ODIUM PARIT Truth begets hatred. Losano. that transforms himself or itself. VERITAS SIMPLEX ORATION EST The language of truth is simple. 247 SCRA 317. 311 SCRA 590 ) VERITAS VOS LIBERABIT The truth will set you free. skilled. VETITUM That which is forbidden or prohibited. VETERANUS Experienced. VERSIPELLIS That changes its shape or form. a forbidden or prohibited thing. ( Cited in: People v. People v.Truth shall make you free. Yabut. that alters its appearance. Malunes. VERUM-TAMEN Nevertheless. rightly. really in fact. 310 SCRA 707. VERITATEM DILEXI I have loved the truth. VERE According to truth. however. but yet. VEREDICTUM Declaration of truth. People v.

169. Tenorio v. 191 SCRA 952. Chow. 259. Valera v. 206 Phil. Nueno v. Mercury Drug Co. 83. 29. 404 SCRA 360. Quezon.I forbid. Severino v. Neri v. Bengzon v. Government of the Philippines v. Pecson. 65. Auditor General. Corpus v. Rodriguez. 67 Phil. 100 SCRA 177. 228. Inc. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. 317.S. Court of Appeals. Gonzales v. 601. 49 Phil. Secretary of Interior. Bolinao Electronics. Chiong v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. De la Llana v. Leonardo v. Ichon. 305. People v. ( Cited in: Yangco v. Dinglasan. Aldecoa v. 462. 781. 1. Santos v. Aquino. Kuroda v. 79 Phil. 603. Jalandoni. Merville Development Corporation v. 248 SCRA 300. Nazareno. 34 SCRA 632. VIA By way of. Executive Secretary. Valencia. 128 SCRA 173. Joaquin v. 65 Phil. People v. Alejandrino v. 368. 48 Phil. Court of Appeals. Dimayuga. Sangguniang Bayan of Dasol. 38 Phil. Peralta. 444. Quezon City. Branch 85. 56. Court of Tax Appeals. Galay v. 92 Phil.. People v. 18 Phil. 573. Castle Brothers.. 420 SCRA 379. Herrera. Sison. Gella. Ark Travel Express. 206 Phil. 423 SCRA 497. Javier v. 413 SCRA 234. Lobaton. Alba. Peralta v. 623. Villegas v. Veloso. Insular Collector of Customs. Rural Transit Co. Inc. Orlanes.. Vera v. Pelino v. 198 Phil. Soriano v. Blanco. 257. Veneracion v. Francisco. Vera. 15 SCRA 569. 7. v. Dayao. Land Car Inc. Mabanag v. Republic v. City of Manila. 18 SCRA 1034. Marcos v. Wise & Co. 76 Phil. Pelaez v. Panay Autobus Co. 62 Phil. 62 SCRA 416. 202 Phil. 1525. Inc. 94 Phil. Marcos v. U. 451. Ozaeta v. 210 Phil. 41. 604. 417 SCRA 307. City of Manila. 366. 365. Fuentes. 705. Ballester. Court of Appeals. 108 Phil. Bull. Abalos. 47 Phil. Auditor General. 18 Phil. People v. Castro v. Pangasinan. 797. 966. Villena v. 309. Javellana v. Court of Appeals. Rohde. 11 SCRA 486. 704. Vito. China Banking Corporation. Enriquez. Commission on Elections. Villegas. Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp. 71 SCRA 176. 84 Phil. 204 Phil. People v. 81. 171. Mayor of Manila. 16 Phil. Inc. Serapio v. City of Naga v. v. 256. Santos v. 191. 468. Macaraig. 