APT - Persons and Family Relations
Galas
Law is a rule of conduct, just, obligatory,
promulgated by legitimate authority, and of
common observance and benefit.
-SANCHEZ ROMAN
Classification of law according to manner of
promulgation:
- Natural Law
o Promulgated impliedly in our
conscience and body
 Natural Moral Law
(do good, avoid evil)
 Law of Nature
(gravity, etc)
- Positive Law
o Promulgated expressly or
directly
 Divine Positive Law
(10 commandments etc)
 Human Positive Law
(statutes, EO’s, etc)
Classifications of Human Positive Law
- Accdg. to whether a right is given
o Substantive Law
(rights x duties)
o Remedial Law
(manner of enforcing legal rights
and claims)
- Accdg. to scope and content
o Private Law
o Public Law
- Accdg. to force/effect
o Mandatory and/or prohibitory
laws
o Permissive laws
Civil Code – compilation of civil laws
Civil Law – a mass of precepts; for members of
society x private interest protection
The civil code is part of the Civil Law, but not all
civil laws are part of the Civil Code
ARTICLE 1. This act shall be known as the
“Civil Code of the Philippines” (n)
Sources of the Civil Code:
- Spanish Civil Code of 1889
- 1935 PH Constitution
- Statutes or Laws (PH, US, EU)
- Rules of Court (Local or Foreign)
- Decisions of Local Tribunals (SC)
- Decisions of foreign tribunals,
comments and treatises of foreign jurists
- PH Customs and traditions
- Gen. Principles of Law and Equity
- Report of the Code of Commission
ARTICLE 2. Laws shall take effect after
fifteen days following the completion of their
publication in the Official Gazette or in a
newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided.
This code shall take effect one year after
such publication. (1a)
Atty. Lydia C.
Originally, the provision only mentioned the
Official Gazette as the medium of publication.
However, it was amended in Pres. Cory
Aquino’s EO 200, which included newspapers of
general circulation.
“Newspapers of general circulation” are chosen
within the court’s jurisdiction.
The phrase
UNLESS IT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED1
pertains to the date of effectivity of the law, not
the act of publication.
TANADA (p) VS TUVERA (r)
Facts:
- Respondents have several Presidential
Decrees and Executive Orders
implemented without the publication in
the Official Gazette.
- Petitioners demand the publication of
several Presidential Decrees and
Executive Orders in the Official Gazette.
- Respondents argue that publication was
not necessary, as cited in a phrase in
Article 2 – Unless otherwise provided(1)
- Respondents also want the case
dismissed outright, seeing petitioners do
not have the legal personality to bring
the petition
- Petitioners maintain that the petition
concerns a public right, and they need
not special interest for their petition to
be given due course.
Decision:
WHEREFORE, the Court hereby orders respondents to
publish in the Official Gazette all unpublished presidential
issuances which are of general application, and unless so
published, they shall have no binding force or effect.
Issues:
- What is meant by “law of public nature”
or general applicability?
o The term ‘laws’ should refer to
all laws, for strictly speaking all
laws relate to people in general
although some may not apply
directly
o To be valid, the law must invariably
affect public interest even if it might be
directly applicable only to one individual,
or some of the people only, and to the
public as a whole
- Must a distinction be made between
laws of general applicability and laws
which are not?
o All statutes must be published.
Including those of local
application and private laws as
a condition of their effectivity.
o PD’s and EO’s, admin rules and
regulations (if their purpose is to enforce
or implement existing law pursuant to a
1
APT - Persons and Family Relations
valid delegation), the city charter,
monetary board circulars (if they are to
fill in the details of the Central Bank Act)
- What is meant by publication?
o Publication must be made in full
or it is no publication at all
o Publishing the number of the PD, its
title, and its whereabouts is not enough
(to inform)
- Are there exceptions to the rule on
publication?
o Admin regulations (letters of
instructions etc)
- Where is the publication to be made?
o Official Gazette
- When is the publication to be made?
o See “unless otherwise provided”
- What is the effect of the lack of
publication?
