Persons Scutarius Legis EH409

Let's start with section 2. Section 2, has been the subject of seeming endless debate with the part of the decision which touches on the issue of publication. (sic) Some of the parties
the bar. This is the provision that says that laws should take effect after 15 days following in this case was that RA 7169 took effect on March 10 1992. 15 days following its
the completion of publication in the Official Gazette, (sic) newspaper of general circulation, publication on February 24 1992. So it was the issue as to the specific date of effectivity
unless otherwise provided. The last phrase there unless otherwise provided, has been the was raised. According to the Central Bank and the liquidator, March 10 was the effectivity.
subject of perinneal debates whether this clause refers to the need for publication of How did the Supreme Court took up this decision? The Supreme Court addressed this
whether this clause unless otherwise provided refers only to the date of the effectivity of decision in two fronts. Number one, which is the main justification is this: according to the
the law. If this clause refers to the need for publication, the interpretation there is the Supreme Court, while it is a general rule that publication is necessary for the validity of the
publication will be dispensed with if the law itself provides so. But if this clause unless law, the law making body, Congress for example, has the authority to provide for
otherwise provided refers to the date of effectivity then the interpretation would be that exception as when the law itself provide that it be effective immediately upon approval.
publication is indispensible but the law making body may provide that it would be effective Looking at the provision of RA 7169 particularly Section 10 thereof: it says there that this
either shorter than 15 days or longer than 15 days following publication. But in any case, act shall take effect immediately upon approval. The law was approved by President
publication is necessary. And with the absence of a specific date of effectivity after Aquino, January 2, 1992 and the Supreme Court said: Contary to the claim of the Central
publication, 15 days apply. What is the correct interpretation of Section 2? This is Bank that it took effect on March 10, 1992, that law took effect on January 2, 1992, the day
answered finally in the case of Tanada vs Tuvera. This case traces its umbilical cord to the it was signed by President Aquino into law pursuant to Section 2. Second justification
political atmosphere of the Philippines during the Marcos (sic). During the regime of which is more of an alternative reasoning of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court went
Ferdinand Marcos, various presidential issuances were kept in the dark. Citizens were on to say that assuming that publication is necessary so obviously in its first justification
prosecuted for violating laws which were not made known to the public. After the EDSA publication is not necessary because an exception was provided by Congress by stating in
revolution and the Cory government took over during which time democracy was Section 10 that it would be effective immediately upon approval. But according to (sic)
supposed to be restored. A group of militant lawyers headed by Lorenzo Tanada, member considering that publication is still necessary to validity, it is a fact that RA 7169 was
of the famous Mabini, went to court suing the government to comply the government to indeed published on February 24, 1992 and so contrary to the claim of the Central Bank
publish various Presidential Issuances issued during the time of Ferdinand Marcos. The and the liquidator that it took effect on March 10, 1992. When in fact it took effect on
bone of the contention in this case is the issue of whether or not a law can be valid without February 24, 1992, the day it was published implying that when Section 10 states it shall
publication. Bringing to forth, Section 2 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. The Supreme take effect immediately upon approval that approval refers to publication. Obviously,
Court in Tanada vs Tuvera made a definitive categorical and absolute rule that for a law to given the reasoning of the Supreme Court in this case, particulary on the first justification.
be valid, publication is indispensible. The reason being that due process demands that Obviously, this is in conflict with the categorical language of Tanada vs Tuvera. Because in
before a citizen can be expected to comply a law and before the government can impose Tanada vs Tuvera, there was no exception. The Supreme Court said, made a definitive
penalties for non-compliance with the law, that law has to be published. It would the heart ruling that publication is indispensible, the word is not only necessary but indespensible
of absurdity to exact compliance and impose penalty to non-compliance for violating a law and nowhere in the book and cases of the Tuvera ruling did it say that Congress or the law
which is not made known to the subject which it has supposed to govern. Due process making body may provide for exception. Or that publication may be dispensed with. If you
demands for it. So the Supreme Court said that laws must come to the clear light of the look at Tanada, the ruling, the requirement for publication is really absolute. And obviously,
sun instead of sulking with the shadows with the deep dark sectors. That was how the it should be absolute. Given the reason behind the need for publication is due process,
Supreme Court articulated Tanada vs Tuvera. This ruling stabilizes everthing until this that is constitutional in origin. So, the question now is which ruling is controlling?
recent case, Philippine Veterans Bank, that came into being. Years after Tanada, the Remember, the Philippine Veteran Bank came later, and in Statutory Construction or in
Supreme Court came back with a ruling in the Philippine Veterans Bank vs Judge Vega law, normally, in case of conflict between two decisions of the Supreme Court, the later
which somehow stirs the already settled pool in the case of Tanada. Now, letswalk decision prevails. Because the later decision contains the recent the more recent
through the case of Philippine Veterans Bank. This involved the liquidation of Philippine sentiments of the court. And when the court renders a decision in the later case, it is to be
Veterans Bank. At that time, the Bank was in the brink of closure. Liquidation is that pressumed that the court took note of the previous ruling on the same issue. So when the
process where the business of the corporation, this is a process leading to the eventual Supreme Court rendered the ruling in Philippine Veterans Bank, it is logical to assume that
closure of the business of the corporation. Where the assets are settled, the obligations they took note of the ruling in Tanada and when they came up with the ruling inconsistent
are settled and the assets are distributed to the stock holders whatever remains after with Tanada, there is sense in the argument that the Supreme Court could have
settling all the obligations. So, this is prelude of the ceasation of the operation of the superceded Tanada. (sic) I have searched in vain for an answer but I can not find any
business. Towards its end, a liqudation proceeding were commenced before the Regional ruling that clarifies this inconsistent position of the Supreme Court. But my personal take
Trial Court presided (sic). However, during the pendency of the liquidation proceedings, a on this is, that between this two conflicting ruling. I would say that the Tanada is and
new law was passed. RA 7169. This law mandates the rehabilitation of Philippine should be the controlling one. And this is not without basis. Now let me cite you my
Veterans Bank which is the very same corporation or bank subject of the liquidation justification for this position. First, while Philippine Veterans Bank came up years after
proceedings. Now, while liquidation contemplates the cessation of the corporation, Tanada, we should not lose sight of the fact that under Article 8, Section 4, Paragraph 3 of
rehabilitation on the other hand requires the restoration of business. So these two the Philippine Constitution the provision govern the judiciary. There is a provision there
proceedings are diametrically opposed to each other. But despite the effectivity of RA that stays in fact that no judgement or principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in a
7169, judge Vega continued to assume jurisdiction over the liquidation proceedings and decision rendered either in en banc or division maybe modified or reversed except by
continued to issue orders involving acts of liquidation which is inconsistent with the Supreme Court sitting en banc. In other words, if the Supreme Court decides an issue
purpose of RA 7169. And so some parties questioned the actuations of the judge in the enunciates a doctrine or principle of law in one case, and that case is decided either in en
court. Then the primary issue is whether or not Judge Vega has jurisdiction to continue banc, meaning the whole complement of 15 justices deciding on the issue or in the case or
acting as liquidation court in view of the enactment of RA 7169. Let's set aside for a in division because the Supreme Court may decide cases in division of 5. They will group
moment this issue as obviously we are not interested with this issue. I'm more interested in into 3, its group will consist of 5 members. The decision rendered by the division consisting

Persons Scutarius Legis EH409
of 5 members is as good as the decision of the entire court consisting of 15 justices. Thats qualification. If it qualifies under the term law, it should be published as requirement for
how they do their work there. Under this provision in the Constitution, if a doctrine of law validity. So the case that you may have encountered in the reference books that I have
or a principle of law is enuciated by the Supreme Court via a case whether that decision is assigned. It is said there that publication is only required if it is penal in nature, that is no
decided by en banc or in division. That ruling of doctrine can only modified in reverse by longer controlling. Because in Tanada, the Supreme Court is categorical that even if the
subsequent ruling only that ruling is decided or rendered by the Supreme Court en banc. law is not penal in nature publication is required. Question. When Section 2 (27:00).
But if you look at Tanada, tanada was decided by the Supreme Court en banc but the
Philippine Veterans Bank was decided by the Supreme Court in division. So Tanada Mc Alaine Ligan
enunciated the doctrine that publication is indispensible. The ruling in Philippine Veterans
Bank to the effect that while it is necessary, the law making body may provide an Whether the law is national in scope or local in scope. No distinction, neither is there
exception. On this court, the ruling in Philippine Veterans Bank could not have modified qualification. p
much less reversed the Tanada ruling. That is the first justification. Second, we have a If it qualifies under the term law, it should be published as requirement for validity. So, the
principle in law which says is that a similar issue involved in one case, if this is raised in case that you may have encountered in the ----------- which states there that publication is
another case, subsequent case, this issue should be resolved in the same manner as it only required if the law is penal in nature, that's no longer controlling, because in Tañada,
was resolved in the first case. So called stare decisis. To promote consistency of judicial the Supreme Court is categorical that even if the law is not penal in nature, publication is
decisions, it is not uncommon that cases involves the same issues. So, this (sic) should required.
be resolved similarly. Even if different justices. So, if a doctrine is laid out in the previous
case, and the doctrine relates to a particular issue and that issue is raised in a subsequent Question! When section 2 speaks of laws, what specifically are covered? Tañada again
case. The party involved in the subsequent case may invoke the ruling in the previous clarifies what are the so called laws that need to be published.
case as stare decisis. Now, you can argue with the court that this issue now facing us 1.) Statutes- these are laws promulgated by Congress, Senate, and the House of the
today was already raised before in the case of (sic) by virtue of the principle of stare Representatives - Statutes, Republic Acts
decisis, the court can not decide this case otherwise. The court should observe the same
decision laid down by the same case. It should be consistent, that's stare decisis. Opposite 2.) Presidential Issuances- these are laws promulgated by the Executive Department
to the principle of stare decisis, is the concept of obiter dictum. Obiter dictum, literally particularly by the President in the exercise of the President's rule-making power.
means “side remarks” of the court. This is a part of the decision, a statement made by the Common forms of Presidential Issuances include Executive Orders, Presidential Decrees
court, in their decision which is not necessary at all for the resolution of the issue raised (PD's), Presidential Proclamations, Presidential Memoranda, and Presidential Circulars.
before the court. So, may it be part of the decision because it is stated there on the So laws promulgated by the President fall under Section 2, and therefore require
decision, but if you look at the issue, it is not actually necessary for the resolution of that publication.
issue. That's obiter dictum. For purposes of stare decisis, obiter dictum does not create 3.) Rules and Regulation- promulgated by Administrative bodies. Take note that the power
precedent. So, if a statement is made by the court in one page but that only consists of a to promulgate rules or laws is not the monopoly of the Executive branch or the legislative
obiter dictum, the party in the subsequent case may not invoke that statement for opinion branch. We have the so-called administrative bodies, which under certain conditions, are
of the court. In this case, stare decisis does not apply and whatever is stated in the also authorized to promulgate rules and regulations which fall under the categoric act, a
previous decision which is only obiter dictum does not create an authority that entitles the law contemplated under Section 2 and therefore, ptublication is required. But like a law
party of a subsequent case because it does not create a precedent. Applying this two which is passed by the Congress to the President, the power of the adminsitrative bodies
principles in the case of Philippine Veterans Bank, I would say that the statement made by to promulgate rules and regulations is limited in the sense that they can only be
the court in the Philippine Veterans Bank to the effect that as a rule publication is required promulgated in the exercise of a validly delegated authority. Meaning, it is not inherent. It is
but the law making body may provide for an exception is only an obiter dictum. Why? merrely delegated by the law or by the delegating law. And second, the purpose of the rule
First, the issue on the validity of RA 7169 on the ground of non-publication was never or regulation is to implement an already existing law. So a delegated authority for the
raised in the case. There were nobody that raised the issue of the validity of RA 7169 on purpose of carrying out the provisions of an existing law. Whatever rules and regulations
the basis of lack of publication. In fact, it was established in the case that in fact that law promulgated by the administrative bodies for the purpose of implementing the provisions of
was published. So, it was legally impossible for the issue of validity vis a vis the an existing law, are in themselves, laws, which need to be published in compliance with
requirement of publication could have been raised in the case because there was no issue Section 2.
as the law itself was published. And yet the Supreme Court went on to discuss or to state This is illustrtated in the case of PITC versus Judge Zosimo Angeles. Philippine
the rule that publication is decided by Congress or that they may provide exception. It was International Trading Corporation is a government-owned and controlled corporation
entirely unnecessary for the Supreme Court to dwell on this matter because it was never created under certain Presidential Decree during the time of Ferdinand Marcos.
raised in the case. So, it was merely an obiter dictum that does not carry a precedent. Subsequently, a Letter of Instruction was passed vesting particfular power in favor of PITC.
Third, as between Tanada and that statement, the obiter dictum in Philippine Veterans Some of these powers include the power or the authority to promulgate rules for the
Bank, the Tanada ruling is more in accord with law. The reason behind the need for purpose of governing trading activities including importation and exportation of goods,
publication is due process, constitutional in origin. Can not be dispensed with. If you look importation from abroad, the exportation to outside of the Philippines. This power was
at the rationally for the need of publication, Tanada is more consistent with the wisdom of specifically vested in PITC by virtue of the law, the Presidential Decree and the Letter of
law. So on this three points, I am comfortable to say that the Tanada is the more Instruction 444. During the administration of Pres. Corazon Aquino, she issued an
controlling. Take note that, as required in Tanada, the requirement in publication as Executive Order which partly amended the previous PD and the Letter of Instruction 444.
contemplated under Section 2 extends or applies to all kind of laws whether the law is of This Executive Order No. 133 also dealing with authority of PITC on matters of importation
general application or private. Whether the law is penal, not penile, or non-penal in nature. and exportation of the goods. Pursuant to these three (3) delegating authority, the
Or if the law is national in scope or local in scope. No distinction, neither is there Presidential Decree, Letter of Instruction 444, and Executive Order 133. PITC promulgated

Before this case came diffrent when the mode of reguation is not for the purpose of implementing the law. were denied of their application for import naturally. no need for [36:58]. the rule referring to the Presidential Decree. So. their interpretation of this that same importer as a condition for import permit has to submit a viable export program amendment is that in the computation of the compensation. proceeded? law for purposes of security? It's Social Security Commission. Sales Corporation and Firestone Ceramic Inc. and in the amendatory law. of PITC. they cannot be expected to comply with the law even But not all issuances promulgated by administrative bodies fall under law and therefore not the general tenor of the law. So in the first ground. In the amendatory law. THerefore. but the details. 2. That's the exception in the Victorias Milling. They argue that PITC had no authority to issue or promulgate the administrative order in One of the argumentation was this administrative circular is invalid because it was not question. The law itself defines what comprises compensation. Otherwise. So. That's the essence of that administrative shall now be included. [36:54]. This case involves the SSS law. To avoid from China. In fact the Supreme Court said. purposes or the intention of the law. the employer is required to remit three and one-half (3 1/2%) publication. What was computed then waS only the basic pay. This prompted them to go to court to question the validity of the administrative circular. the employers and the employees are required to remit to the social because it simply explains the interpretation of the administrative body on on how that law security program certain percentage of the employee's compensation as contribution to should b construed. This poses confusion as to the interpretation if being is to ensure the give and take of trading transactions. The purpose expressly stated. of the compensation excludes any amount received by the employee in the form of bonuses or overtime pay. 1. while employees were required to remit to the system 2 1/2% of the compensation. So if the importer tends to import goods from China worth 1 Million.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 an administrative order requiring every importer of goods from the people of Republic of are exluded. ANd since the new law does not contain the details not otherwise the SSS fund. two (2) importers. can validly promulgate rules and regulations but we should distinguish the situation where an administrative body promulgates the rule or regulation for the How Did the Supreme Court resolved these two (2) issues. You will note that questioned administrative order. either promulgated by the President or the COngress is usually comes? in general governing import and exporting. (2) grounds. which delegated authority to PITC to promulgate rules and regulations necessary for and therefore should comply with Section 2. The administrative order in question is invalid because it was not published as published. silent. creating the so-called social security partner. remedies. but now includes the bonuses and overtime pay. An prescribed under Section 2 of the Civil Law. Subsequently. it doesn't follow that the questioned administrative order is almost always. it includes ordinance.The Supreme Court said. promulgates a rule or regulation for the purpose of implementing an existing law. missing in the law itself. Why! You know that in the implementation or to carry to effect the purpose of these laws particularly on matters law. this rule or regulation. What is only expressed in the law is the policy involved. that adminsitrative order was issued pursuant to a validly delegated authority as the sanctgions. . the contribution of the employer order in question promulgated by PITC. the exclusion of bonuses and overtime pay was China to submit a viable export program of Philippine products to China. If one intends to import goods the bonuses and overtime pay sdhould be included or should not be indluded. which at the ration of 1:1. an This case illustrates the rule? that the law contemplated under Section 2 of the Civil Code administrative body can validly promulgate rules and regulations whcih now contain the includes rules and regulations promulgated by administrative bodies.. these rules and regulations containing the detail for the all issuances require publication. The Supereme Court rebut Vicotrias Milling. obviusly. percent of the employee's compensation. Remington Industrial not only be based on the basic pay. Victoria's Milling ??[39:43] prejudiced by this administrative privileges?. this law was amended. fall under the category of a law contemplated under SEction 2. are themselves. what was used as basis for the computation of the 3 1/2 and 2 1/2% the term compensation. and therefore. the specific details necessary ancillary? of legisltation. Under the interprets the law. the law itself. need for publication. compensation was not defined or was now defined as all 4. the law stipulates a provisions there which states that this administrative valid. the Supreme Court uphold in favor terms. when section 2 speaks of law. the Letter of Instruction 444 and the Executive Order and regulation promulgated by the administrative body partakes of the nature of the law. for implementation cannot be found in the law itself. when an administrative body to promulgate the administrative order in question pursuant to a validly delegated authority. the law then? enforced was the SSS law certain Presidential Decree issued by does not contain the details. ?????[39:50) Victorias Milling went to court questioning the validity of this order issued by the PITC. In the first. Because in the previous law. 133. For failure? to comply with this requirement of and the employees would be bigger because the computation of the 3 1/2 and 2 1/2 shall export program of Philippine products to China. It does not expand the law at all mechanics of this law. but these details are left to the 2. But in the new law. SO. When a rule or regulation simply President ????????[36:00]. Falling under this category is the administrative circular interpreting the amendatory law It says there that compensation refers to all remuneration for employment except bonuses because it's obvious in the law that overtime pay and bonuses were not exempted from and overtime pay. All these constributions will be pulled? together to [36:48] the fund for the found in the law itself. Under this law. which about. it does not only details not otherwise found in the law itself. administrative body. these details have to be published so that people will know. hospitalization. we declared that this administrative order is invalid body is mandated to promulgate rules and regulations for the purpose of carryng out the for lack of publication. and it's because this details are not found in refer to laws promulgated by the Congress or by the President. the definition of compensation was changed. while we uphold the authority of PITC tgo promulgate the adminstrative bodies entrusted with the imnplementation of the law.) The law contemplated under Section 2 also includes the Local Law or commonly remuneration for employment but silent? now? as to whether bonuses and overtime pay known as ordinances. without these details be an employer. that's it. SSS came out with this administrative circular in question. The supreme Court said that the PITC being an administrative body is duly authorized regulation which simply interprets a law. that importer should be ready to export goods or Philippine products to China this consfusion. the coverage. So. So with this interpretation. This is illsutrated in the case of Victoria Millings versus purpose of implementation. it does not change the law at all. bonuses and overtime pay of Philippine products worth 1 Million to China. purpose of implementing an existing law from a situation where it issues a rule or 1. So. THis is a portion of the law which delegates their power to promulgate rules and regulations and pursuant to the delegated power. Supreme Court said. So. no need for publication. mandates or which clarifies that so far as SSS is concerned. which is only interpretative in nature does not benefir of all members which could come in the form of loans. just the general provisions. They challenged the validity of this administrative order on two administrative circular.