416. Bengzon v. 93 Phil. 177 SCRA 808. In re: Dick. 94 Phil. 37 Phil. 208 SCRA 133. Pia v. Tecson . People v. Abrogar. Posadas. 202 Phil. Secretary of Finance. 675. v. Manila Hotel. 52 SCRA 119. Court of Appeals. 716. 1 Phil. v. Bautista. 205 Phil. Employees Compensation Commission. Sandiganbayan. Mariveles Shipyard Corporation v. Bachelor Express. Angeles. Director of Prisons. Drilon. Lee v. 1. 354 SCRA 112. Pilar v. Governor General of the Philippine Islands. 59 Phil. 77 Phil. Tolentino v. vexatious. Garcia v. 93. Congson Ice Plant & Cold Storage. 15 Phil. Sr. U. 50 SCRA 30. 80 Phil. Samanillo v. ( Cited in: Conde v. Regional Trial Court.S. 12. 285. 185 SCRA 329. Philconsa v. v. Arnault v. 83 Phil. 70. 87 Phil. 415 SCRA 573. Macaraig. Secretary of Justice. 78 Phil. 64 Phil. Agna. 69 Phil. 50 Phil. Subido v. v. 415 SCRA 386.. 75 Phil. 424. Araneta v. Public Service Commission. 400 SCRA 543. Cabigao v. 396 SCRA 443. Arevalo v. City of Manila. Francisco v. 53 Phil. 69 Phil. 212 Phil. Zobel v. 410 SCRA 148. 206 Phil. 235 SCRA 630. Springer. Tobias v. 581. 83 Phil. v. v. 912. City of Manila v. 84 Phil. 235 SCRA 506. 46 Phil. Santos. 250 SCRA 629 ) VEXATIVUS Causing annoyance. Quilatan. People v. 208 Phil. 404. Paas v. Avelino. Almarvez. In re: Cunanan. 30 Phil. 39 SCRA 106.

v. 4 Phil. Castaneda. 504. IN re: Frank Stanley Allen. 3 Phil. In re: Augustus A. v. 398. Panganiban. 58. 112. Tongco v. Balubar. Melencio.S. 64 Phil. Inc. 461.S. Maano. Inc. v. 2 Phil.S. People v. Goko. People v.S. Gonzales.. v.S. Uy. Licas. Manila . Ballentine. 718. 3 Phil. 56. namely. 471.S. 201. v. Highfill. U. CFI of Lanao del Norte. C. 434 SCRA 159. Zaragoza v. 492. Ringor. People v. Aenlle & Co. 577. 424 SCRA 277. v.S. 5 Phil. 449 SCRA 57. 4 Phil. 480. U. Cortes v. Tan v. General Milling Corporation. Donladson v. 230. Heinszen & Co. U.S. ( Cited in: Inchausti v. v. 3 Phil. v. v. Resurreccion v. U. People v. lavin.S. 5 Phil. U.M. 698. 429 SCRA 364. Gal-lang.S. Saber v. Scarella. Zanz v.. 435 SCRA 610. Aquino v. McGovern. Secretary of Finance. Dominguez. 516. 436 SCRA 484. 429 SCRA 711. 521. 4 Phil. Manio. 342.S. Court of Appeals. 467 SCRA 449. Michelena.S. Cruz v. 390. Ejandra. U. JCT Group. 2 Phil. Ubinana. Vera. Siena Realty Corporation v. 4 Phil. Sparrevohn v. 2 Phil. 71 Phil. Medina. U. 3 Phil. Nubla. Inc. v. 5 Phil. U. 2 Phil. 235 SCRA 630 ) VIDE A word of reference. 592. 708. v. 154 SCRA 153. 68 Phil. Bermudez-Lorino. 1 Phil. 428 SCRA 422. Grafton. 4 Phil. 204. Inchausti. Paez. Meyer & Co. 2 Phil. Court of Appeals. Santos. 609. U. U. 373. O.S. 27. Commission on Elections. Caroz. 682. 3 Phil. Ringor v. Johnson. Gatchalian v. Yambao. Sandiganbayan. v. Pastor v. Santiago. 306 SCRA 639 ) VIDELICET That is to say.v. 468 SCRA 555.S. 185. Bank of the Philippine Islands v. 337. De Guzman. Araullo. to wit. U. v. Celorico. U. 437 SCRA 259. ( Cited in: U. 467 SCRA 52. 