o These laws shall have no force
or effect
o For without publication, the people will
not be informed of what the law is about,
and would use ignorance to excuse
themselves from liability, negating
Article 3 of the Civil code
DE ROY (p) VS CA (r)
Bernal Family (private respondents)
Facts:
- The Bernal Family lives in a tailoring
shop adjacent to a building owned by
Feliza De Roy and Virgilio Ramos
- The firewall of the De Roy & Ramos
building fell, destroying the tailoring
shop, as well as killing Marissa Bernal
THE COURT finds petitioners GUILTY of GROSS
NEGLIGENCE and awarding damages to private
respondents
- De Roy and Ramos filed a motion for
extension to file a motion for
reconsideration, on the last day of the
fifteen-day period to file a motion for
reconsideration
- The court DENIES their petition on the
basis of the ruling of the Habaluyas
Case (which states that there can be no
motion for extension to file a motion for
reconsideration)
- Further, the petitioners have filed their
motion one year after the grace period
for filing a motion for extension.
(also the ISSUE)
- Petitioners contend that the SC Ruling
was not published in the Official
Gazette, and therefore not binding
- There is no rule requiring SC Rulings to
be published in the Official Gazette
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
- It is in the duty of their counsel as a
lawyer to keep abreast the decisions of
the Supreme Court, particularly where
issues have been clarified, consistently
reiterated, and published in advance
(GR, SCRA, law journals)
*grace period was from August 5 1985 – June 30, 1986
**petitioners filed on September 9, 1987
ARTICLE 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no
one from compliance therewith
- All persons are conclusively presumed
to know all laws as long as the laws
have been duly promulgated
- Any violation thereof is not excusable on
the ground of ignorance
- Ignorance cannot be used as an excuse
as violators can easily escape the legal
consequence of their acts (frustrated
justicesame)
- Article 3 is for necessity and expediency
Ignorance of law: want of knowledge or
acquaintance with the laws of the land
- Mistake of law: a mistake regarding
what law is applicable to a certain set of
facts
- Mistake of law is not ignorance of law
Ignorance of fact: want of knowledge of some
fact or facts constituting or relating to the subject
matter in hand.
- Mistake of fact: mistake regarding the
circumstances surrounding the situation
Article 4. Laws shall have retroactive effect,
unless the contrary is provided
Two types: Retroactive and Prospective laws
Generally, all laws operate prospectively (unless
otherwise provided)
Laws that may be given retroactive application:
- Remedial laws
- Penal laws
- Curative laws
- Emergency laws
- Laws creating new rights
- Tax laws
- Laws themselves provide for their
retroactivity
2
APT - Persons and Family Relations
ATIENZA (p) VS BRILLANTES (r)
Facts:
- This is an administrative case filed by
Lupo Atienza on the ground of gross
immorality and appearance on
impropriety against Judge Francisco
Brillantes
- Atienza has children with Yolanda De
Castro. They were living together in a
house in Manila.
- One day Atienza caught Judge
Brillantes sleeping on his (p) bed.
Houseboy reports that Brillantes and De
Castro have been cohabiting.
- Atienza alleged that Judge Brilllantes is
already married to one Zenaida
Ongkiko. Brillantes and Ongkiko have
five children together.
- Brillantes denies his two marriages with
Ongkiko as it was celebrated without a
marriage license.
- Brillantes also claims that his marriage
with De Castro in California was in good
faith as he was single (again bringing up
the lack of a marriage license with
Ongkiko)
- Under the Family Code (Article 40),
there must be a judicial declaration of
the nullity of the previous (Ongkiko)
marriage.
- However, Brillantes states that Article 40
does not apply to his first (2) marriage,
only his second.
Decision:
WHEREFORE, respondent is DISMISSED from the service
with forfeiture of all leave and retirement benefits and with
prejudice to reappointment in any branch, instrumentality, or
agency of the government, including government-owned and
controlled operations.
Issue:
Can Article 40 of the Family Code have
retroactive effect?
- Yes. It has retroactive effect insofar as it
does not impair vested or acquired
rights.
o In the case, respondent has
failed to show any impaired
vested or acquired rights.
o (Also) The respondent was
already a lawyer during his first
two marriages, and the fact that
he did not secure a marriage
licence on the second occasion
betrays his bad faith.
