You are on page 1of 13

1. Macariola vs.

Asuncion judge cannot own land which was the subject of litigation and he was
the presiding judge of said litigation, Macariola said he violated the Code of Commerce which
says that judges are not allowed to hold office in any commercial or industrial companies, but
since the provision of the Code of Commerce is a political law, when there is a change of
sovereignty, the political laws of the former sovereign are automatically abrogated unless
retained by the new sovereign
a. Political law definition
2. Francisco vs. House of Representatives Davide case, no 2 impeachment complaints may be
filed within a year
a. Verba legis, ratio legis est anima, ut magis valeat quam pereat
3. Manila prince hotel vs. gsis manila hotel auction, art. Xii section 10 par. 2 In the grant of rights,
privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give
preference to qualified Filipinos
a. Self-executing provision
4. Tolentino vs. comelec proposal to reduce the voting age from 21 to 18, no piecemeal
ratification, there should be only one plebiscite, to allow such would deprive people of a proper
frame of reference
a. No piecemeal amendments
b. Doctrine of proper submission
5. Lambino vs. comelec - proposal to change government from bicameral to unicameral and
presidential to parliamentary, not an amendment but a revision
a. Revision definition
b. Amendment definition
c. Two-part test: quantitative and qualitative
d. The people must sign the proposal which must be embodied in the petition
e. Initiative applies only to amendment
6. Defensor-santiago vs. comelec the provision in art. Xvii section 2 is not self-executing and RA
6735 which provided for a system of initiative and referendum, was inadequate to cover the
system of initiative to amend the Constitution
7. Angara vs. electoral commission Electoral Commission should be followed instead of National
Assembly with regards to the time when protests can be filed, the former being the sole judge
of all contests relating to the election, returns and qualifications of the members of the National
a. Judicial review definition
b. Constitutional supremacy
8. Ynot vs. intermediate appellate court
a. Lower courts can decide constitutional questions (Art. 8 Sec 5 Par. 2)
9. Occena vs. comelec
a. Checking function of judicial review nullify acts of coordinate branches
b. Legitimating function of judicial review sustain the validity of acts of coordinate branches
10. Salonga vs. cruz pano
a. Symbolic function of judicial review - educating bench and bar on the extent of protection
given by constitutional guarantees
11. Gonzales vs. narvasa constitutionality of the creation of the Preparatory Commission on
Constitutional Reform, court dismissed the petition because by then the PCCR had ceased to
exist having finished its work and having submitted its recommendations to Pres. Estrada
a. Moot and academic part of actual case requisite (first requisite) for judicial review
12. Alunan III vs. mirasol SK elections
a. Moot and academic, but court decided it because it was capable of repetition, yet evading
13. Ibp vs. Zamora petition seeking to nullify the order of Pres. Estrada for the deployment of the
Philippine Marines to join the PNP in visibility patrols around the Metro Manila area
a. No locus standi (legal standing) proper party (2
requisite for judicial review)
14. Serrano de agbayani vs. pnb moratorium law
a. Operative fact doctrine
15. Salazar vs. achacoso illegal recruitment
a. If a part or parts of the law are declared unconstitutional, the valid portion can stand
independently as law (partial unconstitutionality)
16. Collector of internal revenue vs. campos rueda tangier, morocco
a. State definition (Pounds formulation)
17. Mercado vs. manzano dual citizenship disqualification in the Local Government Code really
meant dual allegiance
a. Dual citizenship versus dual allegiance
b. For candidates for office with dual citizenship, it is enough that they elect Philippine
citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of candidacy to terminate their status as
persons with dual citizenship
18. Valles vs. comelec - Father was Spanish subject on April 11, 1899, so he was a Filipino citizen
according to Sec. 4 of the Phil. Bill of 1902 and she followed the citizenship of her father on the
principle of jus sanguinis
a. Dual citizenship versus dual allegiance
b. For candidates for office with dual citizenship, it is enough that they elect Philippine
citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of candidacy to terminate their status as
persons with dual citizenship
c. Organic acts and their provisions regarding citizenship
d. That she was a holder of an Australian passport and had an alien certificate of registration
do not constitute effective renunciation of Filipino citizenship; for renunciation to effectively
result in the loss of citizenship, it must be express.