456. 331.N. Republic v. 1 Phil. Mendoza v.S. 2 Phil. 483.. 65 Phil. Manalo. 2 Phil. Aglipay v. 6 Phil. 60 Phil. Calabia. Quiroz v. Goldloop Properties. 468 SCRA 633) VIA TRITA EST TUTISSIMA The trodden path is the safest. 676. 63 Phil. J. 675. People v.S. Pangilinan v. v. 590. Mandap.S. 6 Phil. Jonathan Landoil International Company. Tapel. 40 Phil. De la Cruz. 3 Phil.S. Araullo v. Development Corporation v. 332. Inc. 3 Phil. L. Mattie E. 239. 4 Phil. Bicol University. v. Philippine Fisheries Development Authority v. Jones. U. De la Torre v. Douglas. Philippine Export & Foreign Loan Guarantee Corporation. Behn. v. Tan-Guinlay. Abbreviated as viz.S. v. 66. Pacheco.S. 4 Phil.S. Professional Regulations Commission v. 285. Branch III.S. 451. Levy v. 43 Phil. v. v. People v. 1 Phil. v. 453 SCRA 529. 4 Phil. U. U. McCullough v. 4 Phil. Insular Government. 5 Phil. De la Torre. Montagne & Frank E. Fisher. 643. 3 Phil. Ruiz. Colley. 432 SCRA 505. v. Smith. People v. 487. 4 Phil. Mangudatu. v. R. Gardner. 766. 55 Phil. Gaspar. Peralta.F. Lopez.S. 458. v. 67 Phil. Campbell and Gotau-co v. 312. U. Peralta v. 3 Phil. PCI Leasing & Finance. 120. ( Cited in: Rosales v. Manaul. 68 Phil. People v. 54 Phil. 720. 112. U. v. 630. Nobleza. 134. 428 SCRA 410. 454 SCRA 586. 384. Tolentino. v. 64 Phil. Dorr.S. U. U. People v. U. 6 Phil. 5 Phil. Court of Appeals. Miguel v. Santiago. 64 Phil. v. Tolentino v. Francisco v. 299. U. 468 SCRA 542. 4 Phil. Lienau v. 436 SCRA 559. v. v. U. 55. 984. U. 567. 4 Phil.

R.Jockey Club. Behn v.. A. Alvarez. 657. Trinidad. Iloilo Ice and Cold Storage Co. U. 34 Phil. 17 Phil. Philippine Natioal Bank. 626. Green. 98. Province of Albay. 12 Phil.S. Barreto v. 42 Phil.M..S. Government of the Philippines v. 45 Phil. J. Rodriguez v. 9 Phil.. U.S. 487. 1.S. 523. 188. v. Insular Collector of Customs. v.Sv. 16 Phil. Serra v. Cadwalladeer Co. 772. U. 24 Phil. 504. Magno. Arriola v. 7 Phil.S. Alcera v. 27. 235. Narcida v. 22 Phil. 901. Ltd. 48 Phil. U. Urrutia & Co. Moir.S. Torres v. 74. Herrero. Asensi. 32 Phil. U. Manzanares v. G. v. 37 Phil. Moir. Bell. 28 Phil. Bagta v. Molero. De Guzman. 603. 7 Phil. 21 Phil. 48 Phil. 717. Allen v. 315. Kalambakal v. 649. 544. Enriquez. 458.S. 14 Phil. 29 Phil. Cassells v. Orosa. Tan Chiong Chan v. A. 152. China Fire Insurance & Co. 30 Phil. Soy Chuy. 9 Phil. Guamis v. 9 Phil. U. Somes v. Hager v.S. U. Tan Tiap Co. Co. Bean v. 244. 545. Inchausti & Co. 24 Phil. U. Johnston. 20 Phil.C. 49 Phil. v. U.A. 40 Phil. Gomez. U. Cameron Forbes v. 804. 611. 278. v. v. v.S. 8 Phil. De la Pena v. 23 Phil. Hidalgo. U. v. 30 Phil. Lopez. Riodique.O. Dade. Del Rosario. Gomez v. 22 Phil. Mijares. Insular Collector of Customs. Fernandez. W. Macias & Co. 558. Porter Hamilton. 