the Supreme Court said Aug 30. The the verge of collapse. published in the supreme court reports annotated or some laws journals. despite reminders or written demands to the nearby residents. They appealed to the Code. no ??? reason why a decision of the supereme court that supposedly interprets and clarifies a legal issue should not be published to ???[52:30] of the recent rulings of the So. Decisions of the supereme court are supposed to clarify legal issues. the firewall eventually collapsed resulting in the with a particular date but release later for circulation. What is the date of publication? Under the old administrative under Section 8. These are two possible interpretation of compliance of the law. Now it turned out that this 1 year period was computed from the Supreme Court made a categorial ruling that the filing of a motion for extension of time to date of actual release of Official Gazette of circulation. de Roy and company went all the way to the release of Official Gazette for circulation. the date of publication is the date indicated in the Official Gazette so every issue of the Official Gazette it contains a date of issue. Republic Act 7160. forms part of the legal mode of publication is the copy of the resolution or ordinance is posted at the bulletin system. properly applies?. The case for period of effectivity? How do you know reckon the 15 days from publication. question. public policy and necessity. the presumption there is that Felisa de Roy and Revillo Ramos were the owners of a burn out building with a firewall on the date of publication is the date of issue indicated in the Official Gazette itself. is there a need for publication before a There is a rule on how to reckon the date of publication. for its validity needs to be published in conspicuous places at the local government unit conceerned. As appearing in the ??? reports in the supreme court decisions. de Roy and Company filed a motion for extension of time to file motion year because the Civil Code itself provides for specific period of effectivity.????? [45:46] 15 days from publication because under the Local Government under section 2. THe more logical interpretations is unlike laws where publication has to be question is if everyone is presumed to know the law why is there a need for publication done in the official gazette or newspaper of general circulation. while it is not Code. After trial. Generally. This is damages for injuries prospired against de Roy and Mr. They board of the capitol building or the municipal. or church. an ordinance or therefore. Appeals. judicial decisions need to be publsihed. Now how do you reconcile this seeming inconsistency . On the 15th day that de Roy received the copy of the decision of the issues raised in that case was on the date of the effectivity of the New Civil Code. particularly Article 59/SEction 59. This is Supreme Court resolve this issue? founded on expediency. the 5. Otherwise it will be convenient for someone or anyone to excuse himself from liability of a simple violation by simply invoking The Supereme Court categorically ruled out that there is no law that require decision of the ignorance of the law. or barangay hall. This is a case involving a claim of an employee of this employer of certain benefits. in that sense. newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines. It says there 15 days after judicial decisions become binding and valid! When it is not strictly law uner Section 2. for purposes of fixing the eff of a law in relation to section 2. but they are not strictly? laws. in public market. So as it is now. but they have the force and effect of a law. for purposes of binding effect of validity. The presumption is everyone is presumed to know the law. form part of the legal system of the Philippines.. The stricly law. the section. When that it is the duty of the lawyers to keep themselves abreast with the recent decisions of it comes to ordinances or resolution. There is also logic under this interpretation because 1. it was but is governed by the provisions of the Local Government Code. So. the law presumes that case of Felisa de Roy versus the Court of Appeals. 2. In case the date of issue is different file motion for reconsideration is not allowed. resolution should be published not in the official gazette or newspaper of general but the publication could be in some other modes not necessarily the one contemplated circulation. the mode of publication is not governed by the two (2) the supreme court. The obvious purpose of this provision is to prevent evasion of a positive law. The the decision. Dissatisfied with the decision. Obviusly. it partakes of the nature of a law. So. you apply Felisa de Roy. so people will be properly advised. judicial decisions. ordinances or resolutions shall take effect ten (10) days after its publication. Which was denied by the Court of Appeals invoking the ruling of the completion of publication. del Rosario. 1950 it is one the Supreme Court. This because that decision in habaluyas is not valid and binding because when the time the simply means that a person may not excuse himself from liability arising from violation of Court of Appeals denied their motion for extention of time to file motion for reconsideration the law simply because he is ignorant of the law he is not aware of the existence of the that decision on Habaluyas was not published in the Official Gazette. This is the time that the Official Gazette is made Supreme Court. de Roy and company argued that it was error for the Court of Appeals to rely on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Habaluyas vs Japson enterprises Article 3 it says there ignorance of the excuses no one from compliance therewith. for purposes ofvalidity. and posted at 2 interpret legal issues. How did the law. As so the Court of Appeals denied the motion from the date of actual circulation you reckon the date of effectivity from the date of actual for extension. the court found answered in the case of Lara vs. judicial decisions need for publication.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 publication is required for its validity. require publication as mandated under Government Code. In trying to get the Supreme Court to reverse the decision of the Court of available to the public. SO if the law itself. these are the official acts which fall under the reauirement prescribed in Section 2. schools. This concerns the effectivity of the Civil for the plaintiffs and judged de Roy and Ramos liable for damages. instead of filing for a motion for reconsideration or an appeal directly to case Supreme Court said that the New Civil Code took effect on Aug 30. Supreme Court answered this in the code. article 3 which does not excuse ignorance or someone form publication shall need to be in the official gazette. the Supreme Court ??? to say now under Executive Order 200.) Judicial decisions. one year from for reconsideration. 1950 which is one year from Supreme Court rendered in the case of Habaluyas vs Japson enterprises. but as to the specific manner of publication. Question! Does it mean that decisions very difficult to ascertain whether or not a person has actual knowledge of the existence of of the supreme court need not to be published at all or it needs to be published but the law. In this Court of Appeals. that unlike section 2. In this case. So let’s say that the date of issue is delapited building. Ramos. As fate would have it. bulletin board and 2 compliance with due process. SO. So how do you know reckon the destruction of the tailoring shop injuring the persons and the death of one. there's conspicuous places. Take note that under Article 8 of the civil code. Ignorance or knowledge of the law is a state of the mind it will be supereme court be published in the official gazette. judicial decions need to be which is mandated under article 2. So the rule there. but completion of publication. which specifies published but the publication can be done in another mode not necessarily through official the mode and method of publication which is official gazette or with the new amendment gazette or newspaper of general circulation. local ordinances need to be oublished but publication is that prescribed by the Local court. So again. But take note. the judicial law decision or supreme court decision. Court of Appeals and the Court of Appeals sustained and upheld the decision of the a certain benefit which was affected by the effectivity of the New Civil Code one of the Regional Trial Court. the the date of publication. problem arises when the date of issue as indicated in the Official Gazette is not actually particularly a tailoring shop and its owners and the family refuse to stay away from the the date the Official Gazette is released for circulation. city. Usually. In this case.

Applying the doctrine of processual to the court that counterpart of the Official Gazette that contains the official publication of presumption the SC said. One evening. You have to distinguish between a foreign written law and a foreign according to Yao Kee that this is the custom in China. This is made in compliance with the requirement under Section 24 Take note that while ignorance of the law is not an excuse. his co- court resolve the issue involving a foreign law which is not duly proved? We have the so. Our alleged marriage took place in China and as a matter of fact according to her that their courts do not take judicial notice of a foreign law. Let’s take the case of US vs. Some of you may be familiar of this foreign Processual Presumption. consular authentication. principle meshed out under article 3 is presumed to know the law presupposes article 2. According to her she was legally married to the late Sy no one from compliance therewith applies only if the law complies with the requirement Kiat pursuant to a marriage ceremony solemnized in accordance with the Chinese law or stipulated under article 2 and that is publication. of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. What is the law of marriage in the Philippines? Under the family code or Civil and not the original publication of that foreign law. one of the formal requisites of marriage is that it must be solemnized in the but that copy has to be a certified copy. This involves the intestate of he asked that someone to identify himself but no one answered. In filed a petition in court to settle the estate of Sy Kiat at the same time praying that Aida other words. a foreign law may be insofar as this is concerned. Aida Gonzales. Now. Ah Chiong was awakened Failure to prove entitles the court to presume that that foreign law is the same with our by the sound coming from the door which forced open by someone outside. You have a copy of the original and it must be accompanied by an marriage was solemnized without the presence of a solemnizing officer and applying now attestation to be signed or executed by the legal custodian to the effect that that copy is a the law in the Philippines governing marriage it follows that her alleged marriage with the faithful accurate reproduction of the original in his or her custody. Section 24 of Rule 132 partly provides that the certified true Philippine law on marriage. First you may call in course of his employment he was made to stay at a place belonging to his employer. published reports of decisions of Justices. Ah Chiong this case illustrates how the SC Otherwise it may not be admissible as evidence in court. if the law has never been published legally there is no law. As a matter of fact opposed by Yao Kee who claims to be the legitimate legal wife of the deceased Sy Kiat. So if in that particular this case Chinese law on marriage. ignorance of the law is an excuse. The Doctrine of Processual Presumption is Chiong was awakened to the sound in the door. who upon his death left publication. But it is not enough to present a copy Code. If the mistake or ignorance of one must be prove either by an official publication or a certified true copy accompanied by a refers to an essential fact a fact which have it been to as the person believing to be that certification attested by the legal custodian as well as the certification issued by the act would have been a valid or justified act which in turn that ignorance or mistake of fact Philippine consular officer stationed in the country where that foreign document is kept. who is staying in the same bedroom. the Supreme Court ruled that the certain properties in the Philippines. There is no presumption of country. witnesses who are shown to be adequately familiar or expert on the Together with Ah Chiong is a co-worker a house boy. What about if it’s a foreign custom? How do you prove it in our the Philippines. So there was failure to prove the existence of a foreign law in proved by number one by the official publication of a foreign law. Or you may present the printed and publish report of decision of the foreign court. ignorance of a foreign law is not covered that Yao Kee is not legally married to the late Sy Kiat. Gonzales illustrates the principle that in copy of that document or foreign law should likewise be accompanied by a certification we case the foreign law is not duly proven in court the court is justified in presuming that that call it authentication attested to by the consular officer of the Philippines stationed in the foreign law is the same as ours. This is precisely the ruling in Yao Kee vs. also employed by the same matter. customs in China. So in China the husband and wife. Instead that someone . That is in accordance with the law in unwritten/oral law. Yao Kee herself testified that the because in so far as foreign law is concerned it has to be proved as a matter of fact. employer. How do you prove a foreign law? It marriage will be solemnized even without the participation of the solemnizing officer that is depends. so instinctively laws. Ah Chiong was a Chinese national who worked in written law is concerned. They claim Take note that for purposes of applying article 3. the court will have to presume that that foreign law is the same as our own law. Under Rule 132 of China. In the past there have been criminality was So they have there a counterpart of our SCRA. That is to prove that the document kept outside the You have to distinguish mistake of fact or ignorance of fact from mistake of law or Philippines is genuine and authentic. worker the house boy was late in coming that was already late in the evening that Ah called Doctrine of Processual Presumption. chair against the wall so that it will be stabilized. He was employed by his employer as a cook. One night while Ah Chiong was asleep in his bedroom. everyone is presumed to know the law if the law has been duly published. vested to by the official custodian that that copy is a faithful reproduction of that original Presenting from this law. the know the law provided that it has been duly published. Of course the status of Yao Kee as the alleged legitimate wife of the late Sy Kiat was contested by the other groups of heirs the group of Aida Gonzales.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 on articles 2 and 3 if everyone is presumed to know the law why is there a need for proceedings of the estate of the late Sy Kiat. One is a defense the other is not. In our jurisdiction the doctrine is called the Doctrine of country where that foreign document is kept. mistake of fact is an excuse. the marriage ceremony took place knowledge of a foreign law different from a domestic law that everyone is presumed to even without the presence of a solemnizing officer. That is in so far as a foreign applied the principle of mistake of fact. So if a party invokes a certain law marriage was solemnized in a marriage ceremony prescribed by the practices in their existing in a foreign country that law has to be proved as a fact. Since this document is late Sy Kiat is void on the ground that there was no solemnizing officer in accordance with kept outside the Philippines. To reconcile this seeming inconsistency. a Chinese national. This case Yao Kee vs. document that contains a red ribbon that is a formal requirement for authentication. Unfortunately Yao Kee failed to prove that indeed that there is that law in China the Rules of Court or the Rules of Evidence particularly Section 24. is an excuse. expert witnesses. This was if the law has never been published. the door did not have a permanent that in case a foreign law is not duly prove but this is necessary for the resolution of the so by a way of security measure Ah Chiong and the house boy would just have to place a issue. In accordance with their practice/customs. Or if you cannot bring the official publication to the court you have the Presumption. and so in the court? There are also two ways to prove a foreign unwritten law. The court should presume that law of marriage in China is the same In the alternative of just presenting to the court a certified true copy of that foreign law just a copy Philippines. So how did the Supreme Court resolved the issue foreign country they have a counterpart of our Official Gazette then you just have to bring whether or not Yao Kee was legally married to Sy Kiat. So it has been the practice of Ah Chiong to keep a knife beneath his What happens if a party invoking a foreign law fails to prove the foreign law? How does the pillow during the night. Upon his death some of his children. So when it comes to a copy of a written foreign law it ignorance of the law. prevalent in the area. Gonzales. So Gonzales be appointed as the administratix of the estate of the late Sy Kiat. a stay in cook. So the presumption that Yao Kee opposed the petition and claim that she be the one appointed as the administartix everyone is presumed to know the law or the principle that ignorance of the law excuses of the estate of her late husband. A certified copy is a copy of the original which is a presence of a solemnizing officer otherwise absence of this the marriage is void. Let’s go to the ways in proving a written foreign law. in this case the court should apply the Doctrine of Processual that foreign law. the Supreme Court said since Yao Kee certified that their available in his custody.

retroactive application may be applied if the law itself provides for The opposite of prospectivity is retroactive. Like a P. as a general rule. 1961) was not yet criminal at that time it was committed. charged. What is. L. So this dated PNB insisted on refusing to He was prosecuted for homicide for the killing of the houseboy. it says there “the provision of this law shall be given to the effect that these government officers or persons acting in behalf of the government retroactive application and that it covers premarital sex even before this law takes effect”. Mr. According to him. it would have been a valid exercise of self defense. Believing that he was the Philippine National Bank. Buyco offered to pay his obligations using his back- pay acknowledgement certificate. So this is a case for the application of the Principle certificate as payment. should be given their salaries which they could have earned had it not been for the war. what are these recognized exceptions? transactions that took place before it was given effect. Mr. The issue boiled down to whether or not the amendment of the of Mistake of Fact. June 30. that would be a valid law. But there are well recognized exceptions. Republic Act no. It was at this moment that Ah obligation with the government may settle this obligation by using the “Back-pay Chiong for the last time warned the intruder that if you will enter the room he will kill him Acknowledgement Certificate”. Mr. the amendatory law which disallowed PNB from accepting Ah Chong turned out to be true and it was a robber and thief. (#ShabuPaAtorni) this is a form of a certificate post facto law because at that time Mr. charter of PNB which came later. shall be given retroactive effect. Buyco. acknowledgement certificate. the acknowledgement certificate. a charter of the PNB. this is a clear case of Mistake of Fact because had the belief of Mr. invoking Article 4 said. But this exception has its own exception. or a thief. Buyco argued that while it instead of stabbing the house boy. So. and But there are exceptions. circumstance. In the part of the provision of this law. subsequently. On the other hand. a law was passed provides for retroactive application. but no one answered. and under the exception to the exception. It was actually the chair placed against the door that hit him which (actually. the old case of Buyco vs. Because before that law took effect. Mr. if the law is applied to facts. so as to justify PNB in Let’s go to Article 4. the general principle that a law circumstance or events that took place before that law took effect. But. so. Whether Ah Chiong repealed by another law. The intruder. then that law shall apply amendment. cannot be prosecuted. you buy giving it retroactive application would amount to ex post facto law. So if the law takes effect today. it’s G. he thought that the intruder was a robber. it’s so happened that Mr. under Article 4. Mr. unless otherwise refusing to accept Mr. subsequently this law was amended or He was prosecuted for homicide for the killing of the house boy. for example. Now. prosecuted . retroactive application cannot be had when the law will Number one: okay. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court. Buyco’s back-pay acknowledgement certificate. That charter of Philippine National Bank shall apply only to cases after the effectivity of that occurred after the law took effect. But is true that the charter of PNB was amended. be given retroactive application. Buyco offered under attack Ah Chiong got the knife he placed under his pillow and stabbed the intruder to pay his loan obligation through the “Back-pay Acknowledgement Certificate” but this when in fact the intruder was actually his co-worker who obviously played a joke on him. before PNB was disallowed by the charter from accepting back-pay certificates. The argument of PNB was that PNB was merely complying Supreme Court said. the law may so provide that laws may have have acquired which should not be given. Ok. as a general rule. Because future not backward. under the general effectivity of this laws under invoked self-defense according to him that the time he stabbed the house boy he thought the charter of the Philippine National bank. Why? Because if a law should be prospective in application. and it is now PNB is prohibited from the Supreme Court said that a mistake of fact or ignorance of fact can only be invoked as accepting back-pay acknowledgement certificates but it is a fact that before this law was a defense provided there is no fault or negligence on the on the part of the party who amended. 897) is that those qualified individuals who had pending moved forward as a result of forcible opening of the door. Philippine National Bank (guys.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 outside keep on pushing open the door until suddenly Ah Chiong felt that the hard object of indebtedness. Timothy enjoyed pre-marital sex. so that’s why we have that general rule that in retroactive application. acknowledgement certificate. to his sickening . before that. So this case illustrates.O. ah not not a law. It is not suppose to apply on facts. invokes it. and that he was under attack issue there was whether or not PNB can be compelled to accept Mr. So even if the law itself are these exceptions? provides for retroactive application. not before because it would impair the right of Mr. the case of. Timothy cannot be employees or persons acting in behalf of the government were given the so called “Back. this principle of prospectivity of laws is best exemplified in amount to ex post facto law. It says that laws shall have no retroactive effect. Article 4 provides for the exception. Ah Chong warned the intruder not only once but thrice to the prevailing charter of PNB allowed PNB to accept the back-pay acknowledgement identify himself. It would amount to ex goods instead of cash you deliver the P. laws shall have a prospective application.R. at the time he stabbed the houseboy. What retroactive application.O. the Philippine national bank is authorized to that the intruder was a robber or thief and that he was under attack. At that time. ok. Before. I think Republic Act 987 hit hard in his body. No. This case established that Mr. what’s said. It says there that while a general rule impaled. The Supreme Court provided. was refused by the Philippine National Bank. transaction or events. What is an ex post facto law? An ex post facto law is a law that makes criminal an act that 14406. Buyco already made his offer to pay! And at that time when the offer to pay was made. Buyco’s back-pay and that he was only defending himself. law shall have prospective application. after Mr. when you buy in Gaisano Metro. if the law itself provides for the provision that this law shall law or in the impairment of vested rights should be applied prospective… to look forward. convicted for violation of this law because pay Acknowledgement Certificate”. Ah Chong invoked the accept the offer of Mr. This time. So. the law that created the Philippine Transcription start: 25:45 National Bank was amended. immediately after the war. obtained a loan from but just the same the intruder never bothered to identify himself. there were already rights that party may shall have no retroactive application. a law is passed today. this qualified the government officers or (#MiahMoves baybeh). a law was passed. Let’s assume that that law compensation and salary were suspended due to the war. Buyco that was already only on facts. After the war. with the provision of the charter. Take note of that case. is given retroactive application. events and circumstance or transaction that takes place today and onwards vested in him. standed out vested rights would be Number one. so in payment for the balance of his loans. PNB is no longer allowed to accept back-pay certificates as payment for loan obligation. Buyco to pay his loan obligation using his back-pay defense of self-defense. Timothy Yu was so obsessed with premarital sex five years ago One of the mechanics of the implementation. Let’s assume that Mr. and he was under attack Back-pay acknowledgement certificate. granting certain benefits to making those individuals who engage in premarital sex making it a heinous crime that one government employees of persons working for and in behalf of the government whose found guilty may be penalized with death through hanging. accept “Back-pay Acknowledgement Certificate” as payment for loan obligations from the borrowers. The amendment of the prospectivity? It means that laws shall operate on facts. he offered to pay his obligation using his back-pay when the law is already enforced and effect.

procedure do not create rights. the period to file a petition for certiorari is taken away by the subsequent implementation of the Family Code. if that law would amount to ex post facto law. but if the alleged parent dies during minority. Because procedure. But of Course. Why are procedural laws …The principle that there is no vested right in procedure. they are the same. among others. Zulueta filed for consolidation of these two cases. Zulueta filed a motion to consolidate the Makati case with the an action to compel the legitimate filiation as a general rule certified during the lifetime of Iloilo case. The court of appeals granted the petition for effect in 1988. the general rule minor child. remedies in the enforcement of obligation. So it cannot be done. so. the administatrix was the Asia Brewery is a corporation engaged in the manufacture. This was filed after the death of the alleged father. if counted 30 days from the receipt of the order. charged and counter-charged between the two parties. there were two prescribed. sale and distribution of beer daughter of Atty. Take note of that. But during the pendency of the action. this principle also or remedial laws are given retroactive application? The reason why laws shall have admits an exception and the exception being is when retroactive application of a prospective application is to avoid the impairment of vested rights. the action may be filed second case was filed in Makati. With the enactment of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. oh no. Atty. it should be rights. and then Atty. court. that the action to compel recognition has with Zulueta… alleging breach of contract. the administatrix argued that the action has already products that Asia Brewery delivered to Zulueta but remained unpaid. and this rights to pursue. before the effectivity of the Family Code the minor child already acquired vested received the order of consolidation. of course. The action was filed against This is illustrated on the case of Zulueta vs. It turned out that the petition for certiorari Supreme Court was not really categorical in holding that prescription is a matter of filed by Asia brewery was late. One of the arguments of the Family Code should be given retroactive application so as to cover the action for Zulueta there was the Court of Appeals committed a grave error in entertaining the petition inheritance or action to claim inheritance which was prescribed to the minor child before for certiorari filed by Asia Brewery because the petition was filed out of time. Asia Brewery filed a case of during the lifetime of the alleged father. So no essentially an action to compel the legitimate petition filed by the mother in behalf of the impairment of rights. so two months… from the day Asia Brewery received a copy procedural rules or remedial rules are given retroactive application and assuming the for the order of consolidation. Under this new rule. argued that under the New Civil Code particularly Article 285. 1997. Since these cases in behalf of the minor child. It only took effect July 1. so the within 50 days of the order subject of the petition. July 1. at the time they filed. an action to compel recognition of an illegitimate filiation should be filed Asia Brewery for breach of contract. remember? Kinds of laws? We have the substantive laws. and the the alleged father. The action is ‘it should be given retroactive application’. Asia Brewery by the administatrix of the estate of Atty. Ocampo. filiation. It was still within the 90 days period. took effect July 1. assuming that prescription is a matter of procedure. which was subject to the petition for certiorari. but assuming prescription is a matter of prescription or remedial in nature. Apparently. So if the nature of the law is procedural or remedial. arose from the same facts. the same. so Certiorari was filed on August 23. 1997. Tayag. On the other hand. Under the old even if the law provides for retroactivity. Zulueta said. because the motion for consolidation was on one hand. 1997. the alleged father of the collection of sums of money in Makati against Zulueta. There was obviously conflict between the application of 175 of the Family Code consolidation was granted by the Makati court. the Family Code took appeals to question the order of consolidation. the rules of court were therefore the action has already prescribed. Ocampo. which entitled the child to pursue it in logical conclusion and that right can never be governed by the old rule and under the old rule. since prescription of action court of Appeals should not dismiss the petition for having been filed out of time. the action to claim inheritance are all actions to compel legitimate filiation. meaning procedural in nature or remedial in nature for the the argument of Zulueta. Asia Brewery was not satisfied with the order of the Makati Court the law enforced at that time what the. the petition was filed only on August 23. on the ground. 1997 should be given retroactive application. Take not that with filed in the Makati court and the Makati court directed that the case be directed to the Iloilo the action to. a petition for certiorari should be filed Supreme Court said that. Asia Brewery entered into a distributorship agreement administatrix. the period of when to file the petition for certiorari These laws. In July 1997. How did Asia Brewery counter-argue? retroactive application cannot be validly have in this case because when the petition was Justifying the petition filed in August 1997? Asia Brewery argued that. This case illustrates the principle that as an of Court… exception to principle of prospectivity insofar as procedural or remedial rules upurturn(what The rules of court do not create rights. Typical example of procedural or remedial laws is the Rules filed by Asia Brewery was out of time. The reason is obvious. That was the argument of the estate. impose obligations. Iloilo is the home court of Zulueta. This is is a matter of procedure. So if we count from May 23. representing the value of the beer minor child was already dead. was filed because the (sic) alleged father was already dead. the rights to pursue his action to claim inheritance and of compel recognition of illegitimate 1997 rules of Civil Procedure did not yet take effect. pursuant to 285 of the New Civil Code was already Asia brewery argued that for purposed of filing for a petition for certiorari. that act of premarital sex was not yet a crime at that time. the law at that time was done the Family directing the consolidation. 1997. It is precisely the ruling in the case remedial laws as a general rule do not impair vested rights because no one has vested of Tayag vs. This law or this new argument of the estate.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 delight. The order of consolidation subject to the petition of certiorari was accused start Article 175 of the Family Code should be given retroactive application as received by Asia Brewery on March 23. do not impose obligations. So the issue here is whether or not the 1997 rules of Civil Procedure took effect on cannot be given retroactive application. Zulueta went to court and filed a case against the Family Code. it rule. a general rule. This was opposed by the estate as represented by the products. neither do they create rights but simply provide for should be that provided for the 1997 Rule of Civil Procedure which is 50 days. rule. So. alleging violation of the provisions of already prescribed. We also procedural or remedial. that it has to be vested. the Family Code effect. In pursuit of its business. Court of Appeals. therefore. Obviously. Of course. the laws that create of Civil Procedure is a procedural or remedial law. Ocampo. By way of retaliation. they do not impose obligations but provide for the what???) the rule is retroactive exception… procedure for the enforcement of one’s rights… and remedies… remedies in the enforcement of right. involves in a complaint for inheritance is what rights to procedure. so it before the declaration of four years from the time of the mother’s child reach the age of would be jointly tried in Iloilo. is that. So this illustrates the 90 days not 50 days. retroactive application is the . This is based on Article 175 of the Family Code because under 175 of distributorship or dealership agreement. Ocampo. therefore. The argument there. But the Supreme Court disagreed with the amended. Take note that this case was filed Number two exception: Exception to prospectivity. Procedural laws or procedural or remedial law could impair vested rights. the bone of contention in this case is whether or not Article 175 of certiorari and Zulueta elevated the case to the Supreme Court. given retroactive application. acting for pending cases. because the first case filed by Zulueta was filed in the Iloilo court. and Article 285 of the New Civil Code on the other hand. The Supreme Court said that that while the general rule. the mother. This motion for minority. Ok. 1997. When the law is procedural or remedial before the 1997 rules of civil procedure took effect. The Supreme Court said the 1997 Rule in nature. The petition procedure in enforcing a right. Asia Brewery filed a petition for certiorari with the court of Code was not yet in effect. 1997 to the date when the petition for section to the principle that for procedural or remedial law.