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
CARLOS (p) VS SANDOVAL (r)
Facts:
- Spouses Felix Carlos and Felipa Elemia
died intestate and left six parcels of land
to their compulsory heirs: brothers
Teofilo Carlos and Juan De Dios Carlos
- To avoid inheritance taxes, Felix Carlos
agreed to transfer his estate to Teofilo,
the latter would then turn over the share
of the other legal heir, Juan De Dios
Carlos.
(Parcel 1-3 were transferred
and registered in the name of Teofilo.)
(Parcel 4 was transferred and
registered in the name of the petitioner)
- Then Teofilo died intestate (HAHA GG).
He was survived by respondents
Felicidad Sandoval and Teofilo II
- The petitioner and respondents then
entered into a compromise for the sale
of the first parcel of land. Two more
contracts follow for the third and fourth
parcels of land.
If you think ok na sila…
- Petitioner filed a case against
respondents for (a) Declaration of Nullity
of Marriage; (b) status of a child; (c)
recovery of property; (d) reconveyance;
and (e) sum of money and damages
- Felicidad contended that the dearth of
details regarding the requisite marriage
license did not invalidate Felicidad’s
marriage to Teofilo. She also declared
that Teofilo II is the illegitimate child of
Teofilo Sr. with another woman (HAHAHA)
Decision:
The case is REMANDED to the RTC in regard to the action
on the status and filiation of respondent Teofilo Carlos II and
the validity or nullity of marriage between respondent
Felicidad Sandoval and the late Teofilo Carlos
Issue:
(Main) Is Juan De Dios Carlos the proper party
to file a petition for annulment?
- No. A.M No. 02-11-10 SC states that a
petition for the declaration of absolute
nullity of a marriage can only be filed by
solely a husband and wife
- He can petition for the declaration of
absolute nullity of a marriage ONLY
when Teofilo II is declared not a
legitimate, illegitimate, or legally
adopted son of Teofilo Sr.
(Since successional right goes to
3
APT - Persons and Family Relations
collateral relatives if no direct
descendants or ascendants, as well as
illegitimate children and a surviving
spouse can be found)
Is AM No. 02-11-10 SC retroactive in
application?
- It is prospective in application. Which
law would govern depends upon when
the marriage took place. In the case at
bar, AM No. 02-11-10 does not apply,
but rather the Civil Code
What is the rule prior to AM No. 02-11-10 SC?
- The civil code is silent as to who can
bring an action to declare a marriage
void
- However, this does not construe as a
license for any person to institute a
nullity of a marriage case. They must be
benefited or injured by the subject of the
suit (see italicized in main issue)
Does this mean that Juan De Dios Carlos has
no claim over the properties left by his brother
whatsoever?
- No. He can still claim his right over the
properties of his brother, but he should
not have filed a petition for annulment,
but rather underwent proper procedure
by law.
(upon the death of a spouse in a
proceeding for the settlement of the
estate of the deceased spouse filed in
regular courts)
*AM No. 02-11-10 SC (Proposed rule for the declaration of
absolute nullity of marriages)
ANITA CHENG (p) VS SPOUSES SY (r)
Facts:
- Anita Cheng filed two estafa cases
against spouses William and Tessie Sy
for issuing two checks in payment of
their loan drawn against a closed
account.
- Under the same facts, Cheng filed two
cases against respondents violating BP
Blg. 22
- All four cases were dismissed, due to
failure to prove the elements of the
crime and failure to identify the accused
respondents in open court, respectively.
- Then Anita Cheng lodged a complaint
against respondents for collection of a
sum of money with damages based on
the same loaned amount (600K, 300K
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
per check) from the Philippine Bank of
Commerce
- RTC again dismissed her complaint for
lack of jurisdiction. The civil action to
collect money was already implicit in BP
Blg. 22, and according to Section 1 (b)
of Rule 111 of the Revised Rules of the
Court:
o The criminal action for violation
of Batas Pambansa Blg P22
shall be deemed to include the
corresponding civil action. No
reservation for the filing of a
separate civil action shall be
allowed
- Cheng argues that this rule should not
apply, as it must be given prospective
application.
Issue:
Is Section 1(b) of Rule 111 of the Revised Rules
of the Court retroactive in application?