36 Phil. 291. S. Esteban. v. E. 35 Phil. Dragon v. Kilayko.S. v. 5. Macapinlac v. Rabajante v.S. Philippine Sugar Estates Development Company. v. W. Yap Tico. 22 Phil.S. 24 Phil. Government of the Philippine Islands v. 450. Hermanos v. Municipality of Tabaco. 750. U. Compagnie Franco-Indochinese v. Mirasol v. 29 Phil. v. Joson. 34 Phil. Bowen. U. Roman v. U. 17 Phil. 17 Phil. Nuemark & Co. 43 Phil. 663. 273..S. 12 Phil.S.. Ipil. U. Pitt.. 826. 805. 10 Phil. 130. U. 419. 18 Phil. Gsell v. The Manila Railroad Company v. 919. 46 Phil. 345. 921. 48 Phil. 821. 606. Bingham. Yap-Jue. Roa v. 580. Pamatmat. Municipal Council of Iloilo. 643. Tria. 252. v. v.S. v. 266.S. 461. 27 Phil.S. 418. Fernandez v. v. Murphy v. 47 Phil. v. Balcorta. U. 611.. Concepcion. Pua Casim & Co. Gutierrez.S. E. 35 Phil. 303. v. Rosal. 36 Phil. Olsen & Co.S. Carlos. 44 Phil. U. 352. 245. Lizarraga Hermanos v. 35 Phil. Herridge. 6 Phil. U. 44 Phil. Nery. U. Suarez. 43 Phil. Tuazon. Gabriel. Lane. Yu Con v. 9 Phil. Yap-Jue. 14 Phil. Topacio. F. Antonino. 471. El Debate v. Calvo. Government of the Philippines v. Insular Collector of Customs. Philippine Vegetable Oil Co. 133. Julian v. 13 Phil.W. 416. 519.S.S. 35 Phil. 523. de laCerna. 46 Phil. 16 Phil. In re: L. 630. Deutsch Australische Dampschiffs Gesellschaft. Ganaway v. U. Ortega. Herrera v. Gimenez. Panganiban v. 22 Phil. Kuenzle & Streiff (Ltd) v. Palanca. Walter E. . 38 Phil. 100. 17 Phil.S. 355. 199. U. 135. Quimson v. 1. v. v. 41 Phil. Soliman. Tabotabo v. 36 Phil.S. Attorney-General. 608. Robinson v. 33 Phil. Rafferty. Villanueva. 38 Phil. O’Brien v. Yueng Sheng Exchange and Trading Company v. 728. Cornejo v. v. Cowper v. Gsell v.S. 518.. 16 Phil. 27 Phil. v. 549. v. 342. Molina. 770. 47 Phil. 26 Phil. Franco v. 239. 41 Phil. Tiaco. Paguio. Roxas v. 50 Phil. 12 Phil. People v. 45 Phil. Findlay & Co. 47 Phil. 477. 703. 534. Williams. Government of the Philippines v. 365. 14 Phil.. 29 Phil. Tagal v. 22 Phil. 399. Reid. B. v. 501. 41. Paras. /El Hogar Filipino. U. U. v. 9 Phil. Moreta. v. Samaniego. 42 Phil. Philippine engineering Co. Altavas v. 8 Phil. 25 Phil. 45 Phil. 22 Phil. 555.S. Quillen. W. 354. Suan. Bryan. 466. 367. Jariol. U. 12 Phil. v. 294. Santiago v. Cuevas. 627. 8 Phil. Barreto. Alimurong. v. Philippine National Bank v. 857. 643. Kelly. Tan te v. 16 Phil. v. 610. 13 Phil. 15 Phil. v. 48. 388. 25 Phil. Bachrach v. 410. 404. 72. U. 472. Panganiban. British American Assurance Co. Cosio v. 49 Phil. 10 Phil. 12. Roman Catholic .M. 907. 14 Phil. 9 Phil. 161. Penalosa v. De la Quinta. O’Brien. Ong v. 747. 227. 42 Phil. 49 Phil. 41 Phil.S. 34 Phil. Lutero.M. 371. 222. El Banco-Espanol-Filipino v. 359. 6 Phil. 31 Phil. 247. People v. 388. U. 7 Phil. Carrero. The Ship “Alta”.