their appeal. when the new Constitution was ratified. So the question brought before the Supreme Court case of Selso Larga vs. the law in force was of the law. In 1994. Now. it cannot be taken away by which involves an action for authority to demolish certain structures (sic) of government the subsequent reimposition of the death penalty. the higher court. At that time. invoking the principle that criminal law. that fellow released from his last cases which have long become final and executory at that time of effectivity. So that’s the exception to prospectivity as regards to cases enumerated there. Cariño vested right in so far as the accused is concerned. any abolished. if the procedural or remedial rules. which has the accused is a habitual delinquent. At that time. theft. imposing a lesser penalty for judgment that the defendant filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals. application provided. It cannot extend to cover crimes before the abolition of death penalty. Therefore. and if it is favorable to the accused. there was whether or not the accused should be penalized with death pursuant to the law are (sic) law. and the fact that during the time there was only one Court be given retroactive application. with records on appeal. This was the ruling of the case of People vs. declare this as having waived their rights to cross-examine the witnesses of the Director of Deeds. because the penalty resources on the part of the defendant. from his last release of conviction. Thereafter. retroactivity is the general it cannot be given retroactive application if the penal law itself provides that it should not principle. Rodriguez was released from confinement. When it comes to criminal laws. Supreme Court said the ruling is. the records available at the lower court will have to be forwarded to the making it available in the mitigating circumstance the benefits of voluntary plea of guilty. Patalin involves the cover violations of law committed prior to the effectivity of that law. So if the new rule or the procedural rule or the death penalty was abolished in 1987. Another exemption: Even if the penal law is favorable to the accused. For their failure to comply the order to submit the required records on under the new law because that new law should be given retroactive application. Judge Santiago Granada. physical injuries. But this was restored or reimposed in 1992. the defendant failed to appeal which led to the court to the death penalty. And because the accused has already cases which have already become final and executory at the time that procedural or benefited from the retroactive application of the abolition of death penalty. this penalty. when the of Court insofar as appeals are concerned require that the appeal must be accompanied accused pleaded guilty to the crime charged in the Information. when the new rules or remedial law took effect. it would appear that he has already served the case from the lower court to the Court of Appeals. the effect of the abolition of death penalty has remedial rule specific today. So they argued that considering that this requirement is no longer imposed under the rules and What are the exemptions to the retroactive application of penal laws? Number one: When these rules should be given retroactive application. the lower court is to be reviewed by the appellate court. the Loan Development Mutual Fund. this time. otherwise known as the PAG-IBIG Law. The Supreme Court disagreed with the cannot avail of the benefits of retroactive application of a criminal or penal law even if defendant. that the So Mr. and therefore. filed a petition for habeas corpus because if the provision of Appeals in the Philippines stationed in Manila. This as penal laws are concerned. who is a habitual delinquent? procedural or remedial laws are concerned extends only to cases which are still pending Under Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code. a new law was passed. the Court of Appeals to forward all the records available at the Regional Trial Court to the According to him. the requirements on the record on appeal. So obviously. it is favorable to the accused. Patalin. also admits some exemption. Thereupon. and therefor by So the new law produces the effects of reducing the penalty of the crime of estafa and necessity. the proper penalty he should serve should be that imposed Court of Appeals. are required to remit to the . the decision rendered by voluntary plea of guilty. While it is true that when the time was committed in 1984. Again the appeal. The same principle was observed in the case of Manuel Rodriguez vs. time. Now. given the The accused. a wharf belonging to the Municipality of Coron. Take when it comes to criminal law. it will voluminous records of the case. the law are concerned is limited only to cases which are still pending and undetermined of the side enforced was that death is the imposable penalty of the crime of robbery with rape. During judgment in favor of the Municipality and against the defendant. In this case. This is the ruling in the that that reimposed the death penalty. the pending of the requirements. this is already a remedial law takes effect. the decision became Supreme Court sustained the accused. After series of trials or the decision was rendered the law enforced was that which already imposed or reimposed hearings set by the trial court. In that respect. demolition of structures of the subject of the case. During the trial. You know the nature of an appeal is that. it should be given retroactive retroactive application of the penal law even if the penal law is favorable to the accused. the Rules the crime of estafa. otherwise. the situation where the new law is enacted. (Are you sure we haven’t discussed that? Yes considered a habitual delinquent and therefore he cannot avail of the benefits of sir!) Penal laws. estafa. This case illustrates the principle that when penal final and executory. This is the ruling in the case of Municipality of Coron vs. Revised Penal Code. the principle is note also that the rules on retroactive application in so far as procedural or remedial laws retroactive application.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 general rule. This would depict of a prosecution for the crime of robbery with rape committed in 1984. appellate court. employers under pain of criminal prosecution. from the RTC to the Court of Appeals. Larga is an employer. the trial court rendered a pleaded guilty and so the court imposed a sentence of imprisonment against him. So as a general rule for criminal laws. the rules is. Penal laws. accused from his last release of conviction for any of the crimes enumerated in 62 committed the same or any of these crime the third time around or oftener than this time is Let’s go to the third exception. the death penalty was shall not cover cases or violations committed under the old law and therefore. They satisfied the the service of his sentence. Required at this time. enforced at that time when the decision was rendered. it should be given retroactive application. if it is favorable to the accused. shall commit any of these offenses the third time or oftener. This involves the prosecution for the crime of estafa. it supposed to repeal the old law but this repealing prevailing law imposed the penalty of death for robbery with rape. This is pursuant to Article 22 of the Second exemption. and undetermined at that time the new rule or remedial law took effect. they were not able to comply with the directive of imposed under the old law was higher than the penalty imposed under the new law. the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal. no retroactive application can be held. The Supreme Court said that the principle of retroactive application insofar as some penal law or criminal law is favorable to him. But this principle of retroactivity insofar defendants move for the revival of the action considering that a new rule took effect. release of conviction for any of the crime of robbery. It cannot cover when the thing is. the habitual delinquent is one who has (sic). Palawan. Exception is when retroactive application would impair vested rights. At that time. because of the lack of the penalty imposable against him on the basis of the new law. the accused was violations committed under the old law shall continue to be prosecuted despite the repeal convicted. So at that time of the decision of conviction was rendered. costly to appeal of the new law has to be applied in this case. this plea of guilty. and making it a mitigating circumstance for the accused. Notwithstanding the fact that the time property. When the accused is a habitual delinquent. law that repeals the old penal law explicitly provide that the provision of the repealing law particularly in 1987. At that time. The accused Municipality as well as to present their own evidence. was not considered a mitigating circumstance under the old law. he already been dismissed should be revived. so the there would be no end to litigation. Now. the trial court issued a writ of execution on (sic) the law or criminal law is favorable to the accused. and eventually. this principle of retroactive application shall cover only cases benefited the accused because that abolition was given retroactive application to cover which are still pending and on the time the laws take effect. it was very expensive.

looking into the provision of the repealing law it is clear application if favorable to the accused. In this case the Supreme Court favored Mr. pursuant to the provisions of the judiciary act of 1948 but nonetheless Mr. while general rule penal laws shall be given retroactive mr. If so. it is favorable because it imposes a lower penalty than that provided for under voluntary basis therefore it decriminalizes the act of non-remittance of the PAG-IBIG the old law. beyond the jurisdiction of the MTC 1995 election he now tried his luck in trying to reacquire his Filipino citizenship by the new. Frivaldo. he was disqualified for not having the citizenship requirement. no longer under the Revised Motor Vehicle and as I said earlier the penalty under …otherwise known as the PAG-IBIG law. Larga was not given retroactive application in nature. Mr. but if retroactive application and would cover his case even if his case was filled. a curative because Larga was prosecuted for violations committed before the effectivity of the. then the MTC has no jurisdiction. so a higher penalty for the crime. a curative law is retroactive in application because that of 1986 or 87. Ferrer moved to dismiss the case on the ground that the MTC who employee's contribution to the pay PAG-IBIG fund. in relation to the penalty contribution. the cases which are punishable by a penalty more than that described going under of naturalization. On the other hand the government argued that during the pendency of this case however that law was amended this time making the since the new law that made the crime punishable under the RPC is favorable to the contribution of the employees. Larga. the Supreme Court said. ahw. the penalty is lower which is cognizable by the MTC. the jurisdiction of the MTC covers only trying to get his political allies in Congress because at that time there were only two rules criminal cases where the penalty imposed is not more than 6 years while cases. Mr Larga was prosecuted under this law. So the question now is whether or Larga moved to dismiss the case on the ground that by virtue of the repeal of the law by not the new law that made reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries and which he is prosecuted. is entirely the purpose. was committed before the effectivity of the repealing law but the Supreme Court rebuffed the Supreme Court said. the employees contribution to the PAG-IBIG Fund. Ferrer. than the penalty imposed under the Revised disqualified but he. the doctrine illustrated in the case of Ferrer vs. so for contribution disregards the new law. the repealing law should be given application so as to cover the case of Mr. the employers under *pain* of the RPC the penalty is lower. to the PAG-IBIG. punishable under the RPC. ahw. but which is a special law not under the Revised Penal Code. He ran in injuries and damage to property was prosecuted under the Revised Motor Vehicle law. January of 1987 or 86. suspected of having failed to remit the Revised Motor Vehicle law the penalty is higher or beyond the jurisdiction of the MTC as required premium contribution of the employee. That repealing law even if favorable to Mr. Ferrer. so he tried Congress. otherwise known as the repatriation law. * trying to serve Filipino people. What is a curative law? By the term itself. ahw. serious physical injuries and damage to property cognizable. imposed under the RPC which is lower has jurisdiction. 1992. compared to uhm. vehicular accident. the MTC in relation to the crime. one year before the by the. That law. no retroactive application can be done if the accused himself in whose benefit interesting case of Juan Frivaldo. very accused. this case is an exemption because the accused that the repealing law provide for a cut-off date during which contribution to the system himself in whose favor the principle is intended. he uhmm… persevered. meaning before! remains to be should be… These are the exception to the retroactive application of penal laws when mandatory and therefore any act of non remittance continued to be a crime which can be favorable to the accused. where the of reacquiring Filipino citizenship: by direct act of Congress or by the more tedious process cases. Another exception to retroactive application. the penalty This is the story of Mr. therefore. he returned crime was committed the prevailing law then was the Revised Motor Vehicle Law. and 1995. the MTC has no jurisdiction because the penalty imposed all the while he won. So he himself refuses the retroactive application and insist that he accruing January. to correct the past defect. given the provisions of the adversaries he failed and so he availed of the judicial form. provided for under the judiciary act of 1948. naturalization. this kind of crime was used to be prosecuted wished for. the so. heart-warming. repatriation law is an administrative process of Ferrer appealed to the RTC.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 system. he filed petition for judiciary act of 1948 vis-a-vis the provision of the Revised Motor vehicle law which impose naturalization. and the act not. Under the Revised Motor Vehicle law. the Supreme Court had a change of mind. So by. This one. It was sustained by the Supreme Court in his last attempt to serve public office. So if a law qualifies under curative. in other to the Philippines and exercised the most basic right of Filipino citizen. available to natural-born Filipino who lost their Filipino law was passed. who tried him and who convicted him had no jurisdiction because under the constitute a criminal offense under that law. uhmmm. the contribution was on a voluntary basis be prosecuted under the old law and because under the old law the MTC has no but the repealing law itself provides that for those violations. Mr. this time he got what he and prosecuted* at the RPC. because the administration of Ferdinand Marcos was so be prosecuted under the old law. when he won the local election (stuttering) twice he was imposed for this crime is higher than the. then the MTC has jurisdiction. but this case. making the contribution to the PAG-IBIG fund on a accused. Ferrer was the third mode of reacquiring Filipino citizenship by virtue of this Presidential Decree prosecuted before the MTC. the effectivity there was 30. (clears throat). Juan Frivaldo is a… used to be the *top* opposition the principle is intended chooses to disregard the benefit of the new law and insist that he figure during the Marcos time. compared to act of Congress. At the time the political climate changed and the administration of Corazon Aquino took over. this time making the act or the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in citizenship. dissatisfied with the judgment. to the pay PAG-IBIG. 1988. that is the right to words crimes. he cannot anymore be prosecuted and convicted of the offense of damage to property punishable under the Revised Penal Code should be given retroactive which he is charged because of the repeal. which is now *trying of offended in his third attempt. now (clears throat). While the case is now pending appeal before the RTC a new requiring Filipino citizenship. Mr. under the Revised Motor Vehicle law. meaning uhmm… jurisdiction. the Supreme Court said the judgement of conviction was void and therefore he contributions accruing before January 1986 or 1987. the term suggests a law. by reason of the law itself which provides that the provisions of the repealing law shall not cover violations under the old Let's go to the 4th exception to prospectivity. under the Revised Motor Vehicle law is higher. he tried to reacquire Filipino citizenship by Penal Code. at that time. Invoking the principle that criminal law should be given retroactive application. in whose benefit the principle is intended was made voluntary. and should be prosecuted under the old law. but because of political maneuvering of his political the MTC shall be cognizable by the RTC. The 4th exception is when the law is curative law. And under the judiciary act of 1948. in 1995 election. unfortunately for him due to some technicalities the petition was denied. Okay. the general rule is it should be given retroactive application as an exception to prospectivitiy. from January 1987 onwards. criminal prosecution are required to remit to the system. So by it's very nature. Frivaldo could not anymore take the heat in the kitchen so he left the Pecson. Larga. even if the penal law is favorable to the This is the principle initiated in the case of Juan Frivaldo vs the COMELEC. repatriation is . after trial he was convicted. ahw law is a law that is intended to cure or supply the deficiency or cure the defect in the before the cut-off date provided for by the repealing law on non-remittance before January previous law. uhmm… the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical run for public office. failure to remit PAG-IBIG contributions convicted him. he ran thrice and he was disqualified as many times as he *. Ferrer vs Pecson involves the prosecution for the crime of reckless imprudence country and over the years he acquired American citizenship by naturalization when the resulting to physical injuries and damage to property.

is to avoid the scenario where our people are governed by pursuant to the old law before the repeal. There is so many issues the law making body. it is faster. The Supreme Court said. Raul Lee.. the the very least. But the tedious process with naturalization proceeding may take and the courts and the during the trial. for him to be released and the case be dismissed by virtue of the --At the time the candidate files a certificate of candidacy or at the time of the elections. a month after he was elected the third time as governor no end to litigation. Even this limited and restricted mode of absolute. this repatriation law is curative in nature because this was old law which is not considered a crime under the new law. What are the instances that the repeal is not total reacquiring Filipino citizenship. This is my answer to your question (referring to the question proceedings and the costs. okay. or even convicted under the old law. his political adversary moved to disqualify Mr. is to obliterate. so it would apply to cases that are that sense. who run for public office should possess the qualification of Filipino transactions. Otherwise. he was not yet a effect when the law is declared unconstitutional? That’s the essence of article 7 of the civil Filipino! Raul Lee was undermined that the requirement of Filipino citizenship must exist at code. Frivaldo's involves the prosecution for violation of RA 1700 or the infamous anti-subversion law. enforced. of the province of Sorsogon. The repeal does not undo the acts and official or one who. But those are the exceptions to law. a topic closely related to prospectivity of laws or article 4 is Frivaldo's application for repatriation came out only on June 30. are subversives and they were prosecuted under this law. if that old law is year before the 1995 election. now. the approval of his application for repatriation. What is the rule governing on the effect of a repeal of a law? And the time he was elected. So he filed his pending? petition for application for repatriation. It is the ruling in the case of People vs Honorable Judge Oscar Pimintel. So the accused moved for the petition for habeas corpus. and it was clear that he was qualified. the effect of the approval situation. But the there but we will focus our concern to the one which is relevant to our topic. Saving clause – is a clause of Mr. In repeal. in a provision in a repealing law which expressly saves some provisions of the repealed consistent with the curative nature of the law itself. the convict cannot anymore be made to Filipino citizenship must be possessed at the time the candidate file the certificate of serve sentence or be prosecuted and he shall be released because in so far as the repeal candidacy or at the time of the election. any questions before we proceed to another topic? in the old law that it’s supposed to repeal remains unaffected. The under the old law. there will be approved only on June 30 of 1995. valid. So that on June 30. at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy. a law can be repealed by a subsequent law. since the repeal is total and absolute. that law was a perfect. And between two laws. Because that someone who owes allegiance to a foreign country. Take note that this principle is intended to correct what was perceived to be a defect or deficiency in the previous laws applies only when the repeal is total and absolute. Since the accused can no longer be continued to be prosecuted under the The Supreme Court said. charged with and prosecuted for violation of the Anti-Subversion Law. Frivaldo’s approval for the application for his repatriation. it is obvious that the Because repatriation was filed a year before the elections. It’s not a crime to be a nature…. There are exceptions because if the repeal is not total and not avail of or can reacquire Filipino citizenship. the effect of the official is to assume office and not earlier not before because the reason why the public repeal is when the repealing law takes effect. but his application was The cases that are already final. the Supreme Court went on to say further that in order to settle all issues on time the repealed law took effect and therefore any acts or crimes or criminal liability this matter we hereby declare that the approval of Mr. Even the tedious process with naturalization ceases to be a crime. this before the election. at the time of the election or must be possessed by an applicant or by a later law prevails over the former. the crime punished the retroactive effect of Mr. that should be respected as valid. and therefore even it be assumed that the requirement of repealed. Frivaldo's is concerned. okay. So in order to afford Filipinos as simpler and less costly and not absolute? There are two instances when the repeal is not total and not absolute way of reacquiring Filipino citizenship. the year before 1995. the effect of the repeal does not only that Frivaldo's application for repatriation was approved and therefore he was qualified. not repealed. also obliterated. the accused or a deficiency in the previous laws governing re acquisition of Filipino citizenship. So and therefore you don’t apply this principle demonstrated in People vs. in their effort to accommodate Frivaldo this repealed law took effect? Or should the repeal take effect under the time the repealing law time. But there is an exception. only few can actually previously not answered). Repeal. Frivaldo’s application for repatriation retroacts to the time of his application. You keep on revising decisions on cases. 1995 retroact to the time he filed an application for repatriation and that was a if one is prosecuted under the old law. The qualification of a public elected official must exist or must be possessed at the time the rule here is. Meaning it is the portion or part of the repealing law which tells us that certain portion prospectivity. Here. Supreme Court said this repatriation law is called subversive organizations like the Communist Party of the Philippines. etc. cover the acts that took place during the effectivity of the repealing law but retroacts to the okay. given retroactive application of Mr. given was arrested. one ruling question is. made a definitive ruling that the qualification of Filipino citizenship and the takes effect? Because the effect of the repeal renders the repealed law inoperable. can’t be affected by the new rule. less costly on the part of the applicant. Such that the crime under the old law governing reacquisition of Filipino citizenship. 1995. on the ground that his. And therefore whatever criminal liability incurred under the old law is Supreme Court invoked the principle that curative statutes are retroactive in application. this time.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 more uhm. you don’t apply this principle. like Ninoy curative in nature because this was intended to correct what was perceived to be a defect Aquino. simpler. the Supreme Court invoked the principle that infamous law in the time of Marcos. effective and binding law. ahw. and the repeal is total and absolute. given retroactive effect of Mr. . when the repealing law contains the saving clause. how do you reckon the effect of the repeal? Should the repeal retroact to the there obviously the Supreme Court. repeal of the Anti-Subversion Law by the subsequent law which was total and absolute. in other words we don't want to be was repealed. pursuant to the old repealed law. Frivaldo’s repatriation. the approval of Let’s go to repeal. The Supreme Court justifies the retroactive effect of Mr. This is stated in the case of Buscayno vs Military Commission. (Another person questioned but was not answered) Frivaldo on the ground that at the time. member of the Communist Party of the Philippines. Because if the repeal is total and absolute. Sevilla. Anyone who is suspected to be a member of the so- curative statutes are retroactive in application. so whatever transactions or contracts citizenship is because. the repeal produces the result in obliterating the crime of which he is repatriation then it is clear that he was qualified because his repatriation was filed a year prosecuted. Because the later law contains the latest sentiment of candidate at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy. First given the retroactive nature of this law. That is why a law is repealed by the enactment of a later law. the Supreme Court said. and the nature of politics in this country. a new law was passed decriminalizing subversion. this new law—the repatriation law was filed. while the repealing law renders the repealed law inoperable. The Supreme Court justified intention of the legislation or the law making body. and therefore at the article 7 on repeals. Frivaldo's application for repatriation incurred under the old law before the effectivity of the repealing law are obliterated. So the effect there governed by officials who are not Filipino citizens and since the elective official is deemed should be at the time the repealing law takes effect. regarding the retroactivity effect. And therefore in Jeremiah: Sir. the time absolute. the to govern at the time the * of that that qualification of a Filipino citizenship must be exception there is when the repealing law is a criminal law and the repeal is total and possessed at the time he or he is to commence office and that is June 30 of 1995.