- Yes. Section 1 of Rule 111 is a
procedural rule and is retroactive in
application.
- Cheng is in error for insisting otherwise,
as it is now settled that rules of
procedure apply even to cases already
pending at the time of their
promulgation.
What is the effect of the Section 1 of Rule 111 in
this case given that it is retroactive in
application?
- Anita Cheng can no longer bring a civil
suit against the Spouses Sy for it is
already included in the BP 22 cases she
filed earlier.
- She should have appealed for civil
action (for preponderance of evidence)
so she could recover the money.
However, she is past the reglementary
period and the court is constrained to
digress from this rule.
CAROLINO (p) VS SENGA (r)
(p) is the deceased Col’s wife, ADORACION CAROLINO
- Jeremias Carolino is a retired AFP
Colonel who receives pension since
December 1976 until the respondents
withheld (it) on March 2005.
- This is due to his loss of Filipino
Citizenship (PD 1638). He can only
receive his pension again if he complies
with the requirements under the Dual
Citizenship Act
4
APT - Persons and Family Relations
Issue:
Wherein PD 1638 applies retroactively
- No. PD 1638 does not contain any
provision regarding its retroactive
application. It should apply to those who
were in the service at the time of its
approval. Conversely, it does not apply
to those who have retired before its
approval.
Col. Carolino retired in 1976. PD 1638 was
signed 1979. Col. Carolino retired under RA
340.
Discussion on vested rights:
- Before retiring, one must meet the
stated conditions of eligibility with
respect to the nature of employment,
age, and length of service.
- Undeniably, Col. Carolino has met
stated conditions, as he was already
receiving his pension until it was
terminated.
- Petitioner’s husband acquired vested
right to the payment of his retirement
benefits which must be respected and
cannot be affected by the subsequent
enactment of PD No. 1638.
- Vested rights include not only legal or
equitable title of the enforcement of a
demand, but also an exemption from
new obligations after the right has
vested
Article 5. Acts executed against the
provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws
shall be void, unless the law itself authorizes
its validity
Distinctions:
- Mandatory or prohibitory laws: uses the
word SHALL
o must be complied with for they
are expressive of public policy
o violation renders an act void
o ie. Real property transfer is only valid if
made through a public instrument
- Directory or permissive laws: uses the
word MAY
o observance is not necessary to
its validity
o violation does not render an act
void or illegal
- Mandatory statutory provision: one
which must be observed as
distinguished from a directory provision
(optional for a dept or officer to follow)
- Other exceptions:
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
o By expressly validating the
contract
o By making the invalidity to
depend on the will of the injured
party such as voidable or
annullable contracts
o By punishing it criminally but
validating the act; and
o By invalidating the act but
recognizing the legal effects
flowing from the invalid act
Article 6. Rights may be waived, unless the
waiver is contrary to law, public order, public
policy, morals, or good customs, or
prejudicial to a third party with a right
recognized by law.
- Rights
o Legally enforceable claim of one
person against another, that the
other shall do a given act, or
shall not do a given act.
o Power or privilege given to one
person and as a rule
demandable of another
- Waiver
o Intentional or voluntary
relinquishment of a known right
o May be express or implied
Requisites for a valid waiver
- The person waiving must be capacitated
to make the waiver
- The waiver must be clear and
unequivocal, but not necessarily
express
- The person waiving must actually have
the right which he is renouncing
- The waiver must not be contrary to law,
public order, public policy, morals, or
good customs
- The waiver must not be prejudicial to a
third party with a right recognized by law
- When formalities are required (as in the
case of express condonation of debt)
the formalities must be complied with
Examples of rights which cannot be
renounced
- Natural rights (e.g right to life)
- Alleged rights which do not yet exist
(e.g future inheritance)
- Those the renunciation of which would
infringe upon public policy
(e.g right to be heard in court cannot be
renounced in advance; overtime pay may be
waived if it is YET to be earned)
5
APT - Persons and Family Relations
FAMANILA (p) VS CA (r)
Facts:
- Roberto Famanila, a messman of the
vessel Hansa Riga (hired through NFD
International Manning Agents Inc.), suffered
aneurism onboard the ship and was
repatriated to the Philippines. He was
declared permanently, totally disabled.