Arte Espanol Iron works Labor Union v. 110 Phil. 375. Manila Gas Corporation. 224 SCRA 529. 99 Phil. Republic of the Philippines. Espuelas v. . Praxedes. 613. 302. People v. Villanueva v. Chung v. Araos. Po Giok To. 74 Phil.. Untalan v. 65 Phil. Cornejo v. Bangug. 945. 59 Phil. 101 Phil. Concepcion v Jalandoni. National Leather Co. 415 SCRA 44. Sanchez. Advertising Associates. 101 Phil. 877. Inc. Collector of Internal Revenue. Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communication v. 825. O. Carag v. 618. Santos. 78 Phil. Trigal v. Alcoba. Inc. 98 Phil. Silvestre v. 185. 97 Phil. Hebron v. 934. Montejo. Government of the Philippines v. 90 Phil. 57 Phil.v Director of Lands. 264 SCRA 11. v. Neri v. Collector of Internal Revneue v. 66 Phil. 756. Webb. People v. 75 Phil. Cadocio. 108 Phil. v. 101 Phil. 228 SCRA 602. Dailisan v. United States Life Insurance Co. Floriza v. 104 Phil. Contreras v. 845. 260. 412 SCRA 10. Matubis v. 312 SCRA 573. 557. 806. Lazaro v. Warden of the Provincial Jail. MartirGuanzon. 410. Inc. Blossom & Co. Insular Lumber Company. Diokno. Aspalin. 12. 56 Phil. 76 Phil. 102 Phil. Gabriel v. Court of Appeals. 570. Ramirez . Inc. 1080. 73 Phil. Aquino. Court of Appeals. Locson. v. 96 Phil. v. 58 Phil. Walker Rubber Corporation v. 102 Phil. People v.325. Villafranca v. 87 Phil. Valencia. 57 Phil. Collector of internal Revenue. Macadaeg. Castillo. De la Rosa v. 78 Phil. 297. J. Municipality of Wright and Abegonia. 76 Phil. Inc. Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities v. 53 Phil. 1 SCRA 130. 809. 50 Phil. 104 Phil.v Dipay. 97 Phil. Joe’s Radio & Electrical Supply v. 307. 85. Montenegro v. 333. 52 Phil. Toledo. 89 Phil. Springfield Fire and Marine Insurance Company. 104 Phil. 564. 7. Bugay. 367. Francisco. 378 SCRA 128. Wagner. 454. Commissioner of Customs v. People v. 59 SCRA 136. 18. mariano. Vera. 404. People . People v.. People v. 322. 1040. 80 Phil. 990. People v. 93 Phil. 561. 277. 509. Pedret. 102 Phil 719. 54 Phil. Naval. Camara. People v.. 789. Manlolo. Nederlandsch Indische & Handelsbank. 402. Rivera. Mendiola v. Omega. 686. v. 524. De la paz v. United Seamen’s Union of the Philippines. Ana. 51 Phil. Anis v. Insular Collector of Customs. 55 Phil. v. 655. De Prieto v. People v. 62 Phil. Angeles.E. Nueno v. Fisches. Grey v. Sebastian So Eng So. Dialdas v. 60 Phil. 627. JG Summit Holdings. 102 Phil. 53 Phil. 50 Phil. 283. People v. Maconfray & Co. Locsin. Southern Motors v. Patente v. People v. Ang Giok Chip v. 2 SCRA 1154. Golez v. Secretary of Education. 105 Phil. Jr. Compania Maritima v. Mendiola. Hidalgo. People v. 98 Phil. Reyes. Guekeko v. 132. Mabalot. Inc. 72.Bishop of Nueva Segovia v. Yan v. v. 76 Phil. M. De Borja. Inc. People v. Municipality of Hinabangan and Rufina Nabual v. People v. 1 SCRA 588. Alto Electronics Corporation. 165. Felix. Carlos. Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. 114. Tarok. 54 Phil. People v. Nagmamalasakit na mga Manananggol ng mga Manggagawang Pilipino.. 73 Phil. Court of Tax Appeals. El Pueblo de Filipinas v. Manila Tobacconists. Jalandoni v. Sabilul. 55 Phil. 363. Tobias. Santos. Kapisanan ng mga Manggagawa sa Manila Railroad Company v. 2 SCRA 168. 