crime under which he was being prosecuted has already been repealed. It is from the term reenacted. at the time the crime was committed. S that’s the essence of repeal. Therefore the Supreme Court denied the petition for habeas corpus so far as the originally. death penalty was abolished. under the principle of reenactment. as I said. During conviction. So it’s possible RA WWW was passed. For his part.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 The case also involves the prosecution of those suspected of subversion. But things were made difficult for him because the director of agriculture on the case continued despite the repeal of the charter under which he was prosecuted. In affecting the charter of the Phillipine National Bank. punishes the act being statute is. because he already benefited This was an indirect violation of the law. Because according to him. The prosecution of Mr. charged with so many crimes and the violation of the anti-subversion law. a reenactment. Mr. So he was prosecuted under the charter in effect that time when the violation was so to be avoided by the principle of retroactivity. An indirect benefit which was prohibited under the out from the abolition of the death penalty. there is no more crime because the repealed and repealing law are of the same nature. this principle applies only when the dismissal of the case. So RA XXX ceases that the repeal shall contain under matters but the crime punished under the old law to exist. That’s why the general rule is prospective. ? Subversion Law. then that negates the intention of derates (sic). Concepcion Philippines. The essence of vested right. punish and cattle. Accused of obtaining money from the PP vs Patalin. it is clear that amendment. RA XX. Concepcion moved for the repeal is effected by subsequent law. violation of the law under the old law. there was obviously no are different from the other provisions of the old law but essentially. but by virtue of EO 200. However. Under section 1770. It contains a provision states “laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion of their publication that violations committed under the old law shall not be covered by the provisions of the in the Official Gazette. and taking cue from the principles So. the bureau of agriculture is mandated to punishable under the old law. which is same act of premarital sex. because in bank is prohibited from obtaining loans from the bank either directly or indirectly. it produces the effect of obliterating the crime under the old law. the so called Revised Anti. it cannot be taken away. because that same act being punished under the old law in which Mr. and the other is general? Concepcion was prosecuted has already been repealed. in that case that is and to detain him. that principle does promulgate rules to govern the importation of cattle from abroad from countries where . The Supreme But if one is special. Take note that the reason behind the principle. the crime has already ceased to exist therefore there is no basis to try An amendment is small scale and specific. They were not apply. Because obviously the lawmaking body still intended to prosecute or make the case of People vs Concepcion. which the Revised Anti-Subversion law that it contains a saving clause. PNB charter underwent so many repeals in a series of repealing laws for a fact. that provision only provides for Official Gazette. It Repeal is the entire law ceases to exist. During the trial. Cuna filed for of the Administrative Code. That’s vested right. the Supreme Court said that while the only portion affected by the amendatory law. example RA XXX. Lichauco intended to transport cattles from abroad to be shipped to the the same act which was punishable under the old law. What’s the rule if one law is special. as amended. it will continue to be prosecuted despite making body (cut) the repeal of the RA XXX. by the Revised Anti-Subversion Law. It cannot be taken away from him. is when the repealing law is a reenactment statute. and subsequently another law punished under the old law that it repeals. Another instance where the repeal does not result to the obliteration of the amendment. So Mr. insofar as the act intention to obliterate the crime. there is no repeal.” Because new law. But subsequently the charter was repealed. Philppine National Bank. Maybe there are some other provisions which punishable under the old law and punishable under the new law. Taking cue from the principle that when the penal law is repealed. RA 1700. Concepcion was prosecuted. the later law prevails over the previous. But a reenacted is a statute or a law that repeals the old one but at the same time. the opium law was repealed. or newspaper of general circulation. death penalty was imposed. that will continue because of the “newspaper of general circulation” is now incorporated in that provision. it punishes the same act as what is made administrative code. Subsequently during the case. Meaning why would the legislator in the repealing law now. before the repeal. formed a trial. is the legislator or the law Or if there is a violation under the old law. any incumbent officer of the That’s really in the context of reenacted statute. produce the result of obliterating the crime under the old law. or when the repeal takes a form of a law. a new law was it passed. Which is why. special – special. And special law will only be considered as an exception to the general law. When it partnership where he had 40% interest and this partnership obtained loans from the bank. In so far as that act is concerned. The Supreme Court said the repeal of Administrative Code which was actually a later law that supposedly amended the the Anti-Opium Law is a reenactment statute. for why would the legislature reenact This is the ruling of the case Lichauco vs Apostol. General – general. that is later law. Buscayno moved for the Jeremiah question: What’s the difference between revision or amendment and reenacted petition for habeas corpus arguing that by virtue of the new law. the repealing law punishes the When the general law was enacted ahead of the special. Once there is a benefit of claim. because under section 17 62 opium under the law. a law punishing premarital sex. RA WWW punishes the remains to be punishable under the new law. Cuna was prosecuted under the where animal diseases were reportedly rampant to undergo certain quarantine procedure violation of the anti-opium law for selling opium to someone who is not qualified or acquire to avoid the diseases from spreading. Under the old charter of the bank. statute? Subversion Law. the Civil Code still exists. was abolished. committed. Over the the reenacted statute the old law really is 56789. issued a circular requiring all cattle to be shipped to the Philippines from certain countries The same ruling was applied in the case of --. years. that’s it. But the Supreme Court disagreed.vs Cuna. This involves an importer of carabaos that part of the charter. because in reenacted statute. Benancio Concepcion was the President of the criminal that same act. the principle that the repeal shall reenactment. should apply to the former. they said while it is true that the charter under which Mr. And that’s precisely the evil charter. Strike out from the statute books. there was no restriction on the right of Lichauco to import cattle the dismissal of the case arguing that the repeal produced the effect of decriminalizing the from abroad. But because it is a REWRITE* of a reenacted statute. subject to the the old RA 1700 was later repealed. Article 2 of the Civil Code. which says this law expressly repeals RA XXX. that is the same act punished under the new law. So when it comes to reenactment statute. This is the ruling in obliterated. crime and liability under the old law. therefore the intention of the lawmaking body in repealing the old charter was never to so they can be reconciled by making the special law as an exception to the general law. the director of agriculture invoked Section 17 70 of the act or prudeced the effect of obliterating the crime. Lichauco complained. Q: Is that different from the revision of the new law. if you look at the Article 2 of the New Civil code now. the Revised Anti. During the bank indirectly because what happened here was Benancio Concepcion. there was death penalty. the other is general. That is saving clause. because by repealing the but if the repeal contains a saving clause. you don’t apply this principle that the later rule Court rejected his argument. So both laws exist. it cannot be presumed that the lawmaking body intended the crime under the old law reenactment statute. a that the repeal produces the effect of obliterating a crime. So why would the legislature reenact that portion in the subject to be punished. obliterate any violation committed under the old law. That old law still exists.

. special first. process. Philippine National Bank did not waive the right to Let’s go to the effects when a law is declared unconstitutional. Or if there are irreconcilable inconsistencies. it was not germane to the purpose of passed. the other is special. the moratorium law was challenged. So if the general law was enacted later. Ynot argued that the cow being held. it is already a 1770 which mandate or allow the restriction It was argued that 1770 should prevail being stale demand.” So if that period during confers no right. the action with the general rule that the later statute shall prevail over the former. the fact that that law took effect before it was Intermediate Appellate Court.” 1762 is more of a general provision. and being unconstitutional is void. filing of the proposed proceeding was to relieve the prescriptive period of 10 years. arguing that the right of the bank to foreclose its mortgage was had already agriculture justifies the issuance of this circular requiring the quarantine of the cattle prescribed. before it exception to the general law which is 1762. So even if it is void. The purpose. the declaration of unconstitutionality shall relating to the principle of operative fact. The Supreme Court said “While it is true that code. challenged this law on the ground of due process.. It’s not actually “nothing from nothing”.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 animal disease were reportedly rampant. Because a void law is a contemplation of law unconstitutional is the fact that it holds the running of the prescriptive period. it can only be considered as an case? The Supreme Court said. but of its intention to waive it. eventually prescribes. initiated a foreclosure proceeding 15 years from the time the loan matured. But in this case. when the law is declared unconstitutional. The purpose If the purpose of the law is to preserve carabaos. popularly known as the Moratorium law. So that in counting the prescriptive period the The general principle. that cannot be ignored. so that when the law was declared unconstitutional The rule is the general shall prevail over the special. What is the effect? before it was declared unconstitutional. the constitution shall prevail and the law is void. but in this case PNB coming from certain countries where animal diseases were reportedly rampant. And what is the status of a enforce its right to collect. De Agbayani. intended to declared unconstitutional. the provincial commander is given the authority to occurred under that law before it was declared unconstitutional. should not be counted. But section 1770 is a special law because it applies only to a situation where the intended shipment of The Supreme Court said. there were legal provision is general. of this law is to afford those borrowers who suffered from the war to recover financially can the purpose of prohibition from transporting this carabao from one province to another before they can be compelled to settle their loan obligation. and the Supreme carabao doesn’t need to transport the carabao to another province. committing the have produced legal effects that cannot just be ignored simply because that law was crime. right. To achieve the purpose. Philippine National Bank and the other lending institutions So that’s the rule if the general law was enacted ahead of the special. Mr. But because the circular issued by the director of agriculture is premised on the special situation pursuant to 1770. deducted from the period of prescription of 10 years. This is the process on two accounts: case where a borrower obtained a law from the PNB. What happens if the back then. the Supreme Court Court eventually declared it unconstitutional. The raid or the subsequently declared unconstitutional. is void. was declared unconstitutional. So. legal effect that arose from the operation and effectivity of the Moratorium law before it The jurisprudential trend now.” the general provision which is 1762. There was a law before the time of Marcos. Mr. these transactions could seize either carabao or carabeef that the offender had been caught. applies to all cases of importation of cattle regardless of condition and time. general later? neglect the call on that prohibition. “The So at first glance you may argue that unlike in a situation where the law is simply repealed. An action to foreclose a mortgage prescribes in 10 years. or the means was not reasonable. but it was because of its prohibition under the Moratorium law declared unconstitutional by the Court. was legally prohibited from collecting the obligation. the effect of the law which was declared retroact to the time the law was enacted. Ynot was one of those arrested for violating this Presidential Decree. “During the effectivity of the Moratorium Law. because it effects before declared unconstitutional. when the logically serve the purpose? Because one who is one who is bent on slaughtering the condition after the war improved. this law violates due It is precisely the ruling laid down in the case of Serrano de Agbayani vs PNB. the rule is more consistent but that party does not do anything to assert it within the certain period. you apply was declared unconstitutional produced some legal effects that cannot be ignored. So there is the obvious intent there to repeal the still enforced. is when the law is against the Supreme Court said. So if the unconstitutional. And that is a nonexistent from the very beginning. It imposes no obligation. It is as if no law existed at which time the Moratorium law was in its effect and PNB was coincidented by enforcing its all. The Supreme Court however said “actually this two can be reconciled because one the moratorium law is unconstitutional and being unconstitutional. But that is the orthodox view. “While it is true that the Moratorium law was declared cattle is to come from countries where animal diseases were reportedly rampant. it affords no protection and it creates no office. If it did not or if it was not able to enforce its right to collect. whatever transactions that as well as carabeef. act used to challenge the constitutionality of the law went to the Supreme Court. He argued that. refuses special. When the law was declared unconstitutional. it violates due PNB now instituted foreclosure proceedings to enforce the obligation of Mr. may have produced legal effects that cannot be ignored just prevent indiscriminate slaughter of cows. De Agabayani filed an action in court to enjoin the foreclosure of the . the Supreme Court said. This is different from a institute it. So by virtue of this provision the director of mortgage. Under this law.” For his part. “The period during which PNB was enjoined by Moratorium law to constitution. the means is not germane to the purpose of the law. Especially if the general cover the after so many years. they cannot be faulted for not asserting the right when the law was same subject covered by the special. But shortly after the War. De Agbayani The issue there was which of the two laws prevail? 1762. it the prescription period was hold by virtue of the Moratorium law. Here a law is not repealed. it was not because situation where a law is repealed by a subsequent law. there was a certain because that law was eventually declared unconstitutional. Subsequently. Presidential Decree which prohibits the intergovernment transfer or transport of carabaos That is the doctrine of operative fact. then that 1770 is both What is the effect that was produced by the Moratorium law that cannot be ignored in this special. there were effects that the law before it shipment would not come from countries where animal diseases are rampant. “The purpose. because a lot of times. and it’s was declared unconstitutional. which imposes no restriction. both cannot stand together. because it was only a later amendment incorporated in the administrative The Supreme Court did not agree with him. Because this distinction is given to the party which is entitled to assert a right general shall prevail. the running of void law? A void law is a legal contemplation nonexistent. which is the orthodox view. the to assert it.” This section presupposes that the one is entitled to assert his right. 15 years has elapsed. is even if the law is declared unconstitutional.” the later law. and therefore according to the Supreme Court. banks on borrowers from enforcing obligations incurred by the war sufferers. said. which enjoins lending institutions like the law. a law was 1. The same principle was applied in the case of Ynot vs supposed to be void from the very beginning. or even if they wanted to situation is the other way. or argued “you cannot anymore collect my obligation.

you cannot. Or you cannot waive to future commits threats or violence. Acts executed against mandatory or prohibitory laws complying with these requirements. you cannot waive your expected inheritance. But if a child or children is conceived or are void unless contrarily provided. Section 5. you cannot waive in advance your potential inheritance because that would prejudice your 3. 6. partition of the lateral pursuit of constitutional. that law was in effect. the reason there is the offended party may ratify what an otherwise contract between the university and the scholar. It’s perfectly valid until annulled. So if the properties involved are located in Bohol. laws are not void? good customs. shall not only direct the Doctrine of or the operative fact doctrine. 8. when one or either of the without trial. Under article 36 of the family code. whether it’s 1. he was duty children.” properties are located. The right to life can or mandatory law the act is not considered void but only voidable. are the benefit of trial. So your waiver should always be subject to the exception. but they could find this act valid. What’s the mandatory prohibitory law?. Voidable: valid until policy. that example of prohibitory mandatory law. Your friend can be prosecuted. before the death crime but under the family code. your marriage is void. before it was declared void. Let’s go to article 6. So if one in that matter because that right cannot be waived. Even if you want to die. Otherwise under article Section 5. it remains to be valid. a general rule. Under the family code. violence. But the judge can be administrated by the crime. putting it differently. Coz There was also this case of Cui vs Arellano University where the Supreme Court said. Because the purpose of scholarship is to encourage or recognize potential and talented students. prohibitory or mandatory law. you are this masochist type.” It should not be used as a form of 2. especially with the RH bill. Your friend is waving his or her right to life. Now this distribution. Or when your marriage is annulled or declared a nullity. But if a protected by law. if subsequent marriage entered into by either of both without let’s go back to section. against moral. but recognizes some effects are legal. because that authority to solemnize marriage is territorial. we discussed section 4 in conjunction with section 7. Typical example is a never be waived. And the principle in constitutional law is the law is presumed acquired during the marriage. creditors running after you. shall be void. Void: void from the very beginning. An example of rights that cannot be waived by reason of annulled. is or against public policy and morals. words. the acquisition should be recorded in the property registry of deeds in the province of Bohol. threats. 7. In other provides that it is not void but only voidable.. but you have so many jurisdiction. Another example. there are rights that cannot be waived. in the immediate future. But we’re not interested on this principle. criminal laws. we are always free to waive What are the instances when the acts even if executed against mandatory or prohibitory rights. So for example if you are a extension of a rich family and you are hoping judge. we cannot hold the provincial commander liable for damages only the dissolution of the marriage. unless the law itself provides that it be. you cannot ask your friend to marriage where the consent of one party is officiated by fraud. Typical example of this is a judge who solemnized marriage constitutional right to search and seizure can be waived. help kill you. against public policy. except if the waiver is against the law.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 2. beyond its territorial jurisdiction. whether it’s against public policy. But children Supreme Court agreed with him. So the act is void. So here. through fraud. or violence with physical injuries. Even if you anticipate the death of your parents. so you cannot. responsible to some liability. the marriage remains valid. regardless of the court annulling or nullifying the marriage. But if you will be very happy to absorb the punches of your husband. morals. the law makes the act void but recognizes some legal effects there creditors who have been chasing you for his rights. under article 53 of the concerned about is wherein the portion in the petition where the Supreme Court said that.. public order. but also the distribution of the properties including the for the arbitrary seizure of the carabaos. should obtain not “while the seizure is arbitrary. or unless the law provides mandatory law but. So. against customs. When the act is committed against prohibitory or a mandatory law but the law itself against the law. when the law makes the act valid… even if executed against commercial advertisement for the school. Seizing from one the property without conceived or born during the existence of the marriage. you are not provoked by that marriage. You cannot refuse. laws. By reason of public Distinguish void from voidable. Future support. example. it’s a fact dissolution of the marriage but also contain some provisions on the division of the property that the law was enforced. family code. otherwise. the marriage of your parents. Typical example is if the marriage is contracted where one or both is or are suffering from the so called We have done article 5. the portion where we are legitimate. And all these should be recorded in the appropriate property registry. Generally.In judicial decisions. where the bound under the law to enforce it. So the decision shall not only contain. “a it’s then actually. even if the law is against a prohibitory public policy: the right to life. So 53 of the family code. And being the provincial commander. judges can only solemnize marriage within their respective territorial jurisdiction. form part of the legal system of the . rights can be waived. court to annul it. cannot argue that he’s only helping you or Intimidation. found. intimidation or violence. So even if you consent of the marriage which was obtained necessary to life. the right to support cannot be waived. legitimate. solemnizes a marriage outside of its territorial that your parents would die in the future. that’s against prohibitory or mandatory law that is even a inheritance. intimidation. violence constitute crime. Support. Another instance. Right. I mean. But the law itself makes the act valid but makes the party The right to transfer when you’re under custodial investigation can be waived. you may be your friend in killing you. The other thing is it allows the summary seizure of the things or the subject carabaos psychological incapacity. Any act committed against a prohibitory or a mandatory law is These are the examples of situations where the act is executed against prohibitory or a generally void. the law itself declares it as void. that cannot be argued charged with grave threats or life threats. because the law gives the offended party the choice right to transfer to another school unless they reimburse the expenses for his scholarship whether to proceed or to get out. where the scholar supposedly waived his voidable marriage. before it was declared void. your marriage is still valid until you complain to the You cannot waive it because that is necessary to life. because inheritance is is not void but voidable. Because before this law was declared distribution of the properties to the parties. before the law was unconstitutional. “This is arbitrary. customs. delivery of the presumptive legitimes to the unconstitutional. So a judge in Cebu cannot solemnize A right also cannot be waived if the waiver would prejudice the third party with the right a marriage in Bohol. morals. in violation to this prohibitory law. Because violation entails that penal person. typical born during this kind of marriage. Go back to section 5. you have this habit of borrowing money. legitimes shall be recorded in the property of registry where properties affected are Any question before we proceed to Section 5? located. ofcourse. You threaten somebody. So it’s not void. particularly the article 45 of the family code. Is this departation from of due process of law arbitrary at the very least? The contracting parties is psychologically incapacitated.