19. Calilung vs. datumanong petition to declare Republic Act No. 9225, entitled "An Act Making
the Citizenship of Philippine Citizens Who Acquire Foreign Citizenship Permanent, Amending for
the Purpose Commonwealth Act No. 63, As Amended, and for Other Purposes unconstitutional
a. By swearing to the supreme authority of the Republic, the person implicitly renounces his
foreign citizenship and shifts the burden of confronting the issue of whether or not there is dual
allegiance to the concerned foreign country
20. Co vs. hret whether the hret acted with grave abuse of discretion when it declared that
respondent Jose Ong, Jr. is a natural born Filipino citizen and a resident of Laoang, Northern
Samar for voting purposes
a. Attack on ones citizenship may be made only through a direct, not a collateral proceeding
b. Exercise of the right of suffrage and participation in election exercises constitute a positive
act of election of Philippine citizenship
21. Tecson vs. comelec Fernando Poe, Jr. case
a. Organic acts and their provisions regarding citizenship
b. Grandfather was a resident of the Philippines during April 11, 1899 and benefited during the
en masse naturalization that happened, transferred his citizenship to the father, and father
transmitted it to his son even though he (son) is illegitimate
22. Moy ya lim yao vs. commissioner of immigration deportation of Moy ya lim yaos wife, lau
yuen yueng
a. an alien woman marrying a Filipino, native born or naturalized, becomes ipso facto a Filipina
provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines (possesses none of the
b. naturalization vests citizenship on wife if she herself may be lawfully naturalized
c. all the wife needs to do is to file before the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation a petition
for the cancellation of her Alien Certificate of Registration. Upon the grant of the cancellation of
the ACR, she may then take the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and thus
become a citizen of the Philippines
23. In Re: Ching - wanted to practice law, was already over 14 years after he reached the age of
majority when he complied with requirements for election of Philippine citizenship
a. Reasonable time after reaching the age of majority (3 years)
24. Republic vs. dela rosa many irregularities which punctuated the petition and the proceedings
in the application for naturalization of Juan Frivaldo, so the decision granting Filipino citizenship
was deemed a nullity
a. Repatriation was a valid mode of the reacquisition of Filipino citizenship since the repatriation
law for natural-born citizens (P.D. 725) was not repealed by Pres. Aquinos Memorandum of
March 27, 1986
25. Republic vs. li yao availment of a tax amnesty does not have the effect of obliterating his lack
of good moral character
a. A certificate of naturalization may be cancelled if it is subsequently discovered that the applicant
obtained it by misleading the court upon any material fact
26. Frivaldo vs. comelec
a. Loss of citizenship by naturalization in a foreign country
b. repatriation retroacted to the date of filing of application for repatriation
27. Angat vs. republic
a. The Special Committee on Naturalization created by P.D. 725 is chaired by the Solicitor General
with the Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and the Director of the National Intelligence
Coordinating Agency as members, and it is before this Committee that a petition for repatriation
is filed
28. Altarejos vs. comelec
a. repatriation retroacted to the date of filing of application for repatriation
29. bengson III vs. hret Cruz, natural-born Filipino, lost his Philippine citizenship when he enlisted
in the US Marine Corps
a. the act of repatriation allows the person to recover, or return to, his original status before he
lost his Philippine citizenship
30. tabasa vs. CA
a. the privilege of repatriation under RA 8171 is available only to natural-born Filipinos who lost
their citizenship on account of political or economic necessity and to their minor children. To
claim the benefit of RA 8171, the children must be of minor age at the time the petition for
repatriation is filed by the parent.