462. 1 SCRA 593. 649. Palisoc v. 100 Phil. 59. 55 Phil. v. 833. In re: Ong Sun Cui v. 412 SCRA 224. Enrile. Collector of iNternal Revenue. 109 Phil. 394. 101 Phil. perdices. Nueno v. 102 Phil. Premium Marble Resources. 96 Phil. 1 SCRA 93. 65 Phil. 97 Phil. People.. Jr. Collector of Internal Revenue v. Gatchalian. Court of Appeals. 104 Phil. 636. Cabaddu. 78 Phil. 664. 923. Cebu Arrastre Service v. 218. Cristobal. Santos. Sta. Mira Hermanos. National Labor Union v. 859. Court of Appeals. 107 Phil. People v. Inc. 368. 87. 74 Phil. 627. 60 Phil. Akutin. 56. 100 Phil. Sarangani v. People v. 239. 1 SCRA 87. 101 Phil. 175. Adriano. People v. 226. Board of pampanga. Contreras. People v. Perez. Carandang. 237.

Commission on Elections, 415 SCRA 614, Shoppers Paradise Realty and Development Corporation v. Roque, 419 SCRA 93, Tecson v. Commission on Elections, 424 SCRA 27, People v. Islabra, 426 SCRA 547, People v. Cadampog, 428 SCRA 336, People v. Sabardan, 429 SCRA 9, Pasong Bayabas Farmers Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 429 SCRA 109, People v. Tira, 430 SCRA 130, People v. De los Reyes, 430 SCRA 166, People v Leonor, 431 SCRA 223, Freedom From Debt Coalition v. Energy Regulatory Board, 432 SCRA 157) VIDEO To perceive, mark, observe, discern, understand, comprehend, be aware. VIDUUS Deprived or bereft of a husband or wife, bereft of a lover, spouseless, mateless, widowed. VI ET ARMIS With force and tools/implements/arms. In old cases for trespass, a plaintiff often alleged that the defendant had damaged the property by using force or some device. ( Cited in: Perkins v. Perkins, 57 Phil. 205, Montenegro v. Castaneda, 91 Phil. 882, Aquino, Jr. v. Enrile, 59 SCRA 183 ) VICUS An open sore other than a wound that discharge pus. ( Cited in Landicho v. Workmen’s Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-45996, March 26, 1979 ) VIGILANTE PROSPICIUNT JURA The law protects him who is watchful of his rights. ( Cited in: Esguerra v. Tecson, 21 Phil. 521, Salao v. Salao, 70 SCRA 65 ) VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS AEQUITAS SUBVENIT Equity aids one who has been vigilant. ( Cited in: Parsons Hardware Co. v. Court of Appeals, 69 Phil. 419, Dozellier v. David, 37 Phil. 435, Barretto, v. De la Paz, 59 Phil. 845, Mendoza v. Cayas, 98 Phil. 107, Sterling Products International, Inc. v. Farberkenfabriken Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, 27 SCRA 1214, Delima v, Tio, G.R. No. L27181, April 30, 1970, G. A. Machineries, Inc. v. Janutro, G. R. No. L-27958, March 31, 1973, Ramos v. Ramos, 61 SCRA 284, Cruz v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-40880, October 23, 1979, G.A. Machineries Inc. v. Juanito, 50 SCRA 1, De la Cruz v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. L-61969, July 25, 1984, Nera v. Auditor General, 164 SCRA 1, Felipe Ysmael, Jr. & Co. Inc. v. Deputy Executive Secretary, 190 SCRA 673, Jacob v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 92159, July 1, 1993, Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G. R. No. 109430043, December 28, 1994, Magno v. Philippine National Construction