And section 10. Now. adherence to precedent – stare decisis. It may be doubt. while it may be true that there is no law that allows an adopted child to use the prevail. That should be admitted. They just as her middle name. There is no reason why an adopted child should be discriminated committed when he decided the case on a crucial rape of a minor and the law enforced at against using the surname of the natural mother to be her middle name... the SC said that in case of the effect if there is no doubt. The issue there was whether or not China Banking Corporation . right and justice are better served. Decisions of the MTC. can be evoked under the principle of stare decisis is the one rendered by the Supreme Court. the law is clear in applying the law to the letter. 14 conflict of laws.) So the issue there was whether Article 9 states that no court or judge shall decline to render judgment by reason of the or not the child Stephanie will be allowed to use the surname of her natural mother as a silence. But the rule is that when the law is standard up to the specific issue raised the writ of execution and the sheriff served the writ of execution of the China Banking before the court. The SC said that it should presume that the legislature intended has no choice but to apply. a civil action that was arising from rape was filed against the same accused. the purpose of that law. the courts have the duty to question the right of authorities to But before trial could proceed in criminal cases. right.. or the like. obscurity or inefficiency of the law. So it's better difficult but still it is the law and it has to be followed and of adoption is to prevent of the child and once adoption is decreed. He refused to apply the express and clear and irrefutable Philippines. the law which is clear. writ of judgment or writ of attraction. The trial court granted the petition for Time? So let’s continue Tuesday. the adopted child is to any violation shall dictate a corresponding penalty. the court law. His father Judge Catindig filed a petition for adoption to adopt inefficiency of law. According to Article 10 of the civil code. it is likewise understood that there is judicial function. Take note that the only decision which is considered part of the legal system. Relatively to article 10. For purposes of applying the principle of apply experts on the matter.) judicial legislation..his duty is to interpret and apply the letter or language of same time. So. These provisions refer to the duty of the court to render justice in the exercise of its surname of the natural mother as her middle name. court cannot decline to render judgment? (. because this is now a doubt. Now. That's why we have the common principle 'dura lex sed lex'. Where referred to or pertained to the another case that one's adoption is decreed to the court. In the civil case. The primary reason of the court is that there is no law which governs the use of the surname particularly by the adopted child.. use the surname Catindig which is the surname of the adoptive father and the surname of the mother Garcia as the child's middle name. Central Bank of the wisdom of death penalty. The court then adjudged the accused liable in the the constitutional mechanism of separation of powers. This is the ruling in the case of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia. to the lawmaking body. So. The court may not agree with the wisdom of the law but if the law is clear. And under the law.. When the judgment became final. The deposit was a there are too many problems in the society and it's just impossible to address it by our foreigner deposit account. the bank involving the circular bank circulars existing laws or it might happen that a case is brought before the court requiring the which is lifted by RA 6426 (if I’m not mistaken) otherwise known as the foreign currency decision or resolution of the court but there is no specific issue of the specific existing law deposit act. We’ll discuss 9 and 10.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 Philippines. right and justice to prevail.. What are other sources when the court may consider in the resolution of the decision which creates binding precedent. like customs. what we have in existing laws is a law that governs the use of surname (. The 12 yr old girl was raped four death despite e findings that the accused was guilty of the charge. Mr. So the criminal 4 counts of rape were filed against the American tourist and at the castigated Judge Veneracion -. And then adoption on the prayer of Catinidig to allow the child to use the surname of the mother Thursday. the child should be allowed to duty of the judge to interpret that the law and render justice. no way. human relations. otherwise it would violate complainant and against the accused. not the court. because not all human problems can be addressed by existing laws. The courts may rely on the only decision that has the force and effect of a law… because it will pursue that of the customs or the decisions of foreign countries involving the same or similar cases. Friday… Oh. Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia is an 9: No judge or court may decline to render decision by reason of the absence. Salvacion involved a prosecution for the crime of rape committed against 12 yr language of the law and instead he reduced the penalty to reclusion perpetua instead of old girl and a transient american tourist in the Philippines. the solution is not to disregard (. what is the court supposed to do when the therefore cannot be subject of the writ of execution. that should be the respected duty of amount of more than 1 million pesos. Courts (. the accused was able to escape so the question the wisdom of the law. That’s despite the absence of specific laws on that matter. a petition for adoption filed by the natural father of the child. What is right and justice in this case? The SC said.. it would now posses the same rights and privileges from the clear letter or language of the law. the foreign currency deposit account is beyond the reach of the court. The Supreme Court application of the law. the own biases. obscurity or illegitimate daughter. that the law Stephanie as his own adopted child. RTC. But the reason of Judge justice. the court ruled in favor of the private beyond the clear language of the law.) when there is no law that specifically So basically.) the legislative solution is in order. This gives total that time was that this kid of crime is punishable by death penalty. Court of Appeals. There’s not much to be worried about in this… Let’s go that the decision of the court must be attuned to the concept of what is just and what is to 9 and 10. Only decisions of the Supreme may consider as a guide in the revision of the decision or opinions of recognized writers or Court can be evoked of the binding precedent. there is a doubt on the absence of law that governs hard. Unfortunately. interpreting the law but the civil case proceeded. it is presumed that the law-making body intended right and justice to said. the court this specific question. Catindig filed in making body intended right and justice to prevail. it is to be presumed. Any issue on the wisdom of the law should be addressed criminal case would not be pursued or prosecuted because of the absence of the accused. in case of doubt. Veneracion's personal biases and religious beliefs obviously doesn't agree with the The same principle is presented in the case of Salvacion vs. Under which. Tuesday Thursday lang? Garcia as the child's middle name. The only decision which case despite the absence of specific provisions of the law. in lieu of political integration. In his petition for adoption. So. in case of doubt on the middle name once she is adopted by her illegitimate natural father.. In case of doubt. in case the judge. Corporation where the accused reportedly maintained bank deposit. it is to be presumed that right and justice is intended by the legislation so I already discussed obiter dictum. religion. This is the cardinal sin that Judge Veneracion of legitimate children. disagrees with the wisdom of legitimate child is allowed to use the surname of the father and the surname of the mother the law. if the purpose of the adoption produces the idea of have to address is question to the lawmaking body because the court has no duty to skirt making an illegitimate child legitimate. That is addresses the problem. foreign currency deposits are absolutely confidential and that specifically address that question. is the decision rendered by the Supreme Court. the purpose the harder the better. the Supreme Court times. the SC said. So these are the other sources of judicial basis in deciding a adherence of precedent. the primary duty of the court is to interpret and apply the law with no law that prohibits it. by reason of his be vested with the rights similar to that of a legitimate child. the court issued the court.

alien or citizen. 2 of the RPC. These are the legal calling upon all who sojourn in the Philippines subject to principles of International so called conflict of laws. nature of the currency of the dollar deposit account. take note. There is now a conflict Philippines. it is part of the law of the particular country.. consists of two components: number one is the those provided for under the principle of international law and some treaty stipulations. Penal laws. facts That's why if you were part of the service men shooting to death some scavengers in the occurring in two or more states and affected by the various laws of the states. Some of these rules. Everyone is governed and subject to our penal laws. If court arising from the civil action (. it was one of the provisions in the US Bases events or transactions which occur in more than one country or state and affected by the Agreement was that US service men are beyond the criminal jurisdiction of the courts. When there is doubt. transactions.. how did the Supreme Court resolve this issue? On the face of the absolute Filipinos. making cue the parties are Japanese and Korean. cannot be arrested. 16. So. who deposits a foreign currency account. Now. he is governed by the penal laws existing in the part of the law of the Philippines which directs its courts or other tribunals in cases Philippines. in case of breach of between the right of the private complainant to be satisfied of the judgment in her favor contract. The contract is executed in the Philippines. otherwise known as private international law. meaning the laws applicable to cases which do not involve foreign Take the example of these principles of international law in order in your political law. Applying in the Philippines. On the other hand. each country has internal law and in contrast. we have our own conflict of laws rule. So. Let's go to 14. So if the case involves transactions. right and justice can never prevail if the current judgment of the pertained in two or more states and affected by the laws of the these countries involved. deposit act. What is conflict of law? When is there conflict of law? The conflict law and any stipulations. is part of the local law. that case US Base is Zambales. into in Hongkong. events or transactions occurred. this purpose of the law can be achieved only if the investors or laws. So. and rule. there is now a question on what law simply opened the account in the bank on a temporary nature (. The principle of territoriality is fleshed out If a question involved. Let's just limit ourselves to these four. whether or not to apply a foreign law. Internal law governing cases which are purely internal. every country has its own body of laws and each body of defense. In simply means that everyone. there's the judgment rendered in the civil case. events. These two cases illustrate the principle in case of so many. various laws of the countries involved. So it would be in accord this happens. whether citizen or not. we'll just limit ourselves in the provisions in the Civil Code doubt. the subject matter is located in the Phils. Art. So. 16 and 17. if Barack Obama visits or takes a vacation in the Phils. prosecuted and convicted before courts in the cases involving foreign elements. again. the SC asked this On the other hand. Like during the element? A case is deemed to involve foreign element when the case involves facts. Now. take care of 11. there are some treaties under the provisions of When is there a foreign element in a case? When do you say that a case involved foreign which expressly provides on immunity to persons subject to the treaty.. the contract was entered very vital question: Is the transient tourist. Like because there is now a doubt with the transient tourist depositor who simply deposits or when there is an issue in the validity of the contract. your element and the so called conflict of laws rules which govern cases involving foreign head of states or representative of states are immune from criminal prosecution in this element. the court is obliged to presume that the law-making body intended right and justice and I'm referring to Articles 14. So in a country. for example.. start with the first. involving foreign elements. Let's to prevail. Why? Because there are no foreign elements involved. involved depending on the countries where the facts. so long as other words. The principle of territoriality simply means that our courts have . the SC examined the purpose of the which will be performed in the Phils and the subject matter of the contract is in the Phils.) defeats the sole governs the validity of the contract when the contract was executed in Hongkong but the purpose of the law and that is to protect long term investors. in Boracay. a foreign law should apply or the local law should be applied. he owes of a as a background. China. So. meaning long term investors and depositors. the dispute between the parties can be resolved by embodying the applicable and the right of the bank or the accused insofar as the absolutely confidential nature of the internal laws. And this conflict of laws tool apply in cases and convicted before Phil courts and he cannot invoke the defense that he is a foreign involving foreign elements because these laws direct the courts of that country whether or national because whoever is in the Phils enjoying secure and safety in the Phils.) would be refused satisfaction. temporary allegiance to authorities of the sovereignty. the contract is executed in the Phils. existence of the US Bases in the Phils. depositors are such that their purpose of putting in their money in the bank is simply for investment purposes. conflict of laws in governing commits a crime there.. owes not in that given case. So if a foreign national.. events involved in the case took place or and justice to prevail. so many laws are foreign currency account? The SC said. It law. So these are the examples of the situation where these rules. the contract is to be performed in the Philippines. 12 and 13. for example. It was established that the purpose of the foreign currency deposit law is to encourage does not involve a fact. citizenship is not a the Philippines. the of the law. purely internal laws. 14 fleshes out the principle of generality in criminal law. a doubt was created whether the transient visitor is covered. involving a property located in the court on the civil action for damages filed against the 3rd party. Phils because of the principle in international law that a head of state is immune from criminal prosecution. say for example. The parties are deposit. invoking Article 10. take note. the contract is to be performed in the Phils. if the parties are a Japanese and a Korean. Now. So it is part of who happens to be in the Phils and he commits a crime. are examples of the exemption of the generality principle of our criminal laws. it is not international law. a Cuban. 17. like a Russian. it is he sojourns or lives in the Philippines.15. now. in the light of the purpose subject matter is located in the Philippines. So. conflict of laws country. foreigner. penal laws and those of public security shall be of Let's go to Article 14. they were not prosecuted before Phil court because of the immunity involves foreign element and therefore should be governed by the so called conflict of laws provision in the US Bases treaty. this is now a case of a dispute arising from this contract. prosecuted the domestic law. Japan. a contract is entered into between A and B both under Art. take note.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 can be compelled to release the bank deposit of the accused to satisfy the judgment of the Filipinos. take note that every country and state has its own body of laws: laws in subject to penal laws and that of laws on public security and safety. So this is the situation where the case is to be decided by the purely internal of the Philippines. the solution to the issue of the case is the application of the so called conflict with right and justice that the deposit shall be not covered under the foreign currency of laws. and therefore not covered under the protection of the law and therefore the bank was ordered by the court to release the bank account of the accused to the extent as Okay. 15. but for our purpose. And because of that. in the Phils. the contract is to be performed covered by absolute nature of the law? Is he covered by the protection accorded on the in the Phils. the contract is to be executed in the Phils. this is an example of a case involving foreign provision on Art 10 to presume that the law-making body in enacting this law intended right element because the facts. You distinguish this from the principle of territoriality. It of law. event or transaction occurring in another country or two or more investors to put in their currency deposits in our banks to ultimately improve the economy countries. The exceptions here are law consists of two components. take note. he may be arrested.

The last one is when one commits an offense classified under Title 1 of Book 2 of Revised the provisions of the RPC shall be enforced not only within the Phil archipelago. All of them as principal and direct government of the Republic of the Philippines. the offender will appealed. he was convicted. and foremost. Seajack by pirates using Philippine ship or airship referred to in Article 2 paragraph 1 is a ship or airship refers to force violence. currency note. Hiong was that he can not be convicted by the Philippine government because his involvement in the commission of the crime charged was committed in the territory of Number 3. of the entire criminal process and therefore. Art. This is the Penal Code so called crimes against national security and the laws of nation. Hiong was part covered. pursuant to the or counterfeit coin. When an offender commits on board Philippine ship or airship so even if the ship is For under the theory of subjective territoriality principle we have the case PP vs Tulin. And when the case went all the way to the supreme court. completed abroad so if the crime starts here. obligations or securities issued by the government but also those guilty of introducing or transporting into the Philippines a forged coin. who supervised the transfer of petroleum products from MT Tabangao to another vessel. we also adhere to the protected theory in criminal law which says that although the crime may have been committed outside the territory of the Phils. Under which. the state of the country whose interest is territoriality in criminal law. So you just have to memorize the crimes falling under Title 1 Book 2. What are so called territoriality principle we adhere to in the Phils. it was Cheong San Hiong. And while in Singapore. the main argument of be prosecuted before our court. Now. currency. the Supreme Court said while the participation of Mr Hiong was only committed of his official function.(a student clarified counterfeit coverage if it rule. participation but Mr Hiong was convicted only as accomplice to the crime. there are two principles in protected theory in criminal law. Mr. The first sentence there which says that except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential attention. provoking war. includes fake foreign cheques . Based on the evidence induced in considered Philippine ship or airship in contemplation of Article 2 paragraph 1. obligations or securities issued by government of the territoriality principle of criminal laws of the Philippines .answer is NO! :). that is not brought the vessel to Singapore. Unless you tell me that sexual harassment is an exercise of official function. Not only. If the crime was begun abroad but completed in the philippines. we adhere to territoriality principle which says that our courts Two principles involved in when we talked about territoriality. He may be prosecuted in Japan but never in our country because it Phils. And so that. The participation and involvement of Mr. The theory in criminal law. What are although began abroad. the trial. our interest is prejudiced by the commission of the offense. exception.(class chuckling). while the vessel is in Singapore. meaning first and these crimes? Treason. piracy. still our courts have What is meant subjective territoriality principle? Subjective Territoriality principle means the power to prosecute and punish the offender in those specific instances because in that our courts have jurisdiction over crimes which began in the philippines although these specific instances. the pirates transferred the so long as the aircraft or vessel is registered in the Philippines that vessel or airship is (sic) of MT Tabangao to another vessel in Singapore. So take following cases. prejudiced by the crime as the authority to try and punish the offender. the reverse is true under the objective territoriality principle. in the Phils. they vessel. the pirate resist sexual urges and committed an act of sexual harassment in Japan. What are the instances were our criminal laws have extra territorial application? So in On the other hand. So.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 jurisdiction to try and prosecute offenders for crimes committed within the territory of the (class laughing). Art 2 of the RPC flesh out the territoriality principle of our criminal laws note that for this exception to apply the crimes must be those listed under this Title and not as a general rule as well as it fleshes out the exception to generality which is the protected other crime. Not highjack. 2 of the RPC provides for the exceptions of territoriality. These are the crimes falling under Title 1 Book 2 of Revised Penal Code. on two counts: Number 4. Fully armed pirates. that the crime of piracy started in Philippine territory when the vessel was seized by the So if you are mayor or governor while in Japan having a vacation and somehow cannot pirates while sailing off the coast of Mindoro. This refers to public officers committing offenses abroad even if the in Singapore beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. it was also established crime is committed in the foreign country provided in the exercise of their official function. obligations or How did the supreme court resolved this issue? The Supreme court resolved these issues securities issued by the republic of the Philippines. he may prosecuted and punished before . our courts have no jurisdiction to Republic of the Philippines. Mr. Now. The so called subjective have jurisdiction to try and punish criminals committed in our territory and that way of territoriality principle and the objective territoriality principle. Not direct obviously that crime affects national interest and so even the act of forgery and participation. the enumerations there are based on the crime against national security and laws of nation. So. This already in the territory of the foreign country if the offender commits a crime on board a involved the crime of piracy when a vessel known as MT Tabangao while sailing in the Philippine ship or airship that crime maybe prosecuted before our court. when a public officers or employees should commit any offense in the exercise Number 1. Dissatisfied by the judgement. in times of war. airplane or aircraft registered in Philippines and in accordance with Philippine laws forcibly took the vessel to Singapore. So as long as the crime is committed within the territory of the Phils. Those who shall be guilty of acts in connection with the introduction of the forge Singapore therefore beyond the territory of the Philippines. The courts. And when the pirate took over. disloyalty. Hiong counterfeiting is committed beyond territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. our courts have the authority to prosecute the offenders and to punish the offender. in our country. to cut the long Number 2. The exceptions there. currency notes. So if you forge or counterfeit money. enforceable in the territory of the Phils but also outside of its jurisdiction in the mutiny. Take note that coast of Mindoro was seajack. So not only the forger or the one who counterfeits currency or try and punish him for the crime of piracy. in other words. Anyway. our court short our criminal laws have two kinds of application: the intra-territorial meaning has jurisdiction to try and punish the offender for crimes completed in the philippines application within its territory and extra-territorial applicability beyond its territory. our court can prosecute and penalize the (30:58) offender even if the crime was completed abroad or outside our territory. Hmmm. as a general should be related to his official function. Those who shall commit and those who shall forge or counterfeit any coin or story short. the accused were arrested because they went back to the Philippines after the currency notes of the Republic of the Philippines or obligation and securities issued by the piracy. the court convicted all the accused. these instances? we also have jurisdiction. When the pirates were able to board the vessel. After the trial. espionage.

in so far as Philippine law is recover from the conjugal property as and by way of Attorney Recto's attorney fees. even. the Supreme court said. The supreme court taking the necessary precautions or measures to protect the animals from any harm. Mrs Harden are to be determined by the national law. The services of Atty Recto where obtained by Mrs Harden. the wife left for states. status. So invoking this provision. family rights and agreement. Piracy is one of these crimes. Mr. When. Crasus Number 2. reversed the decision of trial court and court of appeals. the territoriality principle said that our penal laws are enforceable in our territory to anyone who sojourned in the Philippines is of course subject This is shown in Recto vs Harden. he is married where ever he may be. Claro M.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 Philippine court although his individual participation was committed only in Singapore. condition and legal capacity. Somewhere the contract entered into in consideration for obtaining a divorce degree. contrary to the contract(sic sic sic) securing a divorce - two Filipinos. But he was rejected by the Supreme court. Crasus. his family rights and duties. Article 15 (sic) principle of nationality theory. it is also established principle fleshes out in Article 15 . a marriage between a filipino and thereafter a divorce is validly obtained under the exception. While the wife obtained a divorce abroad and became a When the vessel reached the philippine waters. Okay. It refused to pay Atty Recto the stipulated 20% atty fees. This prompted Atty Recto to go to says there that laws pertaining to (finger flicks. The supreme court said Article 26 Bull was the master of the vessel which transported a number of cattle from the country for applied only in a situation is between a filipino and a foreigner. obviously and literally. So if a Filipino is married. capacity. In other words. retainership agreement? Supreme court resolved this issue into two forms: This is the ruling in the case of Republic vs Crasus Iyoy.the Filipino spouse is also capacity to remarry(sic much =) ). Suppose a foreigner comes here. condition and legal capacity. the wife in so far as her out is that the crime was committed in Formosa. But contrary to her undertaking under the retainership agreement. Before long. Recto was engaged by Mrs Harden as to the treaty stipulation and laws of preferential (sic) and again this refers to the head of her counsel in the case she filed in the Philippines for the purpose of protecting her share state and some treaties where immunities from prosecution is provided. And to compel Mrs Harden to pay and concerning family rights. she is getting from the conjugal partnership. But she just can not accept that she is the one Revised Penal Code. So it falls 26(sic). Atty. how did the supreme court resolved the issue on the validity of the reference to Filipinos. his wife are both Filipinos.that is Philippine Law. a person's status. Article 15 is our conflict of laws rule on status. the vessel was seized and Mr Bull was naturalized American citizen. the husband realized that his wife is hot tempered and this is not so. As far as his family right. consideration for divorce degree to be obtained abroad but only for the purpose of A bum. And because under our law. issue when he/she is a foreigner? Does Article 15 apply so that as far as the issue of Torregosa defers to answer and asks to refer to our political law professors) status. where ever he may be. in void. Torregosa forgot what the code says) . duties. status. Invoking article 26 of the but beyond its jurisdiction against those who commits any offense classified as crime Family code. Fifteen made express favored Atty Recto.laws court(high-pitched ending by Torregose =)). Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code. The Supreme Court the eyes of Philippine law. He filed an action for declaration of nullity of his marriage. There are some of in the conjugal properties that she had with her husband . Hiong was convicted. family right and duties. protecting the interest of Mrs Harden in the conjugal partnership. status. now known as Taiwan. the wife remains to be married to the no jurisdiction to try him under this law. she visits the Philippine to see her family . not a Filipino? country so long as it continued and while in the philippine territory the crime still subsist. The Mr. duties. The shipment started in Taiwan sailed to the Philippines. Although. capacity. duties. the provisions may be enforced not only within the Philippine territory guilty. This involved the sustained by CA ruled declaring the marriage nullity and void. Her wife however denied the allegation of Crasus and counter alleging that Second and I think this is more compelling justification while Mr. abroad by the foreign spouse. Harden was that the contract in so far stipulated is void because reference to Filipino citizens that means where ever a Filipino may be found. the wife discovered that her husband is good-for-nothing. The Republic of the prosecution under special law that punishes any person who transports animals without Philippine disagreed and so the appeal was filed to the supreme court. the divorce was obtained while the wife is still a prosecuted under special law.. When the carabao subject of the case status is concerned. wherein Mrs Harden undertook to pay 20% of whatever Mrs Harden will duties. So. in contemplation of a petition for divorce that Mrs Harden intended to file against her husband. family rights and duties. And therefore. condition and legal capacity shall be binding by complied with the stipulation embodied in their retainership agreement. Harden. So he argued that Philippine court has recognize divorce as a mode of dissolving marriage. we do not where transported from Formosa to the Philippines. So. So the principle here is even if the crime began in another status. condition. The question is what about the families? What about the issue involving makes him liable under our law. the wife obtained a divorce. (student asked regarding diplomats committing these crimes. divorce is not allowed so therefore this kind of contract follows to be also always governed by its national law . Under Article 2 of the court to declare their marriage a nullity. Mr Crasus and Formosa. condition and capacity of the foreigner (sic) matter will also be resolved for the basis of foreigner natural law? When 15 expresses only to Filipino citizens. came to know of his wife's marriage abroad. On the other hand. conditions involved a foreigner. family rights. In this case. 15 makes express defense interpose by Mrs. And so they can not invoke the benefit under Article 26. Occasionally. its condition and legal capacity throats). the capacity to remarry . and also to increase her support exceptions to territoriality. is always governed by that the crime was the continuing offense. This involves a marriage between Number 1. That's Article 26. So. these are philippine law. Married there and eventually became an American national.A filipino. Under the else. Crasus is the one guilty of psychological capacity. it can not be enforced against Mrs. the trial court and The objective of territoriality principle is illustrated under US vs Bull. take note. not in extravagant. the wife also asked the Supreme Court said Hiong must be convicted for the crime of piracy. the trial court and CA ruled in favor of Mr. is always governed by Filipino. While in states. And once they reached Philippine territory. Claro Recto as the the lawyer and Mrs Harden as the client drawn up an engagement agreement. Now. Alleging that because of financial difficulty. The husband. When Mr. even if it is considered of the purpose of the engagement is to . How is our supreme court rules on the (foot stomp by torregosa =p). the supreme code said there is no possible reason why the benefit of Article against national security or the laws of nation. (clear concerned. This illustrates the Supreme Court said that while it is true the crime started in Formosa. By virtue of the Article 15 of the Civil Code.her children. it its national. He is involved in a case and the issue pertains to the our court shall have jurisdiction under the objective territoriality principle in criminal law. One of the arguments raised by Mr Bull in his effort to get filipino(another sic). the parties. retainership Let's go to Article 15. The primary Filipino citizens although living abroad.

