In the Avoidance of a Greater Evil or injury a person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury,

does an act which causes damage to another, it is required that:

(1) Evil sought to be avoided actually exists,
(2) Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; and
(3) There be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.
In addition, the greater evil should not be brought about by negligence or imprudence, and
the evil brought about by the greater evil must not result from a violation by the actor. In
this case, the person or persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall
instead be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have received.

Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of Right or Office is a justifying circumstance for

when a person acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right of office, it
requires that:
(1) That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in lawful exercise of a right or
office; and
(2) That the injury caused or the offense committed by the necessary consequence of the
due performance of duty or the lawful exercise.
This circumstance is often invoked when police officers manage to shoot and kill a suspect,
whether due to refusal to surrender1, or nearing complete escape from a pursuit2. However,
it can include theft, swindling and malicious mischief committed by a wife against her
husband, in this case such acts can’t be said to have been committed by the wife.

Obedience to an Order issued for Some Lawful Purposes applies when a person acts in
obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose, it requires that:
(1) That an order has been issued by a superior,
(2) That such order must be for some lawful purpose; and
(3) That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful.
Thus a subordinate cannot invoke this circumstance when order is patently illegal3. However,
subordinate is not liable if they are not aware of the illegality of the order and are not
negligent4. Claiming compulsion of an irresistible force, or under impulse of uncontrollable
fear may be done in this circumstance.

1
People v. Gayrama, [1934] 60 Phil. 796
2
People v. Delima, [1922] 46 Phil. 738
3
People v. Barroga, [1930] 54 Phil. 247
4
People v. Beronilla, [1955] 96 Phil. 566