Corporation, 198 SCRA 230, Young v. Court of Appeals, 204 SCRA 584, Gonzales v. Chavez, 205 SCRA 816, Abad v. CFI of Pangasinan, Branch VIII, 206 SCRA 567, Sy v. Romero, 214 SCRA 187, People v. Rostata, Jr., 218 SCRA 657, Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 239 SCRA 529, Salandanan v. Court of Appeals, 290 SCRA 67, Ochogabia v. Court of Appeals, 304 SCRA 587, Eduarte v. Court of Appeals, 311 SCRA 18, Akbayan-Youth v. Commission on Elections, 355 SCRA 318, Heirs of Ernesto Biona v. Court of Appeals, 362 SCRA 29, Miwa v. Medina, 412 SCRA 275, Republic v. Agunuy, Sr., 451 SCRA 735, Romero v. Natividad, 461 SCRA 553 ) VIGILANTIBUS ET NON DORMIENTIBUS JURA SUBVENIUNT The laws serve the vigilant, not those who sleep. ( Cited in: Director of Lands v. Abada, 41 Phil. 71, Soliva v. The Intestate Estate of Marcelo M. Villalba, 417 SCRA 277 ) VIGILIUM Sleepless, wakefulness. VILIPENDO Despise, to hold in slight esteem. VILIS Cheap, of small price or value, purchased at a low rate. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET To repel force by force is lawful. VINCULUM Tie ( Cited in Estrada v. Escritor, 408 SCRA 1, Tenebro v. Court of Appeals, 423 SCRA 272, Abunado v. People, 426 SCRA 562) VINCULUM JURIS Legal relationship or tie. ( Cited in: Chinese Chamber of Commerce v. Pua Te Ching, 16 Phil. 409.) A legal bond. (Cited in: Leung Ben v. O’Brien, 38 Phil. 182, Cangco v. Manila Railroad Co., 38 Phil. 768, Maclan v. Garcia, 97 Phil. 119, Republic v. De los Angeles, G.R. No. L-26112, April 11, 1972, Iglesia ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals, 199 Phil. 1, Yabut v. Lilles, 52 SCRA 37, Asuncion v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 109125, December 2, 1994, De Ysasi, III v. National Labor Relations Commission, 231 SCRA 173, Ang Yu Asuncion v. Court of Appeals, 238 SCRA 602, Tibay v. Court of Appeals, 257 SCRA 126, Garcia v. Recio, 366 SCRA 437, Equitable Leasing Corporation v. Suyom, 388 SCRA 445, Union Bank of the Philippines v. Santibanez, 452 SCRA 228 )

VINCULUM MATRIMONI The marriage tie. ( Cited in De los Reyes v. De Castro, 48 Phil. 123 ) VINDEX A claimant, one who lays legal claim to a thing. VIOLO To treat with violence, dishonor, outrage. VIRAGO A manlike woman; a fierce or abusive woman. VIRGINALIS Virgin, virginal, of or belonging to a maiden. VIR ET UXOR CENSENTUR IN LEGE UNA PERSONA Husband and wife are considered one person in law. VIRGINITAS, VEL CASTITAS CORRUPTA RESTITUI NON POTEST Virginity or chastity, once defiled, cannot be restored. ( Cited in People v. Luague, 62 Phil. 504 ) VIRTUTE CUJUS By virtue whereof. VIRTUTE OFFICII By virtue of his office. By the authority in him as the incumbent of that particular office. ( Cited in: Lamb v. Phipps, 22 Phil. 456, U.S. v. Santos, 36 Phil. 853, Zamora v. Wright, 53 Phil. 613, Balais v. Abuda, 146 SCRA 56, Sarigumba v. Pasok, 155 SCRA 646, Hipolito v. Mergas, 195 SCRA 38, Wenceslao v. Madrazo, 247 SCRA 696, Ulat-Marrero v. Torio, Jr., 416 SCRA 177)