31. Republic vs. villasor
a. Basis of state immunity from suit (philosophical): there can be no legal right as against the
authority that makes the law on which the right depends
b. Consent to be sued does not include consent to the execution of judgment against it, since
government funds and properties may not be seized under writs of execution or garnishment
32. Republic vs. Feliciano
a. Test to determine if suit is against the state
b. The complaint against the state must allege the existence of such consent and where the same
is found, otherwise, the complaint may be dismissed
c. Express consent can be given only by an act of the legislative body in a general or special law
33. Pnb vs. cir
a. For an incorporated government agency, if the charter provides that the agency can sue and be
sued, the provision on the charter provides express consent on the part of the state to be sued
34. Lansang vs. ca
a. Where the public official is sued in his personal capacity, the doctrine of state immunity will not
apply, even if the acts complained of were committed while the public official was occupying a
public position
35. Merritt vs. gpi
a. Special law granting consent of state to be sued
b. Government not held liable for damages because it was not acting through a special agent
36. US vs. ruiz
a. Implied consent of the state when the state enters into a business contract
b. Contracts entered by the state in jure imperii (sovereign acts) as distinguished from contracts in
jure gestionis (commercial or proprietary acts)
37. US vs. dorr
a. Government definition
38. Gpi vs. monte de piedad
a. Doctrine of parens patriae
39. Co kim cham vs. tan keh
a. De jure vs. de facto government
40. Lawyers league vs. Aquino
a. De jure vs. de facto government
41. Sec. of justice vs. lantion
a. International law is equal, not superior to, national legislative enactments
42. Philip morris. vs. ca
a. International law is equal, not superior to, national legislative enactments
43. Tanada vs. angara World Trade Agreement does not violate Sec. 19, Art II of the Constitution
44. Calalang vs. Williams
a. Social justice definition and concept
45. Oposa vs. factoran petititioners, minors duly joined by their respective parents, had a valid
cause of action in questioning the continued grant of Timber License Agreements for
commercial logging purposes, because the cause focuses on a fundamental legal right
a. The right to a balanced and healthful ecology
46. Valmonte vs. Belmonte
a. Right to information and full public disclosure
47. Mariano vs. comelec
a. The Constitution does not preclude Congress from increasing its membership by passing a law
other than a general apportionment law
48. Tobias vs. abalos
a. Reapportionment of legislative districts may be made through a special law
49. Sema vs. comelec
a. Congress cannot validly delegate to the ARMM Regional Assembly the power to create
legislative districts
b. Nothing in Sec. 20, Art. X of the Constitution authorizes autonomous regions, expressly or
impliedly, to create or reapportion legislative districts
c. The power to increase the allowable membership in the House of Representatives and to
reapportion legislative districts is vested exclusively in Congress
50. Bantay republic act vs. comelec
a. Comelec has a constitutional duty to disclose and release the names of the nominees of the
party-list groups, citing Sec. 7, Art. III of the Constitution on the right of the people to
information on matters of public concern as complemented by the policy of full disclosure and
transparency in Government
51. Veterans federation party vs. comelec
a. 4 inviolable parameters: a) 20% allocation, b) 2% threshold c) 3-seat limit d) proportional
b. Formula for additional seats
52. Partido ng manggagawa vs. comelec
a. Formula used in the landmark case of Veterans federation party for additional seats shall be
53. Ang bagong bayani vs. comelec
a. Even if major political parties are allowed by the Constitution to participate in the party-list
system, they must show, however, that they represent the interests of the marginalized and
b. Guidelines to be followed in order that a political party registered under the party-list system
may be entitled to a seat in the House of Representatives
54. People vs. jalosjos
a. Membership in Congress does not exempt an accused from statutes and rules which apply to
validly incarcerated persons
55. Osmena vs. pendatun
a. A member of Congress may be held to account for such speech or debate by the House to which
he belongs
b. The determination of the acts which constitute disorderly behavior is within the full
discretionary authority of the House concerned, and the Court will not review such
determination, the same being a political question
c. Rules adopted by deliberative bodies are subject to revocation, modification or waiver at the
pleasure of the body adopting them
d. Parliamentary rules are merely procedural, and with their observance courts have no concern
56. Jimenez vs. cabangbang
a. A member of Congress may be held to account for such speech or debate by the House to which
he belongs
57. Adaza vs. pacana
a. Forfeiture of the seat in Congress shall be automatic upon the members assumption of such
other office deemed incompatible with his seat in Congress
58. Avelino vs. cuenco
a. The basis in determining the existence of a quorum in the Senate shall be the total number of
Senators who are in the country and within the coercive jurisdiction of the Senate