This argument was rejected by the supreme court. because that is estopel. theft. And since they are both American citizens. can only be as the husband of the wife. instituted by the offended spouse. So it is not unlikely that a foreigner who is still 15 years old can legally was the other way around. its a very interesting case. he is already at legal age would have been that the wife remains to be married. So lets take up the pilapil case. he remains to be the husband of the filipina wife. or come forward and prosecute. the husband acknowledged that the acquired a criminal complaint of adultery against emilda. So that for turn around later on and say that there were properties. And since. there legal capacity is to be determined vandorn case. and they are governed by the national civil code of the philippines. So a very good point is would the decision be the same. On his part the complaining german argued that while a decree of filipinos or governed by the policy prohibiting laws. the husband (american). I think twice? twice. only obtained in germany. you cannot anymore capacity of the minor. they were married in hong kong and well as the filipino spouse. property divorce is recognized as valid in the US. that is why because in their country. because if you include issue of property in divorce it would usually take a In this case. If under his own law. he himself admitted family rights and duties. he is fifteen. The business has husband were both american citizens. this is precisely the reason why the foreigner is concerned. So in this case the supreme court said divorce is far as the german husband is concerned because in so far as the status is concerned. you cannot later defenses raised was that the contract is not enforceable because one of the parties. that representation binds you. one of the grounds invoked there in denying the petition is the american equally applicable to aliens or foreigners. if you look at vandorn it old. where anyone can initiate. and not long after the german husband obtained a the right to participate in the administration of their conjugal business. this case illustrates the principle than the (blank)sic status. we have art. the term and as such he is entitled to administer the business or (aplease?)sic. In this situation now if you look at the decision of the foreigner intends to get married in the Philippines. of the american.that issue should be determined by his own national law. the husband returned to the philippines. to commit this. in so far as an alien's status. played with another conjugal property because team. believing in own law. So this is example the minor is a Japanese national and he enters a contract in the philippines. that agreement entered into in consideration during the cohabitation that this is normally resorted to by the parties for purposes of obtaining divorce abroad. that the husband cannot be qualified administrator. but when they filed the petition of divorce to the U. while divorced or married is a matter of status.S." So therefore in the eyes of philippine law he is and should be considered as an offended again. As of by way of divorce decree in germany. if it by their own law. in so law of the individual concerned. not by our When you represent something. the husband. when the cases led to one ludicrous situation where one spouse remains to be married to another contract is executed. for the profits earned out of their as an offended spouse as to initiate the complaint because of the decree of divorce conjugal business. there was a principle of estopel.while he was (absurditing?)sic. because adultery unlike any other offense. And therefore. In this case the supreme court said. recognizes the divorce and therefore he little improvement of the vandorn ruling. the german husband instituted 1st: In the petition for divorce filed abroad. now. they are been their.pursuant Article 15 of the Civil Code.15 of the marriage being a divorce. That is why. he (blank)sic. So if you say foreigner. it was argued by the defense. argued but adultery (blank)sic. Because. robbery. 15 is age of majority. (foot stomp). declaration that the recognition of divorce is partial in counter only in so far the foreign . Pursuant to Article 15 of civil code. because being a spouse. the Supreme Court made a definitive ruling that Article 15 of our Civil Code is longer process. should be determined by his own law. the Supreme Court said that Mrs Harden and her Similar to this is observed in the pilapil case. so driven by misplaced jealousy. With the assistance of the brilliant lawyer in philippines. husband was guilty of estopel. an claim that that business is conjugal. because once a divorce decree is obtained by the foreign spouse abroad after a decree of divorce was obtained. So if an alien comes here and there is a case in court. because the wife who filed the petition for administration after marry in the Philippines even if he is not qualified in the philippines being below 18 years the divorce was obtained by the husband. that divorce obtained in germany is binding (at least?)sic. after the divorce decree was issued. Because the decisions in this legally capacitated to enter into that contract even if under Philippine law. A status of being married or the dissolution of the our policy. is valid in so far as Mrs. that capacitates Vandorn the filipino and therefore the validity of the divorce binds not only the foreign spouse but as This invovles a filipina wife and an american husband. in the eyes of philippine law. no capacity to enter into that kind of contract. if he is not the there offended spouse. all these are governed by the alien's that there were no properties acquired. the wife shoud be made to account. So that if there is a contract and action is enforceable and the one of the good faith of your representation. may refer to suffer in silence. he is a minor. the same is not recognized in the because in these kind of cases which are very private. that's bad faith. the offended spouse who may not like to be exposed to forth?)sic. And filed that loses the effect of dissolving the marriage and both of them ceases to be spouses to an action for allowance of administration. issue to his capacity . but of course it is unfair. conditions and legal capacity. convenience. is a question of status. the law affords the offended spouse philippines because under philippines divocre is against our public policy. is minor. 26 of the family code where it says now that if the foreign spouse obtain a valid divorce decree abroad. The supreme court said. for the filipina . and (born in option of suffering in silence..15 of the civil code. so obviously a valid because the laws of nevada. the (blank)sic. in (blank)sic. and someone acts on your representation. Harden and her husband is concerned. they both represented in the court for convenience that they acquired (no?)sic.. just the moment he (prosecuted?)sic. by virtue of under his own law. So he was barred. One of the critical issues involved there no property (blank)sic. and what happend to the american husband. pursuant to art. governed by their own national law . he asked court that he be appointed as the the other. So your question now is no longer possible under the family they had properties in the philippines. and how come now that in this case he would own national law. (clear throat).S. the U. while divorce is against public policy of the philippines. for his part. The legal something that there was no property. however aliens may validly obtained divorce was obtained in germany. Japanese law is this case with the vandorn created so much controversy. 15 is there marrying age. knwoledge was whether or not the geman husband is considered a offended spouse who is entitled to and 2nd: by virtue of the divorce decree obtained abroad. the contract is valid in so far as Because you are now questioning the status of the right. public ridicule. pilapil was married to a german national their administrator of their business in the philippines. is is governed by the german law and the german law is recognizes divorce.the husband can no longer think initiate for complaint to adultery. He said that being the husband he has marriage was solemnized in germany. the supreme court in pilapil made a categorical cannot anymore file the action of administration in his capacity as the reported husband. unlike murder. there after a divorce decree was obtained abroad. "under art. the german husband went defense the wife argued that he cannot anymore file an action for administration for their to the philippines and discovered that even during their marriage. Thats a very interesting. that divorce decree is not recognized in the phil and the divorce of law provided that divorce is valid in accordance with their national law. because in the divorce proceedings. But under Japanese law. In other words. a turn around and disclaim your representation for your benefit.. even before the divorce. by the offended spouse that while the divorce decree was obtained abroad. meaning not valid.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 obtain a divorce degree abroad. code of the phil. who is a foreigner. as certified by their consular official. when a who is no longer his or her husband.

conveyance. it is not enough to prove that a property. So (blank)sic. this does not involve property.16 says? Real as well as personal property is governed by the law of of divorce the supreme court sustained its validity given that Llorente was already an the place where it is located. under the japanese provided it is valid in accordance with their repective national laws. gender. 16 par. and so he returned legal capacity in art.S. under the rulings lay down the cases of vandorn and pilapil and rayscitate?)sic. because under filipino service (lady?)sic. while there he acquired american citizenship and often times visited the foreigners consular official station in the philippines and that certificate of legal capacity philippines. 16. There was one . (blank)sic. property. before Llorente died So that is art. valid there.S. she filed a petition for but governed in art. and foreign spouse national law. what does art. therefore he is not capacitated. legitimate.15 meaning he may not be governed by the Llorente. it important to insert a provision on paragraph 2 of art. laws divorce is recognized. assignment of property. and leaving his wife in the the family code when a foreigner who intends to marry in the philippines instead of phils. pursuant to art. After sometime he was able to obtain an presenting the birth certificate because if you apply for marriage license you are required official vacation. Recio was conveyance.16.S. obtained australian citizenship and remarried grace garcia. widower. disposition. you apply art.1 (lex rayscitate?)sic. considering a mans ego bruises through deeper than the capacited to (learn?)sic. Although the supreme court said in so far as the (intesic?)sic. He in this rule. the heirs now are scrambling over to marry. The absolute capacitates to remarry. the absolute and relative.15 if the contract does not involve philippines. single. linggam previously married with an australian citizen in (blank)sic. and Mr. the spoil. divorce decree obtained by Llorente is valid. so if a party to a contract of sale to a property whether real or personal is Llorente. By virtue of art. if he is divorced. the national law of the 3rd: Capacity to marry. he returned to the philppines. 1039. Legally co-habitated with his brother. All according to the will.15. recio failed to do this. the legal capacity to inherent is not governed by art. So it is not enough to present a copy of the divorce decree. made relative does not. as national law of the party concerned as well as the capacity of the party to contract the filipino spouse. who is now capacitated to re marry but subject to certain conditions. So the supreme court said. rulings that the framers in the family code. as his defense recio argued that he could not under art. got divorced. the marriage between Llorente and alicia was void because the decree obtained by under status. during one of his visits he met another girl and they got married. lex luches celbrationes. take note that it is not enough by (blank)sic. So in that case the supreme court said that the 1st: When the issue involves legal capacity to involve them. because of the contract involves disposition of divorce decree was obtained. the issue is whether or not that the divorce decree obtained by the foreign spouse or foreigner aborad is valid that japanese national is capacitated to enter into that contract of sale. any personal circumstances of the individual that falls that. it is of age in japan. he was already an american citizen and therefore he is governed by his own law. whom after the war served the U. So legal when divorce decree is raised when the divorce decree is invoked in any case of the capacity is governed by national law theory under art. this now involves inheritance so the rules of succession apply nullity of the marriage in the basis of bigamy. all of these are governed by (lex because under the cases. sale. Eventually shall state that under their own law This person. and because under U. alone and lonely to submit your birth certificate to prove that you are already of marrying age. the necessary evidence to prove the of the divorce decree obtained by a foreign spouse abroad.1039 a capacity of an heir to inherit is governed by the national law of the be guilty of bigamy because during his marriage with grace. foreigner is qualified to marry for capacity this guy died. The certificate of legal capacity is issued by the to the states. So as it is usual in the philippines society. and then he massage contract. Status refers to ones he executed the will bequeathing all his estate to his second wife(alicia) when he died of marrige. illegitimate. it is not enough to prove the existence of the divorce. but the property is located in the philippines.26 which now recognizes the validity so in this case there was failure to (aduce?)sic. which is the national law of the parties. but if the contract is something arbital. Mr. Recio was capacitated to remarry because there place where the marriage is solemnized of course there are exceptions. and it is because of these two are two kinds of divorce. So legal capacity now is governed american citizen when the divorce decree was obtained. by way of defense of a basis for a claim. When garcia realized that 2nd: instance. But by the law of the place where property is located under lease remanded thorugh the trial court for further (blank)sic. widow. only to discover his wife.15 of the civil code on sell. property so if the issue is the parties or the persons legal capacity nationality theory. As for the issue for his capacity to contract a subsequent marriage with grace. because before the husband died. not the law of the place of the estate is already divorced. the framers who drafted the family code.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 spouse is concerned. his marriage with samson was decedent. in so far (concerned?)sic. validity of to sell of the family code. but under the phil law he is a minor. persons national law but some of the laws. marriage. service contract. recio failed to do the nature of the extent of divorce decree obtained. marriage solemnized abroad of married a foreigner is valid here. Llorente (involved?)sic. In case of a foreigner the foreigner is not required to submit a flesh. The supreme court said that when the divorce decree was obtained by legal capacity may not be governed by art. birth certificate but instead the foreigner is required to submit the so called certificate of especially he came to learn that the wife was pregnant by the brother.15.This was one of the issues raised in the case of Recio. Status in the course paola(the first wife) the treacherous paola questioned the will of Llorente claiming community his profession. as a gen. to convey to assign to dispose. vandorn and Pilapil. legal capacity is Llorentes will then the lease should be looked into the trial court and for this purpose the not governed by national law. prove the national law. art 26. He stayed there for a long time in the U. you apply in art. for the two cases. to mortgage the property. valid here. say a certification of legal capacity by hi consular office before he married grace. the supreme court was explicit in holding japanese national. invoking public policy legal capacity. So far as Llorente is capacity concerned he was qualified to marry alicia.15 nationality theory that governs the individuals status. but the law of the national law of the person who succession is under court said it is not enough to prove the existence of the divorce it is equally important to consideration meaning the decedent from whom the heir is supposed to (blank)sic. The supreme court suggested that it was already easy for Recio to present the The same ruling was observed in the later case of Llorente. if you enter in the contract like service contract. Take note that in so far legal capacity which is also governed by (blank)sic. Llorente when Llorente obtained the divorce decree abroad is void. What is the veribance law he is qualified because 15 is their majority age. dispose. minor in the philippines. there are instances when the person or indivduals against divorce. his legal capacity to enter into that contract be determined if divorce decree obtained abroad was really valid in accordance with of sale of motor vehicle for example in the philippines is governed by philippine law. nationality have the heir. but in the issue of the validity art. is equally important to prove the national law of the alien spouse concerned so that it can says the properties located in the philippines. What are these instances? so far as legal His national law. If one of the . The husband refuse to accept the wife back and so he returned to the states. The supreme located. there was no adequate proof that under the law of australia under legal capacity for the contracting parties to marry is generally determined by the law of the which the divorce decree was obtained.15 neither it is in art. the supreme court said. 21 of the family code. principle no longer under nationality theory by virtue of art. rule capacity to marry is governed by the law of the place foreign spouse to determine if the divorce decree was really valid and with accordance that where the marriage is celebrated. 16 when he was married the first time with samson(previous wife). there are exceptions. the national law. is the principle.(blank)sic. it was already dissolved by virtue of the divorce decree.

lex rei citi does not govern. be it the intrisict or extrinsict. the government to sell or dispose the property. So. these are matters governed by lex rei citi RAE SITAE. in (extrinsictal?)sic. The only issue there was the authority of the party. 815. there capacity is determined by philippine law. they argued that being a property of public domain. of the Civil Code relied upon by the oppositors. the transaction regardless of the nature of the property and regardless of whether the property. meaning those who contract. some quarters. the property belongs to the government of the Philippines. prescription. One of the arguments advanced by the oppositors. Garcia. In this case. the government argued that.15 of the civil code. the dispute involved the exceptions to Lex Rae Sitae. also the matters of ownership. in the will. does not apply because the property in encumbrance. Equipped with all the landscaping and interior items enumerated there: the order of succession.15 in so far as formality of the contract you apply art. it succession. Property. based on this provision. there is no dispute about ownership and title because all the while. subject matter of the contract. of Aquino. . sale. capacity to inherit. involving the intended disposition of the nipongo property mentioned under the second paragraph of article 16 governed by the national law. Meaning in so far as legal capacity shall law theory. because there is order of succession. Article 420 place the contract is executed but by way of exception if the contract involves disposition. the nipongo property was a property of public domain intended for some public piece of land. 17 because this is governed but take note. because the real nature of transaction is only between the contract service succession. so there is no issue as to the Exceptions for lex rei citi: instances where lex does apply. How did the Supreme Court resolve this issue? The Supreme Court said. registration. For their part. disposition of property. number 2: exception. 26. the parties agree that capacity of the contract. So. So. in so far specific items are concerned. in the absence of one. so a sample in a contract of sale of a Code. it is either lex luches celebrationes pursuant the use of Philippines’ consular office or embassy in Japan but during the time of Corazon to art. accretion. personal property is governed by the place of the place where the property is located. by the national law of the decedent. These are the only thing(s). real or contract of this transactions are governed by lex rei. so this kind of contract is not governed by lex rei citi because the you are the wife. however. if it is about succession then it is not governed by lex rei citi but you apply the 2nd par. Validity concerning the dispositions or the testamentary provisions in the will. Now. Lets go to art. 15. the forms and solemnities of the contract of sale whether the contract is valid service. the matters by ordinary contract not (blank)sic. 17 lex luches celebrationes. how much. The second paragraph of article 16 states governs. you apply the nationality or the national rei citi but apply the rule in ordinary contract. so generally if the transaction involves property. These are the four instances which was opposed by several quarters. So. take note. 17. meaning who succeeds first . take note. illegitimate. You apply the law of the country which the testator or the decedent is a citizen apply art. property their is only incidental. concern the validity of ownership of title but the issue involves the authority of the party to by express provision of the second paragraph of Article 16 is governed by the principle of. formalities of the contract apply art. the government itself. sell or dispose of the property. of where involves property but the involvement of the property there is only casual or incidental. mortgage. national law of the decedent Let’s go to the second paragraph of Article 16. You are allowed to Aah. this is a contract involving a property. Garcia. when the issue concerns with the validity of ownership or title of property. national law of the Philippines during the world war. so amount of successional rights and the intrinsic validity of the testamentary disposition are succesion testate or intestate do not apply lex rei citi governed of the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration. going back referring to located in Japan. property. evidencing these transactions. a governed by the national law theory. take note. (if) you are the legitimate son or child. Garcia. (Lex rei President Salvador Laurel. The forms of the Philippines. 15. is contract of service which is how much? These are matters concerning amounts of successional rights governed by governed by the rule of ordinary contract so again the issue is about legal capacity applied national law of the decedent or the intrinsic validity of the testamentary provisions of the art. And the Article 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. ownership or title of the property.apparently the forms and solemnities of the question is located in Japan. conveyance. is governed by lex luches celbrationes. for all aspect of the transactions. this is not governed by the succession of course succession presupposes property. (in) number 1: even if a property is involved but the issue is about succession whether this case. this is the exception to Lex Rae Sitae. This property was acquired by Philippine government pursuant to the art. you dont apply lex involves testamentary and interstate succession. of art 16. but the involvement of the property here is only casual and rank inherits or amount of successional rights: how much one gets to inherit? In the law of incidental. Capacity to execute a will. you. these are succession because its about inheritance. under the first par. even if a property is involved. legal reparation agreement between the Philippine government and the Japanese government.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 parties is filipinos. intended to dispose of the nipongo property the attested art. since this because the main issue involved the contractual relations of the parties. the original purpose of the property was for the. landscaping and interior designing. nationally. if the property is casual or incidental. interstate or testamentary succession. even the formalities and solemnities oppose the disposition of the nipongo property was that under Article 420 of the Civil involving the transactions are governed by lex rei citi. This concerns with the provisions in the will like. both as to the order of succession. title. the law on succession. These are the instances. the testator may provide that part of this estate will go to his friend or to his devisee. if between W and X. you did think to be the recipient of your third exception to Lex Rae Sitae is when the case involves property but the issue does not generosity. the property is located. the contract being that X a successful architect national law of the person whose succession is under consideration. that. Order of decorations. the real (agreement?)sic. of the civil code. there is also corresponding percentage to which an heir is entitled to inherit. lex rei citi (uprise?)sic. all matters pertaining to property are governed by lex rei citi sold or alienated or disposed of. including the “there is no conflict of laws situation involved in the case. it always include property. by virtue of art. forms and solemnities of the will. the estate. 17.16. Okay? As I said. that by express provision of the second paragraph of Article 16. exception to Lex Rae Sitae. Intrinsict validty of these transactions. if the issue is only about (attestive or intestive?) sic. So. the national law of the executive legislator or the law (domicile?)sic. assignment. what is an exception? simple example. I already gave you two exception(s). LEX prescription. governed by art. meaning in forms is not determined by lex luches celebrationes art. items specifically Salvador Laurel vs. given that it is a property of the Republic of the like conveyance of refer only to the three is to design a majestic mansion for W.” Lex Rae Sitae applies only legal capacity of the contracting parties. take note of this case of Laurel vs. So the issue there is whether or not the property can be validly citi?)sic. dispose or convey the property. how much. the matters which are governed by the contract is entered into between X and W. This was the ruling in the case of Laurel vs. the second in involves the property. they are all governed by lex rei citi. capacity to marry and the This was intended as payment for the damage the Japanese government has caused the 4th: the capacity to make a will.17 the nipongo property cannot be alienated and cannot be a subject of a commercial that normally the forms and solemnities of the contracts are governed by the law and the transaction like sale or disposition. The third one: the dispose a portion of your will to anyone who you. one of whom was the group of then Vice- where legal capacity is not governed by art. is property but the issue about is succession. That's why there's principle of Lex Rae Sitae. will. for (testatal law?)sic. in otherwords in matters of authority of the party to sell.