- Authorized representatives of the NFD
International convinced him to settle his
claim amicably. Petitioner accepted the
offer as evidenced by his signature in
the Receipt and Release.
o His wife Gloria Famanila and
one Richard Famanila acted as
witnesses in the signing of the
release.
o This was dated February 28,
1991
- On June 11, 1997, Roberto Famanila
filed a complaint with the NLRC praying
for an award of disability benefits, share
in the insurance fees, moral damages,
and attorney’s fees.
o Petitioner claims that his
consent was vitiated in the
signing of the Receipt and
Release because he was
permanently disabled and in
financial constraints, which
makes the Receipt and release
void and unenforceable.
Decision: Petition is DENIED for lack of merit
Issues:
Is the receipt and release a valid waiver of his
claims over the employers?
- It is true that quitclaims and waivers are
oftentimes frowned upon. However, not
all waivers and quitclaims are invalid
against public policy.
- If the agreement was voluntarily entered
into and represents a reasonable
settlement, it is binding on the parties
and may not later be disowned simply
because of a change of mind.
- The waiver’s terms must be clear and
unequivocal, for it to be valid and
effective. This leaves no doubt as to the
intention of those giving up a right or a
benefit that legally pertains to them.
- In the case at bar, it shows that there
was a valid waiver. It was even
witnessed by the petitioner’s wife and
one Richard Famanila.
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
Was there vitiated consent on the part of
Roberto when he signed the waiver? What is the
effect of vitiated consent?
- No. There was no showing of vitiated
consent.
- A vitiated consent does not make a
contract void and unenforceable, it only
gives rise to a voidable agreement. A
voidable contract is binding unless
annulled by a proper action in court.
- Disability is also not among the factors
that may vitiate consent
(don’t bring this up kasi oblicon siya na topic)
- Again, the dude has two witnesses
- Moreover, the document entitled receipt
and release which was attached by the
petitioner does not show on its face any
violation of public policy. Nor can the
petitioner present proof (of violation of public
policy).
GUY (p) VS CA (r)
Facts:
- Sima Wei died intestate, leaving 10M
consisting of real and personal
properties. Private respondents Karen
Oanes Wei and Kamille Oanes Wei,
represented by their mother Remedios
Oanes, filed a petition that they are the
duly acknowledged illegitimate children
of the deceased.
- Shirley Guy and Michael Guy (p),
opposed to the petition on the ground
that it is not yet proven.
o The Guy family further alleged
that the claim has been paid,
waived, & abandoned or
otherwise extinguished by the
reason of Remedios’ waiver of
claim stating that in exchange
for financial and educational
assistance from the petitioner,
Remedios and her minor
children discharge the estate of
Sima Wei from any and all
liabilities
Issue:
Whether the Release and Waiver of Claim
precludes the private respondents from claiming
their successional rights
- The petition lacks merit. Remedios’
waiver of claim does not bar private
respondents from claiming successional
rights.
- The waiver does not waive hereditary
rights. The purpose of its execution
merely states that 300K and an
6
APT - Persons and Family Relations
educational plan goes to the Wei
minors.
- One of the requisites for a valid waiver:
the waiver must be couched on clear
and unequivocal terms.
- Moreover, Article 1044 of the civil code
provides:
o Any person having the free
disposal of his property may
accept or repudiate an
inheritance.
o Any inheritance left to minors or
incapacitated persons may be
accepted by their parents or
guardians. Parents or guardians
may repudiate the inheritance
left to their wards only by
judicial authorization.
o In the case at bar, no judicial
authorization has occurred so
no waiving of hereditary rights
shall be implemented.
o Further, waivers are voluntary
and intentional relinquishments
of a known right, and the Wei
sisters are yet to petition for
their illegitimacy. So they would
not have known that they
currently have successional
rights.
o Petitioner refuses to
acknowledge the Wei sisters as
his co-heirs. It would thus be
inconsistent to rule that they
waived hereditary rights when
petitioner claims that they do not
have such right.
OTAMIAS (p) VS REPUBLIC (r)
Facts:
- Edna Otamias (p) is asking for 75% of
the pension of Col. Otamias for their five
children, whose custody lies with Edna.