59. Arroyo vs. de venecia
a. The question of quorum cannot be raised repeatedly, especially when a quorum is obviously
present, for the purpose of delaying the business of the House
b. Court is bound under the doctrine of separation of powers by the contents of a duly
authenticated measure of the legislature (enrolled bill theory)
c. A legislative act will not be declared invalid for non-compliance with the internal rules of the
House as long as there is no violation of constitutional requirements or rights of private
60. Santiago vs. sandiganbayan
a. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act does not state that the public officer should be suspended
only in the office where he is alleged to have committed the acts charged
61. Mabanag vs. lopez vito
a. Court is bound under the doctrine of separation of powers by the contents of a duly
authenticated measure of the legislature (enrolled bill theory)
62. Casco vs. Jimenez
a. If a mistake was made in the printing of the bill before it was certified by Congress and approved
by the President, the remedy is amendment or corrective legislation, not a judicial decree
63. Astorga vs. villegas
a. Enrolled bill prevails over journal entry, except as to matters which, under the Constitution,
must be entered in the Journal
64. Morales vs. subido
a. Enrolled bill prevails over journal entry, except as to matters which, under the Constitution,
must be entered in the Journal
65. Tanada vs. cuenco
a. Proportional representation of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
66. Pimentel vs. hret
a. Only if the House fails to comply with the directive of the Constitution on proportional
representation of political parties in the HRET and Commission on Appointments can the party-
list representatives seek recourse from this Court through judicial review (doctrine of primary
administrative jurisdiction)
67. Guerrero vs. comelec
a. Once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office as a
Member of the House, the Comelecs jurisdiction over the election contest relating to his
election, returns and qualifications ends, and the HRETs own jurisdiction begins
68. Angara vs. electoral commission
a. The Electoral Tribunal is independent of the Houses of Congress
69. Daza vs. singson
a. Composition of the Commission on Appointments
70. Coseteng vs. mitra
a. Composition of the Commission on Appointments
71. Guingona vs. Gonzales
a. A political party must have at least two elected senators for every seat in the Commission on
b. It is not mandatory to elect 12 Senators to the Commission; what the Constitution requires is
that there must be at least a majority of the entire membership
72. Farinas vs. executive secretary
a. Rider definition
b. The title of a bill is not required to be a complete index of its contents
73. Tolentino vs. secretary of finance
a. Presidential certification dispensed with the requirement not only of printing and distribution
but also that of reading the bill on separate days
b. It is not the law, but the bill, which is required to originate exclusively in the House of
Representatives, because the bill may undergo such extensive changes in the Senate that the
result may be a rewriting of the whole
c. The Constitution does not prohibit the filing in the Senate of a substitute bill in anticipation of its
receipt of the bill from the House, so long as action by the Senate as a body is withheld pending
receipt of the House bill
d. It is within the power of the Bicameral Conference Committee to include in its report an entirely
new provision that is not found either in the House bill or in the Senate bill
74. Philippine judges association vs. prado
a. The jurisdiction of the Bicameral Conference Committee is not limited to resolving differences
between the Senate and the House versions of the bill; it may propose an entirely new provision
75. Bolinao electronics vs. Valencia
a. A partial veto is invalid; it is allowed only for particular items in an appropriation, revenue or
tariff bill
76. Gonzales vs. macaraig
a. Item veto
77. Philippine constitution association vs. enriquez
a. Any provision blocking an administrative action in implementing a law or requiring legislative
approval for executive acts must be incorporated in a separate and substantive bill
b. inappropriate provisions can be vetoed
c. The spending power (power of the purse) belongs to Congress, subject only to the veto power of
the President; while it is the President who proposes the budget, the final say on the matter of
appropriation is lodged in Congress
d. The power of appropriation carries with it the power to specify the project or activity to be
funded under the appropriation law
e. The Senate President or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and not ordinary
members of Congress, shall approve the realignment of savings
f. The Chief of Staff cannot realign savings; such right must and can be exercised only by the
g. Impoundment definition
78. Tanada vs. tuvera
a. Effectivity of laws
79. Guingona vs. carague automatic appropriation for debt service
a. The sum authorized to be released must be determinate, or at least determinable
80. Demetria vs. alba
a. Prohibition against transfer of appropriations from one department to another
81. Sabio vs. Gordon EO of Pres. Aquino exempting the PCGGs members to testify or produce
evidence in any judicial, legislative or administrative proceeding is unconstitutional