if the place of execution is mainly conditions. paragraph 2. public policy and public morals. How do you determine the law relationship theory. the place where the subject matter of the contract is public instruments are governed by the laws of the place where they are executed. if the contract involves the conveyance. It is a provision in the contract which now become standard in. let’s go to Article 17. it is not uncommon that the law applicable is the foreign law. will know. This is known as the Lex Voluntatis. forms and solemnities of contracts. for purposes of determining the forms law the agreed to apply in case of dispute arising from the contracts. So. the place where the parties are So. good morals. There is an exception. They provides. How is the court supposed to rule on this issue? the court supposed to determine Lex Intentionis. during their momentary stay in Hong Kong but the law clause”. or the court respect the wishes of the parties. But writers are one in saying that. there is an circumstances that the law impliedly intended by the parties is the law of that Country A. in the absence of of Article 16 and 1039 with respect to the capacity of an heir to inherit. take note. take note. clause. It is not What happens if the contract does not contain the “choice of law clause”? Maybe due to uncommon that applying the Conflict of Laws rules in the Philippines. the amount of successional rights and under choice of law provision. There are exceptions. The by the law of the place where the contract is executed. and therefore. So. if the decedent is an American National and the issue is about order of contract. So. the contents of the contract. So. we should respect the intention of the parties. issue as to validity of the subject matter. provided they are not contrary to law. So when for example A and B. the capacity of the heir to inherit is governed the court can infer that the law the parties impliedly intended to apply the certain law. the parties. Stopover. the Lex loci celebrationis principle does not apply because the intrinsic aspect of the contract. that the contracting parties may establish any stipulation. is not determined meaning. that by express provision of Article 17. process. of the contract. are matter concerning the intrinsic aspect of the will. You will know that the most. the law expressly intended by the parties as Article 16. the parties are governed by Lex Loci Celebrationis. Lex Loci Celebrationis governs but there are conditions. So. Again. These matters. So. in so far as the intrinsic aspect. by as to the specific law to apply. the court may apply the Lex heir? The question of whether one may inherit from another? How is the court supposed to Intentionis Principle or the law impliedly intended by the parties. meaning the the most significant relationship theory. are not governed by national law theory. terms and conditions are property. subject to only. What is this most significant relationship theory? substantive aspect of the will because the extrinsic aspect of the will. the court may now infer that base on these and solemnities but matters that go into the very essence of the contract. of Laws. the forms and solemnities of that contract of sale. in [sic] forms and solemnities of contract. That’s the intrinsic aspect of the aspect of the contracts. (and) public policy. the location of the subject matter. meaning the parties are free to stipulate exception to Lex Loci Celebrationis. but the contract the forms and solemnities but not the intrinsic aspect of the contract: the substance of the is to be executed in Country A. Article located. Lex Loci Celebrationis but Article writers are of the mind. terms and Now. Lex Rae Sitae. it can be be upheld as valid. waiting for their respective flights in different countries. this airport. applying conditions of the contract. So. Formalities. the place where the negotiation took covered under the second paragraph of Article 16 but somewhere else. the terms and the contract. so. because these are not like negotiation.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 question: What about the capacity of an heir to inherit? The question of whether one is an evidenced by choice of law provision in the contract. there’s a standard provision which provides for “choice of law clause”. while the are staying few hours in the in most contracts. because 17 applies only to forms and solemnities. the process. no express stipulation resolve this issue? Although not mentioned in the second paragraph of Article 16. especially in contract involves a property to be executed in China. if the negotiation took place in Country A. although the contract was executed in Country X. that. uh. these matters are determined by the law of. this provides for the. The parties or the lawyers failed to incorporate the choice of and which the court is bound to apply following Conflict of Laws rule. no provision in our Civil Code or any law for that matter which governs the conflict of those how is the court to determine or choose the law applicable? There is a third option for the rules involving the intrinsic aspect of those contracts. place. the place or domicile. you an express intention or express clause in the contract? The court may apply the principle. the term and 16. and conditions embodied in the contract. meaning residents of Country A. subject to one. Number one exception. A and B. most of the significant components relate to Country A. the place where it was executed. to be performed in China. Supposed that the significant Of course. it can be inferred. the court will just have to examine the contents of the the place of execution of the contract which is Hong Kong therefor is obviously casual and contract and determine if there is a “choice-of-law-clause”. the substance of the contract. you don’t apply lex loci celebrationis but you apply the laws expressly intended by the parties: Meaning. Take note of that. In which case. they met there. most significant aspect of the contract. Number two. Based on Article 1306 of the Civil Code. applying the most significant parties to govern the intrinsic aspect of the contract. that in the application of the rules in Conflict issues concerning the intrinsic aspect of the contract. disposition or alienation of limitation that [sic] their clause and contracts. from. Number and establish whatever terms and conditions that may deem fit. As I said. And therefor. that in so far as the intrinsic aspect of the contract. Intrinsic. And so that there is an issue involving the intrinsic aspect of the example. the wishes of the parties. 1306 exceptions. what is covered and foreign country. Say for example. in Article 17. that there is a law that governs the intrinsic should. with respect to and solemnities of the contract. the performance of contract? Like the nature of the contract. By examining all the significant components of the contract. Now. the contents of the contract. the forms and The court will have to determine the significant components and aspects of the contract solemnities of the will. there’s a standard provision on the. from the. the laws. therefore the law inferred from Article 1306 of the Civil Code. Hong Kong airport. capacity of an heir to inherit. There is an issue as to the validity of the terms where most of the significant components of the contract pertain. by the national law of . For law clause in the contract. since our policy is liberality. is a Foreign Law. If there is a choice of law incidental. the residents of the parties. and that is to apply the law of the country where the contract is likely to be uphold. How also by the national law of the decedent. the law impliedly intended by the parties. not to the Article 17. the court may be able 17 espouses the principle of Lex Loci Celebrationis: law of the place where the contract is to ascertain that the parties do not express had impliedly intended to apply the law of that executed. these matters are governed by Lex Rae Sitae. the place where the contract is to be performed. what governs the substantive aspect of the contract. that’s how the law. the subject matter of the contract? These do not pertain to forms the Principle of Most Significant Theory. their stipulations. but base on the circumstances of the case. the court now will have difficulty determining which law to apply when there is no succession. the principle here is liberality of contract. these matters should be governed by casual and incidental to the contract. encumbrance. espouses the principle of liberality of contracts. then the court will just have to apply the law chosen by the parties in so far as the you apply the laws of China. wills and other citizens. uh. orders. express provision of 1039 of the Civil Code. what does it say? It says contract. when they are temporarily in stopover in expressly agreed upon by the parties to govern their contractual relations? You’ll know that Hong Kong. intended by the lex intentionis. to “when there is no express provision in our laws. the applicable law sheer oversight or ignorance. There is components of the contract are evenly distributed or cannot be determined with certainty. “choice of executed the contract in Hong Kong. and all International transactions. the sale of a property. you apply the most significant relationship theory. if a contract involves not contrary to law. the three items under the second paragraph is the court supposed to determine the implied agreement of the parties. Where the parties expressly agreed in the contract what specific other components of the contract relate to China. is only the extrinsic aspect of the contract. Take note however. court. In that sense.

may not apply contravene an established public policy abroad. has the option to either collect period is (stomps foot on the ground) 3 years. The same principle was upheld in the this foreign law. as cumulative remedies. may not apply that foreign law. condition. the same beneficial to the Filipinos. may not be given application if doing so will the Philippine court where the case is filed. For its part. So. when under the ameri decree which covers the contracts in question provides 1 year American Royalty Corporation. In other words. they That was the argument of the bank invoking the law in England. American Royalty the rule that our courts. Now. The action of the American Royalty Corporation was premised on the policy of the (????). However. this American Royalty Corporation. The Supreme court reiterated mortgage. These remedies may be pursuit simultaneously. is that provided for under Art.. there are instance that the forum court or on the application of conflict of laws rule. the obligation by filing a collection suit or by foreclosing the mortgage. This is the no time in filing labor complaints against the employer and the recruiters. consistent with on the matter? The public policy of the forum on the matter is the rule prohibiting splitting a the principle that a foreign law cannot be given recognition in the Philippines if it . they figure in foreclosure. the forum. the court cannot apply the English law because to do so. when the foreign law runs counter to the sound and overseas contract workers who worked in the Middle east including the country of Bahrain established public policy of the forum. family rights Philippines. yet. so legally the creditor mortgagee may enforce the obligation by filing a collection suit and at the there is legal basis to argue that same sex marriage should be considered and recognized same time by foreclosing the mortgage. creditor. where there were three ugh arguments raised were advanced for this purpose. So. This is an affiliate of the prescriptive period applicable is that provided for under Art. the real mortgage was now foreclosed. our law itself provides. what about the alternative. the Supreme Court (Tarong na ko ani from this point onward) bank instituted a foreclosure proceeding against the real estate mortgage executed by the said. 3 years. How Philippines. the law of the governed by their national law on the matter of status. their contracts were terminated and many benefits were sound and established public policy of the Philippines. So this case illustrates the principle that if the foreign law even if appropriate based on the various interplay of conflict of laws rules. the parties were collection of the loan. (HAHAHAHA) said.creditor. foreign corporations based in the country upon them. if the question involves these matters. there are now prescriptive period we cannot apply this rule on prescription of 1 year. as valid. What is the public policy of the forum also valid in the Philippines. So. legally married to each other WON they be considered as spouses. public policy shall not be rendered mandatory by the laws or judgments even if be appropriate to apply the English law on the matter. 1 year. the bank and the borrowers entered into a group eh. the mortgagee. not both. the creditor only avail one of the case in the Philippines and there is an issue as to their status WON they be considered as two options. American Bank. the POEA according to the POEA the prescriptive period applicable in this case restructuring agreement.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 the decedent. may not be recognized and Corporation filed an action for damages against the bank for illegally foreclosing the real given effect in the Philippines if it contravenes the will of some and established public estate mortgage. the there that prohibitory laws and those concerning family rights and duties public customs. capacity. So. the bank extended loans to three borrowers or action WON the action that the laborers filed before the POEA had already prescribed. American Royalty Corporation seek damages against Bank of this issue? Applying article 15. Because under the rules in the Philippines. American Royalty Corporation was not a borrower. This case involves issues there (cough) involved in the case we are interested in the issue of prescription an international bank but. owned properties in the years and the office of the Solicitor general argued that the prescriptive period applicable Philippines. to two remedies availed of by the bank. more England against the borrowers. licensed to do business in the Philippines. the creditor mortgagor may avail of the married to each other abroad under their own law. in order but a *** for the restructuring agreement. in so far as Philippines but because they are foreigners. there are instances where even if the law applicable based both. uh. which provides for a 10 year the bank required and the borrowers complied with the involvement of their subsidiary prescriptive period while the NLRC which reversed the decision of the POEA ruled that the corporation in the Philippines. in England. For non-payment of the loan. So. the American Royalty Corporation. they come here in the Philippines they get. *** to collect the obligation and foreclosure of the do so would contravene our policy on the protection to labor. also for the enforcement of their claim. but reacted as WON Ameri Decree (?) which provides for one year period the Supring Court a third-party mortgagor. mortgagee. Because this is. Cadalin. When they were working abroad. the court is justified and not ugh released so they were repatriated to the Philippines and after they filed they lost is even duty-bound not to apply the foreign law but apply the Philippine Law. Two complaints were filed in Hong Kong and two were filed in allowed to avail of the benefits under the Ameri Decree which turned out to be more. For non-payment of the loans under the restructuring agreement. parties agreed that English law is the law applicable and yet the Supreme Court said that public order. the English law. This is a situation where in the application of the Conflict of Laws rules. the mortgagee. Subsequently. because it is agreed upon by promulgated. so. or by the conventions or terminations agreed upon in the following country the parties. These remedies are (Cough) that’s the exception. for the the contracts were executed there the parties worked there. What are these instances? The exception to the application and case of POEA vs. it is not hard to argue that since they are foreigners they are America. is deem to have waived the right to avail of country where it was solemnized. The availment of one is a waiver as regards to the other. the parties agreed that the law applicable to their contract in case of dispute is because that is what our law says! So it would appear that if they are considered legally the law in England. So there were 10 years. If they are Filipinos. the are governed by our national law. This involves labor complaints filed by several Filipino ugh recognition of a foreign law is. if it is against our own public policy. So if the creditor. In the pursuit of his business. not cumulative. So if the foreign law applicable contravenes the . an act is valid abroad it does not necessarily follow that it is contravene the sound and public policy of the forum. 291 of the Civil code which is 3 three borrowers. American Royalty Corporation. uh. would so just because a transaction. morals. the court of the Philippines will single cause of action. to guarantee the payment of the loan of the three borrowers under the did the Supring Court (Hahahaha) resolve this issue (Stomps foot on the ground) as to restructuring agreement. And under the laws in England. Of so many ruling in the case of American Bank vs. American Royalty Corporation was here is that provided for under the Ameri decree(?) in Bahrain where the contract was made to stand as a guarantor by executing real mortgage over its properties located in the executed and the parties were employed. 1144 of the Civil Code. the law to be applied by the The rule that a mortgage creditor may only avail of either collection or for closure but not court is a foreign law. even if it appears that the Ameri degree is the one applicable because the Bank of America instituted four civil actions abroad against the borrowers... so under the restructuring agreement. who are we to say they are not? When two options. unlike in the Philippines. Bank of America argued that under the original. In fact. During the pendency of these cases abroad. In this case the Supreme court said proper applicable prescriptive ground that under Philippine Law. (foot stomp) one may be tempted to ask. ahhh a foreign Law may not be given. But in order to. how do we determine premise on this argument. chooses to avail of the option same sex marriage? is same sex marriage entered into by foreigners valid there in the of collection suit. The rule that … now have to apply the law of the country which the decedent is a national. here because on of the arguments raised by the ugh contending parties there was the MT ***. According to one the three borrowers failed to pay the loan. that this matter should be governed by their own law. but then under the 3rd paragraph of article 17 it says question now is which law should prevail? It appears that base on their agreement.

. public policy. one was able to deflower the other because of the promise of marriage. the aggrieved may ahhh compel the if this of rights and unjust enrichment. predicated on the expenses. should be considered valid based on Jurisprudence that you have so. That is not an absolute rule because Jurisprudence will tell us that there are reason why same sex marriage which is against public policy should not be considered instances where a breach of promise to marriage may give rise to an action for damages. supported by Jurisprudence. take note that unlike and he has no without justifiable cause (cough) someone acquires or comes into . Under this principle we contrary to law. my advice is go for the argument which supports your case (class laughs) to marry depends on the 2 situations.unlike article 20 the act covered under article 21 must be intentional that even if sex marriage is valid abroad under the national law of the parties involved. honesty. ok. (foot stomp) is the fact that it is contrary to Public policy good customs. There is no law that penalizes one who breaches promise to marriage so it cannot Court ugh specifically ugh involving this issue. it is incumbent of everyone in our dealings with others in the exercise of rights. For article 21 party had the intention to endure the act. no one can marriage should not be recognized in so far as foreigners are concerned.. It says there that anyone provisions pertain to the principle of unjust enrichment but how do you distinguish one who willfully. the rule is the other. abuse of rights and your claim for damages must be based on either Article 20 or article 21 What is the rule if there was no sexual intercourse. number 1 where there is carnal knowledge.. under article 22 when someone uhmmm acquires something from another public policy or good customs shall indignify for the damage caused. No action for damages can be had. Okay. But what makes it a wrongful act Philippines because it is against our public policy... What's carnal knowledge? I do not know. may file an action in court to compel the other to acknowledge the child and support the The fundamental tenets in human relation is *pressed out* in article 19 of the Civil code child. sexual intercourse results in pregnancy and birth of a child. That is now your 22. 2nd if there is criminal or moral seduction.. knowledge is full of pretentions (MAO!) Okay. covered under article 21 is breach of contract to searched in vain for an answer there is as yet no ugh actual case decided by the Supreme marry. the girl. Carnal Let's go to abuse of rights.... If divorce is recognized which is against our customs. so that's all for conflict of laws. Okay. when the expenses were incurred by the party the same. I have covered in article 21? Typical example. 18. So if there was no is guilty of fault... So what if you are the party knowledge. where there is ahhhh sexual aggrieved by the other who is guilty of abuse in the exercise of his rights or in the intercourse.. what I'm saying is either way. But not when the sexual intercourse is born out of by mutual lust.. carnal principle of law fundamental principle of human relation. What is a typical act (cough) okay that's it.. sexual. basis for the complaint for damages in a complain ughh predicated on abuse of rights. is entitled to recover actual damages against the other. Your action. It was called abuse of rights even if you have rights but you exercise that right contrary to good mutually. an established public policy so there is also legal basis to argue in article 21 that act. Either way. the aggrieved party. for the damage that he cost to another. the rule is still. not the promise of marriage the girl would not have surrendered complete surrender there We are mandated by law to act with justice. And were it faith. policy in so far as foreigners are concerned there is no plausible reason why same sex a breach of promise to marry is not actionable Why? Marriage is consensual. What if the act is not contrary to law? But it cost damage to another not all acts are No one should unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another. So this remains to be a do not understand why this is called carnal knowledge. justice that makes one liable for damages under the principle of abuse of laughs LOL) No action for damages because the promise of marriage was not the rights.. the act virtue of article 17 paragraph 3 that same sex marriage may not be recognized in the covered under article 21 is not illegal. What are the important elements that you must remember article 21. 2nd rule. public customs or public policy your basis have these provisions article 22 of the civil code and article 2154 these pro visions these 2 for your claim for damages would not be article 20. public legal basis. Meaning the other was able to deflower the obligation should act with justice. related to human relation is so called the principle of unjust enrichment. Give everyone his due. by unlike in 20 wherein it can be intentional or negligent act and unlike article 20. So what happens if one in violation of this principle acts otherwise.. the rule is If there is sexual intercourse. Another principle. Let's go to abuse of rights.. NO law is not recognized in the Philippines because it is against public policy then there is no liability. what's the rule? 1st. morals. give everyone his due and observe honesty and good other. but somehow an action Law one argument is as good as the other on the point unless this is resolved by the for damages may be filed against the party responsible for the breach under article 21 Supreme court. there is sexual intercourse. take note willfully causes damage to another in a manner contrary to morals from the other. So if the one damages can be recovered even if there was no sexual intercourse. to hurt. from the other. let’s go to that act is liable for damages. 2nd action to recover moral damages may be allowed IFF the other caused. What is the rule on breach of promise to marry? As a general rule. These are the most common principles in human relation. there is carnal (foot stomp) there are previous principles involved relating to human relations one of which knowledge.. criminal or moral action for damages happens? One who acts contrary to the tenets fresh out of article 19 is guilty of the so is always allowed. this is criminal seduction or moral when good faith. What is 20 and 21? Let's go to 20. observe honesty and is criminal when the girl is less than 18 years old. the offended party. humiliate the other moral committed either through negligence or intentional act. (Class faith.. Why not say it the way it is fertile ahhh ground for debate. 3rd actual damages may also be recovered as when wedding preparations performance of his obligations. (foot stomp) Because they both have because it could be that the breach of contract to marry is contrary to morals. Article 20 says that any person who contrary aggrieved of course it can be recovered by the party aggrieved where they spent for the to law willfully or negligently causes damages to another shall dignify for the damage wedding expenses. meaning the promise to marry was the which says that everyone in the exercise of his right and in the performance of his ahhh sufficient cause for the degradation. Do we still have time? understood (foot stomp) sexual intercourse! It's even. until now I court decide the problem here is if you happen to be the Judge. let's go to 19. cool and better to hear.. if there is seduction.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 contravenes the sound. but article 21. So. what the girl is beyond 19. so this issue remains to be resolved by the supreme court. Willfully or negligently. Take note that article 19 does not provide for a penalty it merely states a general sufficient cause for the front.. actual damages can because both expressly provide for remedies by way of damages but 20 and 21 are not be recovered by the one who shouldered. your guess is as good as mine. resorted to by the 2 consenting adults who did it to their sickening delight. there are ohh this aghhh principles common principles aghhh abuse of rights the principle of abuse the following remedies. before. The point of be under article 20 because article 20 presupposes an illegal act. the act must be contrary to the law meaning it must be illegal and the act is promise was motivated by ill will intended to endure. What is.. in either words the one who breached the to apply. But if a foreign be forced into marriage so if the one changes his mind at any time as a general rule. not contrary to law. negligence or if the one is guilty of an intentional act and that act is moral seduction no intention to inflict injury but the refusal to comply with promise of contrary to law and it results in the damage suffered by another that one who is guilty of marriage was done in good faith. in a situation where there was no sexual. You now go to court on what is now your legal basis to ask and expenses were already incurred but the other did not show up so the one who spent for damages when article 19 does not provide for remedy. as practicing so what is the rule on breach to promise to marry? The rule governing breach of promise lawyers.. and 2nd depending on which side you are on your argument is as good as the other and let the where there is no carnal knowledge. we now take up human relations. but it may be contrary to moral.