Col. Otamias could only offer 50%, to
which both parties came up with an
Agreement.
- The agreement was honored until
January 6, 2006. Edna alleged that the
AFP “suddenly decided not to honor the
agreement”.
- The AFP Pension and Gratuity
Management Center (AFP-PGMC),
informed Edna that a court order was
required of them before they could
receive a portion of the pension again.
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
- Edna filed before the RTC of CDO, an
action for support. The RTC ruled in
favor of Edna
- The AFP-PGMC filed another petition at
the Court of Appeals, which partially
nullified the RTC’s decision
- Aggrieved, Edna, et al. filed before the
Supreme Court a Petition for Review on
Certiorari
Decision: Petition is GRANTED
Issue:
Whether or not the Deed of Assignment made
by Col. Otamias is a valid waiver of his rights.
- Yes. Based on Article 6, Rights may be
waived, unless the waiver is contrary to
law, public order, public policy, morals,
or good customs, or prejudicial to a third
party with a right recognized by law.
- In the case at bar, his decision to waive
his retirement benefits do not infringe on
the right of third persons, but even
protects the right of his family to receive
support.
- Thus the Deed of Assignment executed
by Col. Otamias was not contrary to law;
Hence, there was no reason for the AFP
PGMC not to recognize its validity.
Article 7. Laws are repealed only by
subsequent ones, and their violation or non-
observance shall not be excused by disuse,
or custom or practice to the contrary.
When the courts declare a law to be
inconsistent with the Constitution, the
former shall be void and the latter shall
govern.
Administrative or executive acts,
orders and regulations shall be valid only
when they are not contrary to the laws or the
constitution.
Laws lose their effectivity by:
- Repeal
- Self-Cancellation
(lapse of period of effectivity)
- Declaration of nullity
(unconstitutionality)
7
APT - Persons and Family Relations
Kinds of Repeal
- Express
(repeal is explicitly stated in the
provisions)
- Implied
(when there is no repealing clause in the
repealing law and both prior and
subsequent law could not reconcile
being substantially inconsistent with one
another; if they can stand together,
there is no repeal)
Rule for General and Special Laws
1.) If the general law was enacted prior to
the special law, the latter is considered
to be an exception to the general law.
The general law remains effective
subject to the exception.
2.) If the general law was enacted after the
special law, the special law remains,
unless-
a. There is express declaration to the
contrary
b. Or there is clear, necessary, and
unreconcilable conflict
c. Or unless the general law covers the
whole subject and is clearly intended to
replace the special law on the matter
Conditions on Revival of Repealed Laws
- If the first law is repealed by IMPLICATION by the
second law, and the second law itself is repealed
by the third law, the first law is revived unless
otherwise provided in the third law
- If the first law is repealed EXPRESSLY by the
second law, and the second law is repealed by the
third law, the first law is not revived, unless
expressly so provided
Article 8. Judicial Decisions applying or
interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall
form a part of the legal system of the
Philippines.
- Judicial decisions are not laws. The
Congress makes the laws, the judiciary
applies or interprets them in given cases
and the Executive executes them as
interpreted by the judiciary
- Doctrines formulated by the decisions of
the SC are called jurisprudence.
Decisions of lower courts are not part of
jurisprudence and can have no mandatory effect.
They cannot be cited as authorities.
- Since Judicial decisions are not laws,
publication is not necessary for them to
take force and effect (see De Roy vs
CA)
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
- Stare decisis – this doctrine refers to
adherence to precedents for reasons of
stability in law. Once a case has been
decided in one way, then another case,
involving the exact same point at issue,
should be decided in the same manner.
Article 9. No judge or court shall decline to
render judgement by reason of the silence,
obscurity or insufficiency of the laws. (6)
- A judge must give a decision, whether
he knows what law to apply or not.
- Some guideposts of judges in rendering
decisions provided in the old Civil Code
o Customs which are not contrary to law,
public order and public policy
o General principles of law affecting the
case;
o Decisions of foreign courts;
o Opinions of known authors and
professors;
o Applicable rules of statutory
construction; and
o Principles laid down in analogous
instances
- This only applies to civil cases, as
criminal cases follow the rule there is no
crime when there is no law condemning
the act (nullum cimen, nulla poena sige lege)
Judges can decline judgment in criminal but not
civil cases
SILVERIO (p) VS REPUBLIC (r)
Facts:
- Rommel Silverio underwent sex
reassignment surgery from anatomically
male to female and petitions to the trial
court that his sex in the civil registry be
changed from male to female.
- The trial court grants the petition.
According to the trial court:
o It is of opinion that granting the
petition would be more in
consonance with the principles
of justice and equity
o It believes that no harm, injury
or prejudice will be caused to
anybody or the community in
granting the petition (wrong –
see ISSUE). On the contrary, it
will bring happiness on the part
of the petitioner and her fiancé
and the realization of their
dreams (no issue here, but
amending the statute is beyond
the jurisdiction of the judiciary).
o No evidence was presented to
show any cause or ground to
deny the present petition
despite due notice and
publication thereof
8
APT - Persons and Family Relations
- But the Republic of the Philippines filed
a petition (for certiorari) in the Court of
Appeals, alleging that there is no law
that allows the change of entries in the
birth certificate by reasons of sex
alteration.
- Silverio, in relation to Article 9 of the
Civil Code, contends that “No judge or
court shall decline to render judgement
by reason of the silence, obscurity, or
insufficiency of the laws.”
Issue:
Whether or not it was correct for the court to
allow the petitioner to change his name and sex
in the birth certificate.
- Rommel Silverio cannot be allowed to
change his name based on gender
assignment.
- The Supreme Court affirms the decision
of the Court of Appeals. It is true that
Article 9 states that “No judge or court
shall decline to render judgement by
reason of the silence, obscurity, or
insufficiency of the laws”. However,
judicial legislation is beyond the
jurisdiction of the judiciary. The duty of
the courts is to apply or interpret the
law, not amend it because such would
actually be an amendment of the law.
(Side Issue) What are the grounds for which
change of first name may be allowed?
- RA 9048 Section 4. Grounds for Change
of First Name or Nickname. – The
petition for change of first name or
nickname may be allowed in any of the
following cases:
o The petitioner finds the first
name or nickname to be
ridiculous, tainted with
dishonour or extremely difficult
to write or pronounce;
o The new first name or nickname
has been habitually and
continuously used by the
petitioner and he has been
publicly known by that first
name or nickname in the
community; or
o The change will avoid confusion
- The petitioner’s basis in praying for
change is his sex reassignment.
However, a change of name does not
alter one’s legal capacity or civil status.
Before a person can legally change his
given name, he must give sufficient
cause as to why he must do so. In the
case, the petitioner fails to show or even
allege prejudice that he might suffer as
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
a result of using his true and official
name.
(Side issue) What about the contention of the
trial court that no harm, injury, or prejudice will
be caused to anybody or the community in
granting the petition?
- The contention has no merit.
- Basically, if Silverio’s petition is granted,
his name change will eventually lead to
marriage with his male fiancé. Marriage
is one of the most sacred social
institutions, a special contract between a
man and a woman. One of its essential
requisites is the legal capacity of the
parties to be male and a female. To
grant the petition would warrant vast
changes in laws on marriage and family
relations.
(Side issue) What about the statement regarding
Silverio’s happiness? (see full text)
- The SC states that there is no argument
about that. The Court recognizes that
there are people whose preferences do
not fit neatly into the commonly
recognized parameters of social
convention.
- However, the petitioner’s request
includes questions in public policy,
which may be addressed by the
legislature, not the judiciary.
Article 10. In case of doubt in the
interpretation or application of laws, it is
presumed that the lawmaking body intended
right and justice to prevail.
- This article applies only when there is
doubt in the meaning of the law. If there
is no doubt, the court must apply the
law, whether it is just or not. The law is
hard but it is still the law (dura lex, sed
lex)
- In case of doubt, the judge should
assume the lawmaking body intended
right and justice to prevail, and its
interpretation will reflect upon the
intention of the legislature.
Article 11. Customs which are contrary to
law, public order, or public policy shall not
be countenanced.
Article 12. A custom must be proved as a
fact, according to the rules of evidence
9
APT - Persons and Family Relations
Definition: Customs and Usage
- Customs – it is a rule of conduct formed
by repetitions of acts, uniformly
observed as a social rule, legally binding
and obligatory.
- Usage – it is a repetition of acts, differs
from a custom as the latter is the law or
general rule which arises from such
repetition.
- Customs must be proved as a fact
because there is no judicial notice of
custom.
Kinds of Customs:
- General (prevailing throughout the country)
- Local (prevailing in some local district)
- Particular (affect only the inhabitants of some
particular district)
Requisites before the courts can consider
customs:
- Must be proved as a fact by the rules of evidence.
- Must not be contrary to law, public order, and
public policy
- There must be a number of repeated acts
- The repeated acts must be uniformly performed
- There must be juridical intention to make a rule of
social conduct
- There must be a sufficient lapse of time
Article 13. When the laws speak of years,
months, days or nights, it shall be
understood that years are of three hundred
sixty-five days each; months, of thirty days;
days, of twenty-four hours, and nights from
sunset to sunrise
If months are designated by their
name, they shall be computed by the number
of days which they respectively have.
In computing a period, the first day
shall be excluded, and the last day included.
Rule if the last day is a Sunday or a legal
holiday:
- In an ordinary contract, the general rule
is that the act is due even if it is a
Sunday or a legal holiday
(This is because obligations arising from contracts
have the force of law between the contracting
parties, Art. 1159, Civil Code)
- When the time refers to a period prescribed or
allowed by (a) Rules of Court, (b) by an order of
the court, (c) by any applicable statute, if the last
day is a Sunday or a legal holiday, it is understood
that the last day should really be the next day,
provided that said day is neither a Sunday nor a
legal holiday.
Article 14. Penal laws and those of public
security and safety shall be obligatory upon
all who live and sojourn in the Philippine
Atty. Lydia C. Galas
territory, subject to the principles of public
international law and treaty stipulations
DEL SOCORRO (p) VS WILSELM (r)
Facts:
- Norma Del Socorro (p) and Ernst Johan
Brinkman Van Wilselm (r) contracted
marriage in Holland. They were blessed
with a child, Roderigo Norjo Van
Wilselm, who at the time of the filing of
the petition is 16 y.o
- Del Socorro and elder Wilselm divorced
when Roderigo was 18 months old.
Petitioner and Roderigo returned to the
Philippines hereafter
- According to the petitioner, respondent
made a promise to provide support for
their son in the amount of 250 Guildene
monthly. This promise was not fulfilled
by the respondent.
- Sometime later, the respondent
remarried and moved to the Philippines.
At this point, all characters of the case
now reside in Cebu.
- Petitioner sent a letter requesting for
support but the respondent refused to
answer said letter.
- Petitioner filed a complaint against the
respondent for violation of Section 5,
paragraph E(2) of RA No. 9262
- On the other hand, respondent contends
that there is no sufficient and clear basis
presented by petitioner that she, as well
as her minor son, is entitled to financial
support. Respondent also adds that by
reason of the Divorce Decree (Holland)
he is not obligated to petitioner for any
financial support
Decision: Petition was GRANTED
Issue: Whether Wilselm can be charged under
Philippine law for his offenses against his minor
child with Del Socorro
- In relation to Article 14 of the New Civil
Code, it is undisputable that the alleged
continuing acts of respondent in refusing
to support his child with petitioner is
committed here in the Philippines – as
all of the parties herein are residents of
Cebu City.
- As such, our courts have territorial
jurisdiction over the offense charged
against respondent
10
APT - Persons and Family Relations Atty. Lydia C. Galas

- In addition, in international law, the party

who wants the law applied to a dispute
or case has the burden of proving the
foreign law.
o While respondent pleaded the
laws of the Netherlands in
advancing his position that he is
not obliged to support his son,
he never proved the same.
o In view of this, the doctrine of
processual presumption shall
govern.
 Under this doctrine, if
the foreign law involved
is not properly pleaded
and proved, our courts
will presume that the
foreign law is the same
as our local or domestic
or international law

(Focus on the other answer involving Article 14

nalang, kasi I don’t think part to ng syllabus natin –
but I’m placing it here jic. Aja friends! <3)

11