a. Power of legislative investigation
b. The right of the people to access information on matters of public concern generally prevails
over the right to the privacy of ordinary financial transactions
c. The power of contempt in a legislative inquiry is indispensable and useful
d. Power of inquiry is not only granted to the Senate and the House but also to their respective
committees; committees can also use the power of contempt
82. Bengzon vs. senate blue ribbon committee
a. Power of legislative investigation should be in aid of legislation
83. Standard chartered bank vs. senate committee on banks
a. The mere filing of a criminal or administrative complaint before a court or quasi-judicial body
should not automatically bar the conduct of legislative inquiry; exercise of sovereign legislative
authority, of which the power of legislative inquiry is an essential component, cannot be made
subordinate to a criminal or an administrative investigation
b. Legislative inquiry does not violate the right to privacy
c. Legislative inquiry does not violate the right against self-incrimination, because the persons
called to testify are not being indicted as accused in a criminal proceeding but are merely
summoned as resource persons or as witnesses; they will not be subjected to any penalty by
reason of their testimony
84. Neri vs. senate committees
a. The conduct of the investigations do not comply with the Constitution if there is failure to
publish the rules of procedure on legislative inquiries
b. Under the Constitution, the president is the repository of the commander-in-chief, appointing,
pardoning and diplomatic powers, and the information relating to these powers may enjoy
greater confidentiality than others (executive privilege)
c. One of the types of executive privilege is the presidential communications privilege
d. The power to enter into an executive agreement with other countries is a quintessential and
non-delegable power of the President
e. Proximity test
85. Arnault vs. nazareno
a. Punishment of contumacious witness may include imprisonment for contempt for the duration
of the session, but principles of due process and equal protection will have to be considered
86. Senate vs. ermita
a. The aim of the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is to elicit information that may be
used for legislation, while aim of conducting a question hour is to obtain information in pursuit
of Congress oversight function
b. The requirement for Cabinet Members to secure Presidential consent during question hour is
valid, but their appearance in inquiries in aid of legislation is mandatory, unless a valid claim of
executive privilege is made either by the President himself or by the Executive Secretary acting
for the President
c. Executive privilege definition
d. Necessity for withholding the information must be of such a high degree as to outweigh the
public interest in enforcing that obligation in a particular case
87. Soliven vs. makasiar
a. While president is immune from suit, she may not be prevented from instituting suit
88. Estrada vs. arroyo
a. After his tenure, the president cannot invoke immunity from suit for civil damages arising out of
acts done by him while he was president which were not performed in the exercise of official
b. Elements of a valid resignation: intent to resign and act of relinquishment
89. Civil liberties union vs. executive secretary
a. President and his official family (e.g. Cabinet members) cannot hold other offices; the
prohibition covers both public and private office employment
90. Villena vs. secretary of the interior
a. The President is the Executive of the Government of the Philippines and no other, and that all
executive authority is thus vested in him
91. Mondano vs. silvosa
a. Stricter interpretation of executive power, e.g., the Presidents power of general supervision
over local governments could be exercised by him only as may be provided by law
b. Control definition
92. Marcos vs. manglapus
a. Residual powers of the President
93. Matibag vs. benipayo
a. An ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately
and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office,
and the fact that it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments does not
alter its permanent character
b. 2 causes to terminate ad interim appointment specified in the Constitution: disapproval of the
appointment by the Commission on Appointments, or adjournment by Congress without the
Commission on Appointments acting on the appointment
c. When the Commission on Appointments disapproves an ad interim appointment, the appointee
can no longer be extended a new appointment; absent such decision, the President is free to
renew the ad interim appointment
94. Sarmiento vs. mison
a. The only categories of appointments which require confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments: heads of executive departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and those other
officers whose appointments are vested in the President in the Constitution
95. Quintos-deles vs. committee on constitutional commissions
a. The appointment of a sectoral representative by the President is specifically provided for in the
Constitution so it falls under those other officers whose appointments are vested in the
President in the Constitution, thus requiring the confirmation of the Commission on
96. Concepcion-bautista vs. salonga
a. The appointment of the Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights is not otherwise
provided for in the Constitution or in the law, thus, there is no necessity for such appointment
to be passed upon by the Commission on Appointments
97. Calderon vs. carale Art. 215 of the Labor Code, insofar as it requires confirmation by the
Commission on Appointments of the appointment of the NLRC Chairman and commissioners, is
98. Rufino vs. endriga
a. A statute cannot circumvent the constitutional provisions on the power of appointment by filling
vacancies in a public office through election by the co-workers in that office, thus, because the
challenged section of the law is unconstitutional, it is the President who shall appoint, by virtue
of Sec. 16 which provides that the President has the power to appoint officers whose
appointments are not otherwise provided by law
99. De rama vs. ca
a. There is no law that prohibits local executive officials from making appointments during the last
days of their tenure
100. Denr vs. denr employees
a. Alter ego principle or doctrine of qualified political agency
b. The power of the President to reorganize the National Government may validly be delegated to
his Cabinet Members exercising control over a particular executive department
101. Dadole vs. COA
a. Power of general supervision ONLY of local governments and autonomous regional
102. Pimentel vs. Aguirre
a. A basic feature of local fiscal autonomy is the automatic release of LGU shares in the national
internal revenue; withholding 5% of the Internal Revenue Allotment is unconstitutional because
the power of the President over local governments is only one of general supervision, and not
one of control
103. Gudani vs. senga
a. Commander-in-chief powers
b. An officer whose name was dropped from the roll of officers cannot be considered to be outside
the jurisdiction of military authorities when military justice proceedings were initiated against
him before the termination of his service
104. David vs. arroyo
a. Calling-out power
b. Declaring a state of emergency calls for the exercise of awesome powers which cannot be
deemed as harmless or without legal significance
105. Ibp vs. zamora
a. Calling-out power is discretionary
106. Lacson vs. perez
a. The President has discretionary authority to declare a state of rebellion
b. In calling out the armed forces, a declaration of a state of rebellion is an utter superfluity; at
most, it only gives notice to the nation that such a state exists and that the armed forces may be
called to prevent or suppress it
107. Sanlakas vs. reyes
a. Presidents authority to declare a state of rebellion springs in the main from her powers as chief
executive and, at the same time, draws strength from her commander-in-chief powers
108. Monsanto vs. factoran
a. Pardon cannot restore public offices forfeited
109. Torres vs. Gonzales
a. Conditional pardon
110. Vera vs. people
a. To avail of the benefits of an amnesty proclamation, one must admit his guilt of the offense
covered by the proclamation
111. Bayan vs. zamora
a. Treaty vs. executive agreement
112. Fabian vs. desierto
a. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court without its
advice and concurrence
113. Villavert vs. desierto
a. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court without its
advice and concurrence
114. Re request for special division
a. It is within the competence of the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its power to promulgate
rules governing the enforcement and protection of constitutional rights and rules governing
pleading, practice and procedure in all courts, to create a Special Division in the Sandiganbayan
which will hear and decide the plunder case against Pres. Estrada
115. In re edillon
a. The practice of law is not a property right but a mere privilege, and as such must bow to the
inherent regulatory power of the Supreme Court to exact compliance with the lawyers public
116. Maceda vs. Vasquez
a. Power of administrative supervision over all courts and personnel
117. Martinez vs. ca
a. The words the motion poses nothing new is adequate compliance with the provision that
states No petition for review or motion for reconsideration shall be refused due course or
denied without stating the legal basis therefor
118. In re Gonzalez
a. The Tanodbayan is without authority to conduct an investigation on charges against a member
of the Supreme Court with the end in view of filing a criminal information against him with the
Sandiganbayan because if convicted in the criminal case, the Justice would be removed, and
such removal would violate his security of tenure
119. De la llana vs. alba
a. The abolition of then existing judicial offices did not violate security of tenure
120. Nitafan vs. cir
a. Imposition of income tax on salaries of judges does not violate the constitutional prohibition
against decrease in salaries
121. Marcelino vs. cruz
a. Provision regarding periods for decision is merely directory, being procedural in nature
122. Lee hong kok vs. david
a. Regalian doctrine
123. Godinez vs. pak luen
a. Land sold to an alien which was later transferred to a Filipino citizen, or where the alien later
becomes a Filipino citizen, can no longer be recovered by the vendor, because there is no longer
any public policy involved
124. Ramirez vs. vda de Ramirez
a. Hereditary succession is an exception to the rule of non-ownership of lands by aliens
b. The exception does not apply to testamentary dispositions