Otherwise. Supposing the finder complies of something from one to the other is deliberate.. to return it to the one from whom it came... A was not at fault. Alone and lonely. the actor is not civilly or criminally liable. we Supreme Court rejected her argument. the actor who caused the damage is not liable because He you decided to go out of the department store when you were intercepted by the guard.. So this was delivered to him by mistake . (Random gibberish) to avoid grater evil that the Hospital wuld not release her mother from confinement. But under Art.22 and 2154 can be distinguished from one another.. after deliberate search the Code.. The Supreme Court say.. The doctrine of state of necessity Where are we? So another principle is related to human relation commission is the did not prosper in that case. but the actor is not in any way liable. So. hospital personnel.. This due to the act. pero kung ako na na postdated and unfunded cheque . In payment. in that under 22. that whenever something is received and there is no right to demand it and the property found is a lost property. principle of unjust enrichment. Arises. It is someone receives something from another even if he has no right to demand from it but but right and equitable that he should indemnify B by virtue of Art.. A’s cattle the obligation to return the property arises. kaya pa.432. 2154 was delivered by mistake. if the defendant was benefited. the doctrine of state of necessity or incomplete privilege does not apply.. you pay again. the Mayor is obliged to make a public the delivery is by mistake. take note in 22 the article was delivered intentionally and relation to Art. under Article 719 of the Civil Code. you went to your ATM Hospital who claimed to be mistreated or maltreated by the . deliberately without mistake. . according to her. and so to avoid being mauled or to avoid embarrassment Code provides. 23. Ah. she was compelled to issue the cheque mistake. for action in rem no liability. 2154 there is always an obligation to return. Take note of this provision. Take note that you making the 2nd payment was intentional it was not delivered other words. where there is no right to demand it but the thing was delivered though mistake Without A’s knowledge. if the interference in intended to but it was received without mistake.. when you got the damage caused. So you went home. the one. While article 2154. in particular. the patient confined in the Manila Doctor’s someday. 2154 says. delivered but no justifiable cause for someone to receive it while in 2154 the property was Under this provision. This principle was enunciated in the case of hammered by the security guard. aw. one dozen ahhh whisper with wings. one time when you were so depressed. True.308 of the the thing is delivered by mistake. So. is ahhh liable to return to you the 2nd property is the one responsible for the damage or guilty of some fault or negligence. the act of not But art. doctrine of state of necessity applies when the owner of the damaged through mistake because you decided to pay it to avoid embarrassment to avoid being property is free from any form of negligence. Art 22 and 2154.22. another species of unjust enrichment.22 when there if known. The hospital has not allowed the release of his mother account I'll keep the money. Vicky Ty was compelled to issue a deposited 1000000 in your account (I don't know with you guys. did I give you the example already? See we already done with that. the recipient under the principle of unjust enrichment is obliged to for the damages trough that act. unfortunately for criminally or civilly. the guard that act is liable to indemnify the damage caused . and the evil feared is greater than the damage to the property owner. deliver the found property to the Mayor of the place where the property was is no justifiable ground to receive it. An obligation to return. Ah. Do not. it is the person who benefited out of that event who is liable to indemnify you decided to voluntarily pay again. you paid in cash and you took the receipt you put the receipt in Ok. the obligation to return arises. Vicky Ty is the one One hour? . store after few hours Penal Code. is illustrated in a situation where People vs Ty.. doctrine of necessity is only applicable when the have 2 hours? person involved is not guilty of any fault or negligence. The That's. If the no right to demand delivery on the part of the recipient . you misplaced the receipt. the typical example of this in the book. ahem. remember however that.22 of the Civil Code in I missed out something . So what is involved here is a to 23. 23 of the Civil Code. someone who finds a lost property is obliged to return it to the owner involve the obligation to return whenever something is received. and 2154. for example you buy there you buy. for your cellphone when you discover that your patient was initially accommodated in the suite accommodation but the accommodation supposed deposit of 1000 turned out to be 1000000 because someone by mistake has been downgraded. 21.. even if one is not deliver it. it says there that whenever the owner of that property the fact that in 22 the property was recieved without justification. You cannot find it in your bag. the finder is liable for the crime of theft. and I am referring to the doctrine of state of necessity or the doctrine of solutio indebiti how does one distinguish from the other.432 of the Civil Code is equally the same as Art. Can you withdraw it? No! because 2154. meaning as distinguished from Art.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 possession of something from another without justifiable cause the one who receives it is this is. It is theft. So this also contemplates of a situation where are saved.. nothing. The same holds true under Article 11 paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal you. if the owner of the dept store who received twice for the same item. caused the damage in order to avoid a greater evil but the person who benefited out of you were bringing with you your 1 dozen whisper w/ wings. when there is no right to demand it. found. it was intentionally avoid greater evil. So in both 22 and it is the fact that the one derived benefit. LOL) because the cheque bounced and Vicky was prosecuted under BP 22.. So doing his job. responsible for the alleged greater evil.. 22 is action rem in verso while in Art. The actor who caused the liability has received by someone because it was delivered to him by mistake. without justifiable cause cannot prevent the other from interference of his property. Art. The to withdraw something to buy ahhh a load. I think 22? Let's go to 23! Time na.. demanded for the receipt otherwise you will be mauled to death Gaisano. under the state of necessity. but the person who benefited out of that act shall indemnify the owner of the pursuant to article 22 the situation here is like a someone who is in a department store say property damaged. 432 of the Civil Code. The obligation to indemnify still arises. How do you distinguish this from article responsible for another’s loss or damage. Vicky Ty. 11 paragraph 4 of the Revised your shoulder bag and then you continue to roam around the dept. Take not of this case. Let us proceed obliged to return the same to the one who delivered it. both Revised Penal Code. the obligation to return it arises. In this case. but how do you distinguish one from the distinguish this from Art. mandates you to return whatever you receive by interposed the state of necessity. So it must be publicly announced. The daughter of the patient. Under Art. Pause for Prayer. In article 432. Under Art. What happens when Art.. so let's go to 23 tomorrow! Ha? Thursday.11 paragraph 4 of the Revised other? Article 22 is referred to as action in rem verso while article 2154 is referred to as Penal Code. the home it was then that you found the receipt somewhere beneath your bag under 22. But art. this two can be distinguished by incomplete privilege. Art. I am referring to art. Let me go back to Art. and Art. a flood drives his cattle to the cultivated highlands of B.2154 the rule. okay. ah. Remember the case I assigned..101 of the revised Penal receipt is nowhere to be found. It says there that an act or omission was not situation where one receives something from another without justifiable cause. So owner comes forward. What is the rule? The rule under art. but he was benefited. the delivery delivering or returning the lost property to the ah. Under Art 2154. so it was delivered without mistake. the obligation to indemnify arises. the defendant may still be held liable happens. but B’s crops are destroyed. You bought there whisper with wings. and claims the lost property within 6 months from the public . fault or negligence of the defendant. that because of Vicky’s fault that brought about the unanticipated greater evil. Now. if the 2154 of the civil code which says that whenever something is received where there is person was benefited out of the event. 2154 is the principle in debiti . if something is deliberately delivered to another but there is announcement of the finding of the lost property.

. And because Mr Christensen was an American.. The bulk of the pie was bequeathed to Lucy... By virtue of your administration of the issue to the German law. The same as Article 11.. with cases in involving public element and the Phil. This is called the place where the testator was domicile at the time of his death must apply. the issue now is on the validity of the provision in the will of Mr safety of security. but reserved to his country. the one who caused the damage.silence.. who now becomes the owner of the property by virtue of that interstate and testate succession (sic) is governed by the laws of the national law of occupation. So the of the civil code. does not grant the estator the absolute right of to court applies the various conflict of laws principles. confronted with the problem of renvoi. when it comes to the succession of a citizen. and by simple mathematical computation. However if the owner did not claim within the purely internal? Or the entire body of laws of the foreign country including the conflict of period of six months from the time it was publicly announced. and if we consult the law of that other country.... Questions? Before I to proceed to civil rule on succession. the conflict interminable referring back forth of this.. 24. So you. Art. This is one... ah. But civil liability lies on the persons benefited from the act. it is not specified that is why contract. when our court is internal laws and the conflict of laws rules. Did I discuss the problem of renvoi? I missed that out sorry. the court is applied as to whether the without the knowledge or consent of the owner.. Chances are.. although he did not acknowledge that Helen is his illegitimate squatters’ houses. And if we look at our own laws. when there is a doubt as to whether the law referred to in our conflict of laws value of the property found as a reward. you refers the issue to the law of the US. 436. any person has the right to dispose of actions.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 announcement. So if you happen to be an Christensen in so far as the amount given to her. If this is allowed to continue.. the property shall be delivered to the owner. The problem of renvoi arises when the law. that we our. So the finder is rule as the law referring to the law of the foreign country.. and in this body of laws are two components purely law. domicile law theory is the conflict of laws rule on succession. 21. they are not criminally or civilly liable. referring back. she says that either that the law of the benefited out of the act of the fireman in destroying the squatters areas neighbouring Phil of succession illegitimate daughter cause she claims to be the illegitimate daughter of houses... But according to refers the issue back to our own laws.. national law is the controlling law. During his lifetime.23 is about the destruction of the property.... the testator is a foreigner like a say that when there is a property and you took over that property. our own law. the Supreme Court . ah Negotiorum Gestio is about the administration of a property and it is a quasi. 432..23. the law of the be solved... because their own conflict of law says that the question must be referred to destroys their houses to put off the fire. If this does not stop. That is the essence of indemnity.. But not in the Phil... so Helen was given a little share of the pie. is the entire body of the surrounding area occupied by squatters with their shanties and makeshift houses. it property.. national law of the decedent.. That is the rule when the property found is a lost the person whose succession is under consideration. this is the law that Helen has now invoked.... he is conflict of laws rule. there will be no end to litigation... but.. ah.. every our art 16 says national law of the decedent but does not specify if it refers to the internal country has each body of laws. So the court now.. The owner of the building. refers the issue to art 16. When the court resolves a free to dispose it.. In that have (?) the question confounding the court is refereed in our law to the law of another there is a portion of one’s estate that cannot be disposed of. because When does the problem of renvoi arise? As I emphasized earlier in my discussion. So when we apply article 16 paragraph 2.. no civil executed a will wherein he disposed the bulk. no right to recover compensation arises... the illegitimate daughter is entitled to one half of what the legitimate daughter in so far as the actor.. the national law of the decedent. If we dispose of his estate because we observe or adhere to the principle of (legiting?). or you administer German. is the law of the foreign country compensated or rewarded by his honesty. so based on our conflict of laws.... body of laws of what country including of conflict of law rule. The obligation to compensate for the damage caused arises from the fact that the invoked the internal law in the Phil of succession.. the court exercise of the police power where no right of compensation is available.. honesty pays. And law of that country including the conflict of laws rule. If one property is destroyed by competent authority by reason of (?) problem went to court. So the intrinsic aspect of the will. 16. Take for example article sixteen of the own civil code paragraph 2 which says delivered to the finder. What happens here? The SC said... so there will be a manner he wishes.. daughter. That is the essence of This is perfectly illustrated in the case of Edward Christensen. The entire property shall be laws rule.. the issue is referred that is the only way to get through the subdivision and put of the fire. the law in the US says that Mr Christensen is free to dispose of his estate in any own laws refer the same question back to the laws of the foreign country. the problem will not of rules on succession is that.. or the conflict of laws rule. one is the US internal law on succession as well as the US conflict of laws The questions could be a little tricky in the exam. Ahm. so she is saying that the issue is or owner of a ruinous building in the verge of collapse because of poor maintenance.. Now there is a gap. our Lucy. because in the conflict of laws situation involving cases.. But of the laws of the forum. it will pose contrasting to ours. destroying a there is a doubt because if the law being referred to in art 16 is the internal law of the property in order to avoid greater evil. The internal law on succession. which is problem of the renvoi which literally means. the city elates to the matter of the amount of successional rights which refers to the validity of the government destroyed your ruinous building to avoid eventual collapse and to avoid testamental provisions of the will. so far as succession. Art 16 says has no right to demand for compensation for the value of the building because this is the national law of the decedent. Helen a Filipino. in order to solve the problem. the components of differentiate the thin line that separate these provisions. That is the. what is negotiorum Gestio? Sir: Negotiorum Gestio is a quasi-contract.. But our art 16.. But there are 2 laws in the US. course the owner of the houses destroyed may recover damages from the owners of the subdivision who benefited when the fire was eventually put off. The only way to access the subdivision is through being referred to by art 16 was referring to law of the foreign country. But what about the conflict of laws in the us on succession. the 2nd paragraph of art 16. to bequeath it to anyone he wishes.. because ours is the law. So. simply states. Typical example is a fire.. a portion a. Christensen.. our internal law of succession. Suppose in the problem the.. the owner is obliged to pay you the expenses that you may have incurred... But if the law subdivision in Maria Luisa for example. does not specify whether that national law refers to the internal national law or the entire ah. little of his estate to Helen. Let’s go back to the problem of doreva. So. but the finder gets 1/10 of the when the law. But the liability for indemnity lies gets.. 22.. in property. no civil or criminal liability Edward. in our existing laws. The obligation to indemnify arises out from the benefit incurred when the firemen American citizen but domicile in the Phil at the time of his death. that is our own law by Jaysen: Sir. the same as article 11. let us virtue of our own law art.. One is absolutely free to dispose his of estate.. So this problem has to end. So if the firemen back to us.. 22 or 23. But do not confuse this with article 436 Christensen was way below the amount that Helen claims to be her just share. Mr. the amount given to her in the will of Mr on the parties who have benefited out of the issue. he bequeathed the bulk of his property to his liability and criminal liability on the part of the actors who destroyed the surrounding legitimate his daughter Lucy. he destroyed the houses of the squatters to put off the fire. It’s part of the his estate in any manner he desires. general law.. which is governed by danger to life and safety of the nearby residents.. occurring in our high-end foreign country then our court will not try the internal law of that country. theirs the a situation of international football. unlike 432. that law of that country in turn compulsory heir. okay.. Edward Christensen was an Art.

not filed ahead of the criminal action. and the private lawyer criminal action. one civil. are value of stolen property and indemnification for consequential damages. What is the rule? It is not waived. a private officer or public employees or officer legitimate child. civil liability may take the form of breaches the public peace. that is one half of the share of actions based on Article 32 when a person. apart from the hospital expenses incurred in the (sic) hospitalization of the victim. when the civil action based on 100. there is attempted (sic) where public or when a police or a member of a police force fails or refuses no crime. and lastly 2176 of the Civil Code the so called through fault or negligence or intentional act. it is not constitutes tort. Let’s go to the first situation. when the crime of murder is committed. civil the estate of her father in accordance to Phil internal law. fraud. article 104 of the Civil Code consist of committed. the society of as a whole comprises civil liability? When we talk about civil liability. accept the person criminally liable is civilly liable. no file ahead. the first situation is where the civil action is not waived. there is no law that punishes it as a crime. In this case of the criminal action because this civil liability proceeds from criminal liability. it is not unlikely that an act or omission may dependent civil action. Even if the act is immoral fraud–estafa. By the way. the People of the Philippines. So it is not uncommon that the same act or omission is filed in court. There is no criminal consideration that there may be civil action the first situation. when a crime is committed. Every person Christensen. there are two solutions to solve that the problem of various sources of civil liability. On the other hand. physical injuries–homicide. the party called independent civil action and a civil action does not depend on the outcome of prosecutor representing the State. renvoi. there is a crime. for example. Let’s go to a crime that is only proper. Fault or negligence under art 2176 or quasi quasi delict. and the way of compensation the party responsible is a unearned income that the victim expected to earn during his lifetime and it had been for judge civilly liable. How are same case criminal case. our court should. possession of firearm. we have to distinguish or enumerate or determine the representing the private offended party. in other word if same act by the act or omission independent from the criminal action for libel–defamation. The civil action may be filed arising from the there crime? There is a crime when the act or omission is punished by law. I’m not talking of any other sources. in this case Helen was given just heir in action there depends on the outcome of the criminal action. murder. so it presupposes criminal liability. That’s why the civil should apply our own internal law of succession. 34. does not depend on the outcome of whatever criminal Let’s got to civil action… an act or omission may either constitute a crime or constitute a action that may be instituted arising on the same act or omission. tort is also a wrongful act committed by one in violation of the to render or aid of protection to somebody who is in danger of his life or from. so in the crime of robbery. one to recover civil liability. there is a law that punishes an act or omission. those enumerated note of that. the purpose of the civil action based on tort and (sic) is not to penalize the untimely death of the victim.that’s restitution. the rule on but there’s a specific tort that makes it a crime. A crime the offended party is the entire people. individual. the moment that criminal information for robbery recovered from the same offender. it says every back and acquire the internal law of the foreign country. restitution. So all other imposes penalty either with a form of fine where the accused is ordered to pay a certain damages that the victim sustained as a consequence of the crime like in murder. but more because of the breach that the crime . That is the case that perfectly illustrates the problem of renvoi. it is being punished not because of restitution the accused or the convict may be directed by the court to return the stolen item the damage that is caused to the victim. So what’s the rule in dependent civil action? Number 1. For this purpose. It signifies that when a crime Civil liability under104 of the Revised Penal Code. what crime and tort. What is crime. A tort in our jurisdiction. or if the restitution is not available. we shall discuss how is automatically the civil action is deemed in (sic) instituted with the criminal case. but before that. Let’s go to incurred. civil liability may be filed in court. our court shall accept the referring back of the issue and therefore our court criminally liable is civilly liable. no the offender and because there is a private interest involved where the victim. But the private offended party does not wish to . On the other hand. This is the kind of civil action which is dependent on referring back of the issue and apply the internal law of the forum. (It all?) Depends on. parricide. civil liability may take the form of caused to the public peace. So it is an act in violation of the right of another source of an independent civil action apart from the criminal action that may be another causing damage or injury to the latter. Note there for example. under the bill of rights. Let’s take the case of robbery. these comprise the civil liability that may the party responsible but to compensate the victim for the damage that the victim suffers. tort. it is deemed impliedly instituted the moment the criminal action is who suffers damage as the result of the act or omission. but even both outcome of the criminal case. what is tort? When is involving defamation. for amount or imprisonment. So a crime if there is criminal liability. it is always people of the phil. contrary to pursued under the principle of independent civil actions. of course reserve. it may also constitute not a crime but only a tort. that is right of another which causes damage to the latter. not reserved and based on tort or if possible that the (sic) permission constitutes crime at the same time not file. mere possession of a firearm – there is no private right involved When I say dependent civil action. you take or private individual violates any of the constitutional rights of another. So maybe a crime that punishes legal dependent civil action contemplates of four distinct situations. one dependent on the outcome of the criminal case and the other is the so same case for robbery. does may give rise to the institution of two actions: one criminal. or constitute both a crime a tort at the same time. wilfully or negligently cause a damage to another shall indemnify for the damages dependent and independent are governed by different procedural rules. if entails civil liability. So these are the. where the accused or the convict is ordered to pay the one being breached when a crime is committed. physical injuries. indemnification for consequential damages may take the form of the violated. That is the intentional tort. On the other hand. The 2nd solution is. One to impose not reserve the filing of civil action or does not file it ahead of criminal action then criminal liability. I’m referring to Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code it there or an act or omission may cause damage to another but there is no law that makes it says person criminally liable is civilly liable. to consider the law as internal. First solution is. infanticide. the basis there is Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code. is the one that depends on the constitute only a crime. so what’s the rule? Number 1 breach of the public peace and therefore criminal case of murder may be instituted against ruling. in that dependent. what really does it contemplate? that is why in a criminal case. generally. For our purposes now. We have civil liability arising from crime where the source. The public deserves the tranquility and peace and that is the reparation where the offended pa-. not the entire people. as I say. the offense constitutes an offense against the entire people because a crime number 1. civil action may be instituted against the wrongdoer – this is the kind of independent civil action. is either committed filed arising from the same act or omission. In other words. Article 100 in the RPC is not waived. So more concerned (sic) rights of an individual being indemnification. be covered in civil action unlike in criminal where the criminal only serves like your fine or It’s possible that an act or omission is only crime when there is no private interest in (sic) imprisonment. 2176 are the various sources of civil liability which may be delict. our first should reject the referring the base there is. (ART) 33 for crimes tort. tort is an act that cause damage to a private example. there are two lawyers there appearing. intentional tort is done one in ways under art 20. So in that civil action constituted when there is when the same act also constitutes crime. So in the crime of robbery. two purposes are pursued the state seeks imposition of criminal we supposed to (sic) civil action? There are two general kinds of a civil action the one liability and that private offended party seeks recover of civil liability.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 said. and the party offended party does not waive the filing of civil action. So 32. 33. there is reserved neither it is not filed ahead of the criminal action. So. The dependent civil action. So these are or offensive to the sensibilities of man. What’s the rule now? The law.

preponderance of evidence. the fiscal would not be concerned so much with proving the damage caused because he is only representing the interest of the State and the State does not concert with the damage. the prosecutor will only be concerned themselves with proving the elements of the crime. there’s only one case but the criminal aspect and civil aspect are jointly trialed. There’s only one criminal case. when the acquittal of the accused is based on reasonable doubt there is no sufficient evidence constituting proof beyond reasonable doubt. So the both the criminal action. You cannot anymore invoke article 100 because article 100 presupposes conviction. the civil action are jointly trialed at the same place. the private offended party may just engage the prosecutor. because in the civil case the only quantum of evidence required is preponderance of evidence which is an evidence lower and degrade than proof beyond reasonable doubt. Why? The reason there is. So it’s possible that the evidence presented is not enough to constitute proof beyond reasonable doubt but good enough to constitute proof. ‘fiscal I don’t wish to engage the services of private lawyers so can you please prove all (sic) civil liability in the presentation of your evidence?’ Because normally if you have your own lawyer. Can the court in the same decision hold the accused liable for civil liability. damages when on one hand the court (sic) the accused can it. on the other hand. Take note. So. ah. hold the accused liable civilly? And the article 29 of the Civil Code.Persons Scutarius Legis EH409 engage the services of private lawyer. in a way act as the lawyer both for the State and the private offended party. if the judgment of acquittal is based on complete innocence because the court finds that the acts or omissions from which criminal liability might have arise did not exist. a (sic) damage but then the (sic) allow that the prosecutor also act as the. can the court still hold the accused civilly liable? In this case. The decision of the court may take this form: what happens if the court finds the accused not guilty because of reasonable doubt there is no sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt so the court declares the accused not guilty. the private offended party will just have to make arrangement to the public prosecutor that. . it is still possible that the accused may be held civilly liable although criminally examinated(?). no more and this is consistent with the dependent nature of the civil action. okay? There will be only one decision rendered by the court. There’ll only be one decision. On the other hand.