CASE FACTS DOCTRINE

Tañada v. Tuvera The petitioners filed for a writ of mandamus to The clause "unless it is otherwise provided" refers to the date
compel respondent public officials to publish and/or of effectivity and not to the requirement of publication itself,
cause to publish various presidential decrees, letters which cannot in any event be omitted. This clause does not
of instructions, general orders, proclamations, mean that the legislature may make the law effective
executive orders, letters of implementations and immediately upon approval, or on any other date, without its
administrative order for these to be valid and previous
enforceable must be published in the Official Gazette. publication.
The Court agreed to the petitioners and ordered Publication is indispensable in every case, but the legislature
respondents to publish the said unpublished may in its discretion provide that the usual fifteen-day period
Presidential Decrees; otherwise these shall be shall be shortened or extended.
deemed with no force and ineffective.
PASEI v. Sec. of Labor The DOLE Secretary, through the POEA, temporarily Although the respondents acted within their authority and did
took over the business of deploying  Hong Kong (HK)- not commit grave abuse of discretion in restricting and
bound, Filipino domestic workers (DH) in light of regulating recruitment, the orders and circulars issued are
published stories of abuses suffered by Filipino DH in invalid and unenforceable. This is because of lack of proper
HK. DOLE Secretary issued Department Order no. 16 publication and filing in the Office of the National Registrar as
s1991 (D.O. 16 s1991) temporarily suspending the required in Administrative Code.
recruitment by private employment agencies of
Filipino domestic helpers for Hong Kong. POEA,
pursuant to DO16 issues Memo Circular no. 30 s1991
(MC 30 s1991) provided the “Guidelines on the
Government processing and deployment of Filipino
domestic helpers to HK and the accreditation of HK
recruitment agencies intending to hire Filipino DH.
This MC also created a joint POEA-OWWA Household
Workers Placement ment. POEA also issued MC 37
s1991 on the processing of employment contracts of
DH in HK, thus requiring all HK recruitment agent/s
hiring DHs from the Philippines to recruit under the
new scheme which requires prior accreditation with
the POEA. 

Philippine Association of Service Exporters (PASEI)

filed a petition for prohibition with temporary
restraining order prohibit the enforcement
implementation of aforementioned order and
circulars.

Francisco v. CA
DM Consunji v. CA When a party having knowledge of the facts makes an election
between inconsistent remedies, the election is final and bars
any action, suit, or proceeding inconsistent with the elected

Martinez v. Van Buskirk
Thornton v. Thornton
Alonzo v. Padua Five brothers and sisters (Padua) inherited in equal
pro indiviso shares a parcel of land registered in ‘the
name of their deceased parents. Celestino Padua
transferred his undivided share by way of absolute
sale. A year later, Eustaquia Padua also sold her
share. By virtue of such agreements, the petitioners
occupied, after the said sales, an area corresponding
to two-fifths of the said lot, representing the portions
sold to them. The vendees subsequently enclosed the
same with a fence and built a semi-concrete house on
a part of the enclosed area. One of the co-heirs
sought to redeem the land sold 14 years after the
sale. Trial court dismissed the complaint, on the
ground that the right had lapsed, not having been
exercised within thirty days from notice of the sales.
Although there was no written notice, it was held that
actual knowledge of the sales by the co-heirs satisfied
the requirement of the law. Respondent court
reversed the decision of the Trial Court. Respondents
assail that they were not notified of the sale and
remedy, in the absence of fraud by the other party. The first act
of election acts as a bar. Equitable in nature, the doctrine of
election of remedies is designed to mitigate possible unfairness
to both parties. It rests on the moral premise that it is fair to
hold people responsible for their choices. The purpose of the
doctrine is not to prevent any recourse to any remedy, but to
prevent a double redress for a single wrong. The choice of a
party between inconsistent remedies results in a waiver by
election.
It is a matter of common knowledge as well as proof that it is
the universal practice of merchants to deliver merchandise of
the kind of that being delivered at the time of the injury, in the
manner in which that was then being delivered; and that it is
the universal practice to leave the horses in the manner in
which they were left at the time of the accident. This is the
custom in all cities. The act of defendant's driver in leaving the
horses in the manner proved was not unreasonable or
imprudent. The acts, the performance of which has not proved
destructive or injurious and which have, therefore, been
acquiesced in by society for so long a time that they have
ripened into custom, cannot be held to be themselves
unreasonable or imprudent.
The Court's deviation from the strict letters of Art. 1088 NCC on
giving of written notice to co-heirs of the sale of an heir's share
is not being abandoned. The ruling here should be deemed an
exception due to peculiar circumstances of this case. Law and
justice are inseparable. Laws must be applied in consonance
with justice.
 invokes Art. 1088 NCCwhich provides: "Should any of
the heirs sell his hereditary rights to a stranger before
the partition, any or all of the co-heirs may be
subrogated to the rights of the purchaser by
reimbursing him for the price of the sale, provided
they do so within the period of one month from the
time they were notified in writing of the sale by the
vendor.
Co v. New Prosperity Plastic
Products
Tenchavez v. Escaño
Aznar v. Garcia
It is equally clear from the record that the valid marriage
between Pastor Tenchavez and Vicenta Escaño remained
subsisting and undissolved under Philippine law,
notwithstanding the decree of absolute divorce that the wife
sought and obtained on 21 October 1950 from the Second
Judicial District Court of Washoe County, State of Nevada, on
grounds of "extreme cruelty, entirely mental in character." At
the time the divorce decree was issued, Vicenta Escaño, like her
husband, was still a Filipino citizen. She was then subject to
Philippine law, and Article 15 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines.
Application of Laws – Foreign Law – Nationality Principle –
Internal and Conflict Rule Application of the Renvoi Doctrine:
The Renvoi Doctrine is a judicial precept whereby the Conflict
of Laws Rule in the place of the forum refer a matter to the
Conflict of Laws Rule in another, and the latter refers the
matter back to the forum (remission) or to a third state
(transmission). Thus, owing to its french translation: “to send
back” or “to refer back unopened”. In the case of Aznar vs.
Garcia. The Decedent was a national of California and a
domiciliary of the Philippines. The acknowledged natural child
claimed her right to her legitime pursuant to Philippine law.
This was opposed by the decedent’s executor contending that
the will, not mentioning her legitimes, was valid pursuant to
Californian law. The Court in the Philippines ruled in favor of
the child. The reason: while the Philippine laws hold that it is
the law of the country of nationality of the decedent which
should govern, where the law of the latter refers back the
matter to the forum or domiciliary, there is Renvoi. Thus the
Philippine Court will take cognizance of the issue and apply the
law of the Philippines. The law of the state of California
provides for the applicBility of the law of the domicile, by
reason of which the Court validly ruled in favor of the
acknowledged natural child.
Amos v. Bellis Court ruled that provision in a foreigner’s will to the effect that
his properties shall be distributed in accordance with Philippine
law and not with his national law, is illegal and void, for his
national law cannot be ignored in view of those matters that
Article 10 — now Article 16 — of the Civil Code states said
national law should govern. Where the testator was a citizen of
Texas and domiciled in Texas, the intrinsic validity of his will
should be governed by his national law. Since Texas law does
not require legitimes, then his will, which deprived his
illegitimate children of the legitimes, is valid. The Supreme
Court held that the illegitimate children are not entitled to the
legitimes under the texas law, which is the national law of the
deceased.
Tamano v. Judge Ortiz