17 Phil. ( Cited in: Government v.. Inc. Tan Keh. VIS LEGIBUS EST INIMICA Violence is inimical to the laws. 81 Phil. 26 Phil.. 466. 926. Evidence that is given by live testimony (i. Baco River Plantation Co. 43 Phil. Song Fo & Co. 577. Urrutia v. 521. Bingham.) do not impose liability on the party damaged thereby. 82. Romulo. acts of God. Cabrera. 210 SCRA 18 ) VITIUM Error. VIVA VOCE By or with a living voice. 26 Phil.e. fire. 113. Many contracts state that certain occurrences which are beyond the control of the parties (e. VIS ET METUS Force and fear. Co Cham v. 3. fault. flood. Gotesco Investment Corporation v. Gardiner v. De Villaroel v.g. 75 Phil. Piccio. Manila Motor Co. ( Cited in: Hidalgo v. 50 SCRA . Executive Secretary. VIVAMUS ATQUE AMEMUS Let us live and love. 104 Phil. etc. 13 Phil. VIS INERMIS An unarmed force. Oria. VIS MAJOR A greater or superior force. People v. Javellana v. VIS A TERGO Force from behind. v. Crossfield. a person who appears and testifies in court) is generally preferred to evidence in affidavits or other documents. acts of war..VIRTUTIS AMORE By the love of virtue. 558. Board of Election Inspectors v. 632. 33 Phil.. Such an occurrence is often referred to as a vis major. Chatto.

VOTIVITAS A solemn promise. VOLUNTAS IN DELICTIS NON EXITUS SPECTATUR In crimes. 179 SCRA 5.R. De Venecia. Garciano v. Court of Appeals. 229 SCRA 355. Sison. 104 Phil. proclaim. Court of Appeals. the intent and not the result is regarded. 664. Juco v. Ilocos Norte Electric Co. 425. 1992. 399 SCRA 50 ) VOLENS ET POTENS Willing and able. 174 SCRA 80. Director of Prisons. Court of Appeals.. v. 417 SCRA 503) VOCIFICIO To cry aloud. 452 SCRA 532 ) VOLUNTAS Volition. will. Arroyo v. 279 SCRA 647. pleasure or delight. People v. 33 Phil. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. there is no injury. VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA To one who is willing. No. Servicewide Specialists Inc. Executive Secretary. ( Cited in Lim v. G. enjoyment. Sanchez v. Balmori v. G. ( Cited in: Cerezo v. 183. L41480. 35 Phil. Suyantong. 96126. 285. Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. v. VOLUPTUOSUS Full of gratification. 75 Phil. Central Bank of the Philippines. VOLUNTAS TESTATORIS AMBULATORIA EST USQUE AD MORTEM The will of the testator is changeable up to the moment of his death. Peralta v. 43 Phil. a vow. Perfecto. 1976. 80 Phil. People v. 589.30. 277 SCRA 268. Gatchalian. 887. 43 Phil. intention. 477. VOLENS Willing. Reyes. Court of Appeals. August 10.R. Farinas v. Intermediate Appellate Court. . April 30. Sy v. This Latin phrase expresses the tort doctrine of assumption of risk. Commission on Audit. No. utter a loud cry. Fortune Corporation v. Gsell. Tamayo v.

( Cited in Pamil v. ZONAM SOLVERE To untie the girdle. 1 SCRA 899 ) VOX EMISSA VOLAT. ( Cited in Blas v. VOX POPULI VOX DEI The voice of the people is the voice of God. to marry a woman. Teleron. LITERA SCRIPTA MANET The spoken word flies. . the written letter remains. Santos. 86 SCRA 413 ) VULGO To spread among the multitude. to make known to all by words.VOTUM MORTIS CAPTANDAE The desire of the grantee for the early death of the grantor particularly in contracts de praesenti with deferred execution. to publish.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful