230 PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES (AS OF 2020)
The
RESEARCHED AND COMPILED BY ATTY. ALVIN
T. CLARIDADES
BY PROF. ALVIN CLARIDADES ON JANUARY 10,
2020
230 PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES (AS OF 2020)
RESEARCHED AND COMPILED BY PROF. ALVIN
T. CLARIDADES
1. Doctrine of absolute privilege. Doctrine that
protects persons from claims alleging defamation
where the alleged defamatory statements were
made by members of legislative assemblies while
on the floor of the assembly or communications
made in the context of judicial proceedings, as
part of a
2. Doctrine of absorption of common crimes. The
rule enunciated in People v. Hernandez [99
Phil. Rep 515 (1956)] that the ingredients of a
crime form part and parcel thereof, and hence,
are absorbed by the same and cannot be
punished either separately therefrom or by the
application of Art. 48 of the RPC. [Ponce Enrile v.
Amin, GR 93335, Sep. 13, 1990, 189 SCRA 573].
It held that the crime of rebellion under the RPC is
charged as a single offense, and that it cannot be
made into a complex crime. Also Hernandez
doctrine.
3. Doctrine of actio personalis moritur cum persona.
The doctrine that personal action terminates or
dies with the person. [Santos v. Sec. of Labor, GR
L-21624, 27 Feb. 1968, 22 SCRA 848].
4. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction. Law. 1. The
principle that once a court has acquired
jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the
court has done all that it can do in the exercise of
that jurisdiction. 2. The doctrine holding that even
the finality of the judgment does not totally deprive
the court of jurisdiction over the case. What the
court loses is the power to amend, modify or alter
the judgment. Even after the judgment has
become final, the court retains jurisdiction to
enforce and execute it [Echegaray v. Sec. of
Justice, GR 132601, Jan. 19, 1999, 301 SCRA
96]. Also Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction.
5. Doctrine of adherence to judicial precedents. The
doctrine that enjoins adherence to judicial
precedents. It requires courts in a country to
follow the rule established in a decision of its
Supreme Court. That decision becomes a judicial
precedent to be followed in subsequent cases by
all courts in the land. [Phil. Guardians
Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) v. Comelec, GR 190529,
Apr. 29, 2010, 619 SCRA 585]. Also Doctrine of
stare decisis.
6. Doctrine of adoptive admission. Rem. Law.
doctrine pertaining to a party’s reaction to a
statement or action by another person when it is
reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an
admission of something stated or implied by the
other person. [Estrada v. Desierto, GR 146710-
15, Apr. 3, 2001, 356 SCRA 108].
7. Doctrine of agency by The doctrine where the
principal will be estopped from denying the grant
of authority if 3rd parties have changed their
positions to their detriment in reliance on the
representations made. Also Doctrine of holding
out.
8. Doctrine of alter ego. A doctrine based upon the
misuse of a corp. by an individual for wrongful or
inequitable purposes, and in such case the court
merely disregards the corporate entity and holds
the individual responsible for acts knowingly and
intentionally done in the name of the corp. The
doctrine imposes upon the individual who uses a
corp. merely as an instrumentality to conduct his
own business liability as a consequence of fraud
or injustice perpetuated not on the corp., but on
3rd persons dealing with the corp. [Cited Sulo ng
Bayan, Inc. v. Araneta, Inc., GR L-31061, Aug.
17, 1976, 72 SCRA 347].
9. Doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction. Rem. Law. The
doctrine that the court acquires jurisdiction of case
or controversy as an entirety and may, as incident
to disposition of matter properly before it, possess
jurisdiction to decide other matters raised by case,
such as proceedings which are concerned with
pleadings, processes, records or judgments of
court in principal case or proceedings which affect
property already in court’s custody. [Malaloan v.
CA, GR 104879, May 6, 1994, 232 SCRA 249].
10. Doctrine of anticipatory breach. Rem. Law. The
doctrine holding that even if the contract is
divisible in its performance and the future periodic
deliveries are not yet due, if the obligor has
already manifested his refusal to comply with his
future periodic obligations, “the contract is entire
and the breach total,” hence there can only be 1
action for damages. [Blossom and Co., Inc. v.
Manila Gas Corp., GR L-32958, Nov. 8, 1930 55
Phil. 226].
11. Doctrine of apparent authority. The doctrine under
which the acts and contracts of the agent, as are
within the apparent scope of the authority
conferred on him, although no actual authority to
do such acts or to make such contracts has been
conferred, bind the principal. The principal’s
liability, however, is limited only to 3rd persons
who have been led reasonably to believe by the
conduct of the principal that such actual authority
exists, although none was given. In other words,
apparent authority is determined only by the acts
of the principal and not by the acts of the agent.
[Banate v. Phil. Countryside Rural Bank, Inc., GR
 163825, July 13, 2010, 625 SCRA 21]. Also
Holding out theory; or Doctrine of ostensible
agency; or Agency by estoppel; or Apparent
authority doctrine.
12. Doctrine of assumption of risk. The precept that
denotes that a person who knows and
comprehends the peril and voluntarily exposes
himself or herself to it, although not negligent in
doing so, is regarded as engaging in an
assumption of the risk and is precluded from a
recovery for an injury ensuing therefrom. Also
Doctrine of volenti non fit injuria.
13. Doctrine of attractive nuisance. A legal doctrine
that makes a person negligent for leaving a piece
of equipment or other condition on property which
would be both attractive and dangerous to curious
children. These have included tractors, unguarded
swimming pools, open pits, and abandoned
refrigerators. Liability could be placed on the
people owning or controlling the premises even
when the child was a trespasser who sneaked on
the property. Also called Attractive nuisance
doctrine.
14. Doctrine of autolimitation. The doctrine in pol. law.
where the Phils. adheres to principles of intl. law
as a limitation to the exercise of its sovereignty.
15. Doctrine of bar by prior judgment. Law. A concept
of res judicata holding that when, as bet. the 1st
case where the judgment was rendered and the
2nd case that is sought to be barred, there is
identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of
action. In this instance, the judgment in the 1st
case constitutes an absolute bar to the 2nd
action. [Antonio v. Sayman Vda. de Monje, GR
149624, 29 Sep. 2010, 631 SCRA 471].
16. Doctrine of benevolent neutrality. Constl. Law.
The doctrine holding that freedom to carry out
one’s duties to a Supreme Being is an inalienable
right, not one dependent on the grace of
legislature and religious freedom is seen as a
substantive right and not merely a privilege
against discriminatory legislation. With religion
looked upon with benevolence and not hostility,
benevolent neutrality allows accommodation of
religion under certain circumstances. [Estrada v.
Escritor, AM P-02-1651. Aug. 4, 2003, 408 SCRA
1].
17. Doctrine of caveat emptor. A warning that notifies
a buyer that the goods he or she is buying are “as
is,” or subject to all defects. The principle under
which the buyer could not recover damages from
the seller for defects on the property that
rendered the property unfit for ordinary purposes.
The only exception was if the seller actively
concealed latent defects or otherwise made
material misrepresentations amounting to fraud.
Also Doctrine of let the buyer beware.
18. Doctrine of centralized management. The doctrine
holding that the corporate powers of all corps.
shall be exercised by the BoD or the individual
officers or agents appointed by it. [Manila Metal
Container Corp. v. PNB, GR 166862, Dec. 20,
2006, 511 SCRA 444]. Also called Centralized
management doctrine.
19. Doctrine of checks and balances. A doctrine in
constl. law. that allows 1 dept. to resist
encroachments upon its powers and prerogatives
by the other depts. or to rectify the mistakes or
curb the excesses committed by the other depts.
Also called Checks and balances doctrine.
20. Doctrine of collateral estoppel. A doctrine that
prevents a person from relitigating an issue. Once
a court has decided an issue of fact or law
necessary to its judgment, that decision
preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a
diff. cause of action involving a party to the 1st
case. Also Doctrine of preclusion of issues.
21. Doctrine of class suit or virtual representation. A
doctrine based on the concept that members of a
class who are made parties will protect their own
interests which are such that in protecting them
the interests of the persons not made parties will
also be protected. [67 CJS 919].
22. Doctrine of command responsibility. The doctrine
under which any govt. official or supervisor, or
officer of the PNP or that of any other law
enforcement agency shall be held accountable for
“Neglect of Duty” if he has knowledge that a crime
or offense shall be committed, is being committed,
or has been committed by his subordinates, or by
others within his area of responsibility and,
despite such knowledge, he did not take
preventive or corrective action either before,
during, or immediately after its commission. [Sec.
1, EO 226. Feb. 17, 1995].
23. Doctrine of command responsibility. Elements: (a)
The existence of a superior-subordinate
relationship bet. the accused as superior and the
perpetrator of the crime as his subordinate; (b) the
superior knew or had reason to know that the
crime was about to be or had been committed;
and (c) the superior failed to take the necessary
and reasonable measures to prevent the crim.
acts or punish the perpetrators itself.
24. Doctrine of comparative injury. A rule in equity
which states that although a person is entitled to
injunctive relief, if the injury done to the
respondent or the public would be
disproportionate, then injunctive relief must be
denied.
25. Doctrine of comparative negligence. The doctrine
that allows a recovery by a plaintiff whose own act
contributed to his injury, provided his negligence
was slight as compared with that of the defendant.
[Rakes v. The Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific, Co., GR
1719, Jan. 23, 1907, 7 Phil., 359].
26. Doctrine of compassionate justice. The doctrine
that the harsh provisions of law and the rigid rules
 of procedure may sometimes be tempered and
dispensed with to give room for compassion.
27. Doctrine of completeness. Evid. The doctrine
holding that a dying declaration to be admissible
must be complete in itself. To be complete in itself
does not mean that the declarant must recite
everything that constituted the res gestae of the
subject of his statement, but that his statement of
any given fact should be a full expression of all
that he intended to say as conveying his meaning
in respect of such fact. [People v. De Joya, GR
75028, Nov. 8, 1991, 203 SCRA 343].
28. Doctrine of conclusiveness of judgment. Law. A
concept of res judicata holding that where there is
identity of parties in the 1st and 2nd cases, but no
identity of causes of action, the 1st judgment is
conclusive only as to those matters actually and
directly controverted and determined and not as
to matters merely involved therein. Stated
differently, any right, fact or matter in issue
directly adjudicated or necessarily involved in the
determination of an action before a competent
court in which judgment is rendered on the merits
is conclusively settled by the judgment therein
and cannot again be litigated bet. the parties and
their privies, whether or not the claim, demand,
purpose, or subject matter of the 2 actions is the
same. [Antonio v. Sayman Vda. de Monje, GR
149624, 29 Sep. 2010, 631 SCRA 471].
29. Doctrine of condonation. Law. 1. The doctrine that
a public official cannot be removed for admin.
misconduct committed during a prior term, since
his re-election to office operates as a condonation
of the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent
of cutting off the right to remove him therefor. The
foregoing rule, however, finds no application to
crim. cases pending against petitioner. [Aguinaldo
v. Santos, GR 94115, Aug. 21, 1992, 212 SCRA
768]. 2. This doctrine was abandoned by the SC
[in Morales v. CA and Binay, Jr., GR 217126-27,
Nov. 10, 2015] but the abandonment
is prospectivein effect Also Doctrine of
forgiveness.
30. Doctrine of constitutional avoidance. The doctrine
in constl. law prescribing that the court should
refuse to rule on a Constl. issue if the case can be
resolved on another ground.
31. Doctrine of constitutional supremacy. The doctrine
that if a law or contract violates any norm of the
constitution, that law or contract, whether
promulgated by the legislative or by the exec.
branch or entered into by private persons for
private purposes, is null and void and without any
force and effect. Thus, since the Consti. is the
fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the
nation, it is deemed written in every statute and
contract. [Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, GR
122156, Feb. 3, 1997, 267 SCRA 408].
32. Doctrine of constructive compliance. The doctrine
that states that if, without the fault of the heir, the
modal institution cannot take effect in the exact
manner stated by the testator, it shall be complied
with in a manner most analogous to and in
conformity with his wishes. [Art. 883, CC].
33. Doctrine of constructive trust. A gen. principle that
a person who acquires land or other property by
fraud, misrepresentation, imposition, or
concealment, or under any such other
circumstances as to render it inequitable for him
to retain the property, is in equity to be regarded
as a trustee ex maleficio thereof for a person who
suffers by reason of the fraud or other wrong, and
is equitably entitled to the property, even though
such beneficiary may never have any legal estate
therein. [Magallon v. Montejo, GR 73733, Dec. 16,
1986, 146 SCRA 282].
34. Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction. Law. The
gen. principle that once a court has acquired
jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the
court has done all that it can do to exercise that
jurisdiction. See Doctrine of adherence of
jurisdiction.
35. Doctrine of contributory infringement. The doctrine
holding that, aside from the infringer, any person
who actively induces the infringement of a patent
or provides the infringer with a component of a
patented product or of a product produced bec. of
a patented process knowing it to be esp. adapted
for infringing the patented invention and not
suitable for substantial non-infringing use is liable
jointly and severally with the infringer as a
contributory infringer. It must, however, be proven
that the product can only be used for infringement
purposes bec. if it can be used for legitimate
purposes, the action shall not prosper.
36. Doctrine of corporate negligence. The judicial
answer to the problem of allocating hospital’s
liability for the negligent acts of health
practitioners, absent facts to support the
application of respondeat superior or apparent
authority. Its formulation proceeds from the
judiciary’s acknowledgment that in these modern
times, the duty of providing quality medical
service is no longer the sole prerogative and
responsibility of the physician. The modern
hospitals have changed structure. Hospitals now
tend to organize a highly professional medical
staff whose competence and performance need to
be monitored by the hospitals commensurate with
their inherent responsibility to provide quality
medical care. [Professional Services, Inc. v.
Agana, GR 126297, Jan. 31, 2007, 513 SCRA
478].
37. Doctrine of corporate opportunity. The doctrine
under which a director of a corp. is made to
account to his corp., the gains and profits from
transactions entered into by him or by another
 competing corp. in which he has substantial
interests which should have been a transaction
undertaken by his corp. This s a breach of
fiduciary relationship.
38. Doctrine of corporate responsibility. The doctrine
following which it was held that a hospital has the
duty to see that it meets the standards of
responsibilities for the care of patients. Such duty
includes the proper supervision of the members of
its medical staff. [Professional Services, Inc. v.
Agana, GR 126297, Jan. 31, 2007, 513 SCRA
478].
39. Doctrine of deference and non-disturbance on
appeal. The doctrine that the SC on appeal would
not disturb the findings of the trial court on the
credibility of witnesses in view of the latter’s
advantage of observing at first hand their
demeanor in giving their testimony. [Tehankee,
concurring op., Llamoso v Sandiganbayan, GR L-
63408 & 64026, Aug. 7, 1985, 138 SCRA 92].
40. Doctrine of dependent relative revocation. The
doctrine that states that a revocation subject to a
condition does not revoke a will unless and until
the condition occurs. Thus, where a testator
“revokes” a will with the proven intention that he
would execute another will, his failure to validly
make a latter will would permit the allowance of
the earlier will.
41. Doctrine of discouraging the splitting of cause of
action in complex crimes. Pro. The doctrine
dissuading the splitting of a cause of action in
complex crimes for the reason that it would work
unnecessary inconvenience to the administration
of justice in general and to the accused in
particular, considering that it would require the
presentation of substantially the same evidence in
diff. courts. [People v. Cano, GR L-19660, May
24, 1966].
42. Doctrine of discovered peril. The doctrine to the
effect that where both parties are negligent, but
the negligent act of one is appreciably later in time
than that of the other, or when it is impossible to
determine whose fault or negligence should be
attributed to the incident, the party who had the
last clear opportunity to avoid the impending harm
and failed to do so is chargeable with the
consequences thereof. [See Picart v. Smith, Jr.,
GR L-12219, Mar. 15, 1918, 37 Phil. 809]. 2. The
rule that an antecedent negligence of a person
does not preclude the recovery of damages for
supervening negligence of, or bar a defense
against the liability sought by, another if the latter,
who had the last fair chance, could have avoided
the impending harm by the exercise of due
diligence. [Glan People’s Lumber and Hardware
v. IAC, GR 70493, May 18, 1989, 173 SCRA
464]. Also called Last clear chance doctrine.
43. Doctrine of disregarding the distinct personality of
the corporation. The doctrine stating that when
“the notion of legal entity is used to defeat public
convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, or
defend crime, the law will regard the corp. as an
assoc. of persons, or in the case of 2 corps.,
merge them into one, the one being merely
regarded as part or instrumentality of the other.
[Yutivo Sons Hardware Co. v. CTA, GR L-13203,
Jan. 28, 1961, 1 SCRA 160]. The same is true
where a corp. is a dummy and serves no business
purpose and is intended only as a blind, or an
alter ego or business conduit for the sole benefit
of the stockholders. [McConnel v. CA, GR L-
10510, Mar. 17, 1961, 1 SCRA 722].
44. Doctrine of effective nationality. Law. The doctrine
holding that a person having more than 1
nationality shall be treated as if he had only one-
either the nationality of the country in which he is
habitually and principally resident or the
nationality of the country with which, in the
circumstances, he appears to be most closely
connected. [Frivaldo v. Comelec, GR 87193, June
23, 1989, 174 SCRA 245].
45. Doctrine of effective occupation. A doctrine in intl.
law which holds that in order for a nation to
occupy a coastal possession, it also had to prove
that it controlled sufficient authority there to
protect existing rights such as freedom of trade
and transit. Also called Effective occupation
doctrine.
46. Doctrine of ejusdem generis. Con. The doctrine
under which where gen. terms follow the
designation of particular things or classes of
persons or subjects, the gen. term will be
construed to comprehend those things or persons
of the same class or of the same nature as those
specifically enumerated. [Napocor v. Angas, GR
60225-26 May 8, 1992, 208 SCRA 542].
47. Doctrine of election of remedies. A doctrine
developed to prevent a plaintiff from a double
recovery for a loss, making the person pursue
only 1 remedy in an action. Although its
application is not restricted to any particular
cause of action, it is most commonly employed in
contract cases involving fraud, which is
a misrepresentation of a material fact that is
intended to deceive a person who relies on it.
48. Doctrine of equality of shares. The doctrine that
all stocks issued by the corp. are presumed equal
with the same privileges and liabilities, provided
that the AoI is silent on such differences. Also
called Equality of shares doctrine.
49. Doctrine of equitable recoupment. It provides that
a claim for refund barred by prescription may be
allowed to offset unsettled tax liabilities should be
pertinent only to taxes arising from the same
transaction on which an overpayment is made
and underpayment is due.
50. Doctrine of equivalents. Intel. Prop. The rule
stating that an infringement also takes place when
 a device appropriates a prior invention by
incorporating its innovative concept and, although
with some modification and change, performs
substantially the same function in substantially the
same way to achieve substantially the same
result. [Smith Kline and Beckman Corp. v. CA, GR
126627, Aug. 14, 2003, 409 SCRA 33].
51. Doctrine of equivalents test. Intel. Prop. A test
established to determine infringement which
recognizes that minor modifications in a patented
invention are sufficient to put the item beyond the
scope of literal infringement. Thus, an
infringement also occurs when a device
appropriates a prior invention by incorporating its
innovative concept and, albeit with some
modification and change, performs substantially
the same function in substantially the same way
to achieve substantially the same result. [Godines
v. CA, GR 97343, Sep. 13, 1993, 226 SCRA 338].
Compare with Literal infringement test.
52. Doctrine of estoppel. Law. A doctrine based on
grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith
and justice, the purpose [of which is to forbid one
to speak against his own act, representations, or
commitments to the injury of one to whom they
were directed and who reasonably relied thereon.
[PNB v. CA, GR L-30831, Nov. 21, 1979, 94
SCRA 357].
53. Doctrine of estoppel by laches. Law. An equitable
doctrine by which some courts deny relief to a
claimant who has unreasonably delayed or been
negligent in asserting a claim. A person invoking
laches should assert that an opposing party has
slept on his/her rights and that the party is no
longer entitled to his/her orig. claim.
54. Doctrine of executive privilege. The doctrine
stating that the Pres. and those who assist him
must be free to explore alternatives in the process
of shaping policies and making decisions and to
do so in a way many would be unwilling to
express except privately. These are the
considerations justifying a presumptive privilege
for presl. communications. The privilege is
fundamental to the operation of govt. and
inextricably rooted in the separation of powers
under the Consti. [Almonte v. Vasquez, GR
95367, May 23, 1995, 244 SCRA 286].
55. Doctrine of exhaustion. The doctrine that provides
that the patent holder has control of the 1st sale of
his invention. He has the opportunity to receive
the full consideration for his invention from his
sale. Hence, he exhausts his rights in the future
control of his invention. It espouses that the
patentee who has already sold his invention and
has received all the royalty and consideration for
the same will be deemed to have released the
invention from his monopoly. The invention thus
becomes open to the use of the purchaser without
further restriction. [Adams v. Burke, 84 US 17,
1873]. Also Doctrine of first sale.
56. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies.
The gen. rule that before a party may seek the
intervention of the court, he should first avail of all
the means afforded him by admin. processes. The
issues which admin. agencies are authorized to
decide should not be summarily taken from them
and submitted to a court without first giving such
admin. agency the opportunity to dispose of the
same after due deliberation. [Rep. v. Lacap, GR
158253, Mar. 2, 2007, 517 SCRA 255].
57. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Exceptions: (a) The question involved is purely
legal; (b) the admin. body is in estoppel; (c) the
act complained of is patently illegal; (d) there is an
urgent need for Judicial intervention; (e) the claim
involved is small; (f) grave and irreparable injury
will be suffered; (g) there is no other plain, speedy
and adequate remedy; (h) strong public interest is
involved; (i) the subject of the controversy is
private law; (j) the case involves a quo warranto
proceeding [Sunville Timber Products, Inc. v.
Abad. 206 SCRA 482 {1992)]; (k) he party was
denied due process (Samahang Magbubukid ng
Kapdula, Inc. v. CA, 305 SCRA 147 (1999)]; (l)
the decision is that of a Dept. Sec. [Nazareno v.
CA, GR 131641, Feb. 23. 2000]; (m) resort to
admin. remedies would be futile (UP Board of
Regents v. Rasul 200 SCRA 685 (1991)]; (n)
there is unreasonable delay [Rep. v,
Sandiganbayan, 301 SCRA 237 (1999)]; (o) the
action involves recovery of physical possession of
public land [Gabrito u. CA, 167 SCRA 771
{1988)]; (p) the party is poor (Sabello v. DECS,
180 SCRA 623 (1989)]; and (q) the law provides
for immediate resort to the court (Rulian v Valdez,
12 SCRA 501 (1964)].
58. Doctrine of fair comment. A doctrine in the law of
libel which means that while in general every
discreditable imputation publicly made is deemed
false bec. every man is presumed innocent until
his guilt is judicially proved, and every false
imputation is directed against a public person in
his public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable.
In order that such discreditable imputation to a
public official may be actionable, it must either be
a false allegation of fact or a comment based on a
false supposition. If the comment is an expression
of opinion, based on established facts, then it is
immaterial that the opinion happens to be
mistaken, as long as it might reasonably be
inferred from the facts. [Borjal v. CA, GR 126466,
Jan. 14, 1999, 301 SCRA 1].
59. Doctrine of fair use. Prop. The doctrine that
permits a secondary use which serves the
copyright objective of stimulating productive
thought and public instruction without excessively
 diminishing the incentives for creativity. Also
called Fair use doctrine.
60. Doctrine of file wrapper estoppel. The doctrine
holding that a patentee is precluded from claiming
as part of patented product that which he had to
excise or modify in order to avoid patent office
rejection, and that he may omit any additions
which he was compelled to add by patent office
regulations. This doctrine balances the Doctrine of
equivalents.
61. Doctrine of finality of administrative action. The
doctrine in pol. law that prior to the completion or
finality of the action of an admin. agency, courts
will not interfere with it for the reason that absent
a final order or decision, power has not yet been
fully and finally exercised, and there can usu. be
no irreparable harm at that point.
62. Doctrine of finality of judgment. Law. The doctrine
that once a judgment attains finality it thereby
becomes immutable and unalterable. It may no
longer be modified in any respect, even if the
modification is meant to correct what is perceived
to be an erroneous conclusion of fact or law, and
regardless of whether the modification is
attempted to be made by the court rendering it or
by the highest court of the land. Just as the losing
party has the right to file an appeal within the
prescribed period, the winning party also has the
correlative right to enjoy the finality of the
resolution of his case. The doctrine of finality of
judgment is grounded on fundamental
considerations of public policy and sound
practice, and that, at the risk of occasional errors,
the judgments or orders of courts must become
final at some definite time fixed by law; otherwise,
there would be no end to litigations, thus setting to
naught the main role of courts of justice which is
to assist in the enforcement of the rule of law and
the maintenance of peace and order by settling
justiciable controversies with finality. [Gallardo-
Corro v. Gallardo, GR 136228, Jan. 30, 2001, 350
SCRA 568].
63. Doctrine of first sale. A doctrine in intel prop. law
wherein the owner of an intel. prop., such as a
patent, loses or exhausts all his rights to the
goods subject of the intel. prop. right after its 1st
sale in the market. Also Doctrine of exhaustion.
64. Doctrine of forgiveness. See Doctrine of
condonation.
65. Doctrine of forum non-conveniens. The forum is
inconvenient. Priv. Intl. Law. A rule designed to
deter the practice of global forum shopping,
[Coquia and Aguiling-Pangalangan, Conflicts of
Laws, pp. 40-41, 2000 Ed.] that is, to prevent non-
resident litigants from choosing the forum or place
wherein to bring their suit for malicious reasons,
such as to secure procedural advantages, to
annoy and harass the defendant, to avoid
overcrowded dockets, or to select a more friendly
venue. Under this doctrine, a court, in conflicts of
law cases, may refuse impositions on its
jurisdiction where it is not the most “convenient” or
available forum and the parties are not precluded
from seeking remedies elsewhere. [First Phil. Intl.
Bank v. CA, GR 115849, Jan. 24, 1996, 252
SCRA 259 ].
66. Doctrine of fraudulent title becoming the root of
valid title. Land Titles. The doctrine that a
fraudulent or forged document of sale may
become the root of a valid title if the certificate of
title has already been transferred from the name
of the true owner to the name of the forger or the
name indicated by the forger. [Rep. v. Agunoy,
Sr., GR 155394, Feb. 17, 2005, 451 SCRA 735].
67. Doctrine of fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant. It
basically means that no one may enjoy the fruits
of fraud. [Acot v. Kempis, 55 OG 16, p. 2907
(1959)].
68. Doctrine of free enterprise. A doctrine holding that
a capitalist economy can regulate itself in a free
and competitive market through the relationship of
supply and demand with a min. intervention and
regulation from the state.
69. Doctrine of governmental immunity from suit. The
doctrine that no governmental body can be sued
unless it gives permission.
70. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts. Law. An
established policy that parties must observe the
hierarchy of courts before they can seek relief
directly from the SC. The rationale for this rule is
twofold: (a) it would be an imposition upon the
limited time of the SC; and (b) it would inevitably
result in a delay, intended or otherwise, in the
adjudication of cases, which in some instances,
had to be remanded or referred to the lower court
as the proper forum under the rules of procedure,
or as better equipped to resolve the issues bec.
the SC is not a trier of facts. [Heirs of Hinog v.
Melicor, GR 140954, 12 Apr. 2005, 455 SCRA
460].
71. Doctrine of holding out. The doctrine where the
principal will be estopped from denying the grant
of authority if 3rd parties have changed their
positions to their detriment in reliance on the
representations made. Also Doctrine of agency
by estoppel.
72. Doctrine of hold-over. The doctrine under which a
public officer whose term has expired or services
have been terminated is allowed to continue
holding his office until his successor is appointed
or chosen and had qualified.
73. Doctrine of hot pursuit. Crim. Law. The doctrine
under which a warrantless arrest may be validly
effected when an offense has just been
committed, and the person arresting has probable
cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of
facts or circumstances, that the person to be
arrested has committed it.
74. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final
judgment. Two-fold purpose: (a) To avoid delay in
the administration of justice and thus,
procedurally, to make orderly the discharge of
judicial business; and (b) to put an end to judicial
controversies, at the risk of occasional errors,
which is precisely why courts exist. [Mercury Drug
Corp. v. Huang, GR 197654, Aug. 30, 2017, 838
SCRA 221].
75. Doctrine of immunity from suit. The doctrine the
application of which has been restricted to
sovereign or governmental activities [jure imperii].
The mantle of state immunity cannot be extended
to commercial, private and proprietary acts [jure
gestionis]. [JUSMAG v. NLRC, GR 108813, Dec.
15, 1994, 239 SCRA 224]. 2. The restrictive
application of State immunity is proper when the
proceedings arise out of commercial transactions
of the foreign sovereign, its commercial activities
or economic affairs. Stated differently, a State
may be said to have descended to the level of an
individual and thus can be deemed to have tacitly
given its consent to be used only when it enters
into business contracts. It does not apply where
the contract relates to the exercise of its
sovereign functions. [USA v. Ruiz, GR L-35645,
May 22, 1985, 136 SCRA 487].
76. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final
judgment. The doctrine that has a two-fold
purpose: (a) to avoid delay in the administration of
justice and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the
discharge of judicial business and (b) to put an
end to judicial controversies, at the risk of
occasional errors, which is precisely why courts
exist. [SSS v. Isip, GR 165417, Apr. 3, 2007, 520
SCRA 310].
77. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final
judgment. Exceptions: (a) The correction of
clerical errors; (b) the so-called nunc pro tunc
entries that cause no prejudice to any party; (c)
void judgments; and (d) whenever circumstances
transpire after the finality of the decision rendering
its execution unjust and inequitable. [Temic
Semiconductors, Inc. Employees Union (TSIEU)-
FFW v. Federation of Free Workers (FFW), GR
160993, May 20, 2008, 554 SCRA 122].
78. Doctrine of immutability of judgment. A
fundamental legal principle that a decision that
has acquired finality becomes immutable and
unalterable, and may no longer be modified in any
respect, even if the modification is meant to
correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law,
and whether it be made by the court that rendered
it or by the highest court of the land. The only
exceptions to the gen. rule on finality of judgments
are the so-called nunc pro tunc entries which
cause no prejudice to any party, void judgments,
and whenever circumstances transpire after the
finality of the decision which render its execution
unjust and inequitable. [Sacdalan v. CA, GR
128967, May 20, 2004, 428 SCRA 586].
79. Doctrine of implications. Con. That which is plainly
implied in the language of a statute is as much a
part of it as that which is expressed. [In Re:
McCulloch Dick, GR 13862, Apr. 16, 1918, 38
Phil. 41].
80. Doctrine of implied conspiracy. The doctrine
under which 2 or more persons participating in the
commission of a crime are held to be collectively
liable as co-conspirators, notwithstanding the
absence of any agreement to that effect, if they
act in concert, showing unity of crim. intent and a
common purpose.
81. Doctrine of implied municipal liability. The doctrine
that a municipality may become obligated upon an
implied contract to pay the reasonable value of
the benefits accepted or appropriated by it as to
which it has the gen. power to contract. [Prov. of
Cebu v. IAC, GR 72841, Jan. 29, 1987, 147
SCRA 447]. It applies to all cases where money
or property of a party is received under such
circumstances that the gen. law, independent of
an express contract, implies an obligation to do
justice with respect to the same. [38 Am Jur. Sec.
515, p. 193].
82. Doctrine of implied trust. The doctrine enunciated
in Art. 1456 of the Civ. Code which provides that
“if property is acquired through mistake or fraud,
the person obtaining it is, by force of law,
considered a trustee of an implied trust for the
benefit of the person from whom the property
comes.” [Armamento v. Guerrero, GR L-34228,
Feb. 21, 1980, 96 SCRA 178].
83. Doctrine of in pari delicto. Legal principle that if
2 parties in a dispute are equally at fault, then
the party in possession of the
contested property gets to retain it and
the courts will not interfere with the status quo. It
implies that if a party
whose action or failure to act precipitates breach
of a contract, or who fails to take appropriate
action or takes inappropriate action to limit
or recoup a loss, such party may not claim nor
be awarded
84. Doctrine of inappropriate provision. It deals with
item provisions in a budget bill that are to be
treated as items for the President’s veto power.
[Dean Tupaz, 24 Hours Before the Bar (1st Ed.
2005), p. 133].
85. Doctrine of incidental recognition. The doctrine
that voluntary acknowledgment of a child may be
done incidentally in a pubic document; that a
father’s incidental mention of a child as his in a
public document executed by him deserves full
faith and credit. [Javelona v. Monteclaro, GR L-
48464, Oct. 4, 1943].
86. Doctrine of incompatibility of public offices. Law. It
concerns a potential clash of 2 incompatible
 public offices held by a single official. In other
words, the doctrine concerns a conflict bet. an
individual’s performance of potentially overlapping
public duties.
87. Doctrine of incomplete testimony. Rem. Law. The
doctrine holding that when cross-examination of a
witness cannot be done or completed due to
causes attributable to the party who offered the
witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered
incompetent and should be stricken from the
record.
88. Doctrine of incorporation. Law. The doctrine that
states that the rules of Intl. Law form part of the
law of the land and no legislative action is
required to make them applicable to a country.
The Phils. follows this doctrine, bec. Sec. 2. Art. II
of the Consti. states that the Phils. adopts the
generally accepted principles of intl. law as part of
the law of the land. Compare with Doctrine of
transformation.
89. Doctrine of indefeasibility of torrens titles. A
certificate of title, once registered, should not
thereafter be impugned, altered, changed,
modified, enlarged or diminished except in a
direct proceeding permitted by law. [De Pedro v.
Romasan Devt. Corp., GR 158002, Feb. 28,
2005, 452 SCRA 564].
90. Doctrine of indelible allegiance. The doctrine that
an individual may be compelled to retain his orig.
nationality notwithstanding that he has already
renounced or forfeited it under the laws of the 2nd
state whose nationality he has acquired.
91. Doctrine of independence. Comml. Law. The
doctrine that the relationship of the buyer and the
bank is separate and distinct from the relationship
of the buyer and seller in the main contract such
that the bank is not required to investigate if the
contract underlying the letters of credit has been
fulfilled or not bec. in such transactions banks
deal only with documents and not goods (BPI v.
De Reny Fabric Industries, Inc., L-‐2481, Oct. 16,
1970). In effect, the buyer has no course of action
against the issuing bank. Also called
Independence principle. The exception to this
doctrine is the Fraud exception rule.
92. Doctrine of independently relevant statements.
Evid. The doctrine holding that only the fact that
statements were made is relevant, and the truth
or falsity thereof is immaterial, hence, such
statements are admissible in evidence, as an
exception to the hearsay rule.
93. Doctrine of individuality of subscription. A
subscription is 1 entire and indivisible whole
contract. It cannot be divided into portions. [Sec.
64, Corp. Code]. Also Doctrine of indivisibility of
subscription.
94. Doctrine of indivisibility of subscription. The
doctrine that a subscription contract is one, entire
and indivisible contract. It cannot be divided into
portions so that the stockholder shall not be
entitled to a certificate of stock until full payment
of his subscription together with interest, and
expenses if any is due. [SEC Opinion, Apr. 11,
1994]. Also Doctrine of individuality of
subscription.
95. Doctrine of informed consent. A duty imposed on
a doctor to explain the risks of recommended
procedures to a patient before a patient
determines whether or not he or she should go
forward with the procedure. Also called Informed
consent doctrine.
96. Doctrine of inscrutable fault. The doctrine holding
that in case of a maritime collision where the
vessel at fault not known, each vessel shall suffer
its own losses and both shall be solidarily liable
for loses or damages on the cargo.
97. Doctrine of interlocking confessions. The doctrine
under which extra-judicial confessions
independently made without collusion which are
identical with each other in their essential details
and are corroborated by other evidence on record
are admissible, as circumstantial evidence,
against the person implicated to show the
probability of the latter’s actual participation in the
commission of the crime. [People v. Molleda, GR
L-34248, Nov. 21, 1978, 86 SCRA 667].
98. Doctrine of inverse condemnation. It involves the
action to recover just compensation from the
State or its expropriating agency. It has the
objective to recover the value of property taken in
fact by the governmental defendant, even though
no formal exercise of the power of eminent
domain has been attempted by the taking agency.
[Napocor v. Heirs of Macabangkit Sangkay, GR
165828, Aug. 24, 2011, 656 SCRA 60].
99. Doctrine of isolated transactions. The doctrine
that foreign corps., even unlicensed ones, can
sue or be sued on a transaction or series of
transactions set apart from their common
business in the sense that there is no intention to
engage in a progressive pursuit of the purpose
and object of business transaction. [Eriks Pte. Ltd.
v. CA, GR 118843, Feb. 6, 1997, 267 SCRA 567].
100. Doctrine of judicial admissions. The well-
settled doctrine that judicial admissions cannot be
contradicted by the admitter who is the party
himself and binds the person who makes the
same, and absent any showing that this was
made thru palpable mistake, no amount of
rationalization can offset it. [Binarao v. Plus
Builders, Inc., GR 154430, June 16, 2006, 491
SCRA 49].
101. Doctrine of judicial estoppel. The doctrine that
when a party assumes a certain position in a legal
proceeding and succeeds in maintaining it, he
may not thereafter be permitted to assume a
contrary position just bec. his interests have
changed.
102. Doctrine of judicial Rem. Law. The doctrine
holding that courts may take cognizance of
matters as true or existing without need of
introduction of evidence, or accept certain matters
as facts even if no proof of their existence is
presented.
103. Doctrine of judicial stability. Rem. Law. 1. The
doctrine that no court can interfere by injunction
with the judgments or orders of another court of
concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant
the relief sought by the injunction. [Cabili v.
Balindong, AM RTJ-10-2225, Sep. 6, 2011, 656
SCRA 747]. 2. An elementary principle in the
administration of justice where no court can
interfere by injunction with the judgments or
orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction
having the power to grant the relief sought by the
injunction. [Go v. Villanueva, Jr., GR 154623, Mar.
13, 2009, 581 SCRA 126]. Also Doctrine of non-
interference.
104. Doctrine of judicial supremacy. The doctrine
recognizing that the judiciary is vested with the
power to annul the acts of either the legislative or
the exec. or of both when not conformable to the
fundamental law. [Assoc. of Small Landowners v.
Sec. of Agrarian Reform, GR 78742, July 14,
1989, 175 SCRA 343]. 2. The power of judicial
review under the Consti. [Angara v. Electoral
Commission, GR L-45081, July 15, 1936, 63 Phil.
139].
105. Doctrine of jus sanguinis. Right of blood. A
principle of nationality law by
which citizenship is not determined by place of
birth but by having instead 1 or both parents who
are citizens of the state or more generally by
having state citizenship or membership to a nation
determined or conferred by ethnic, cultural or
other descent or origin.
106. Doctrine of jus soli. Right of the soil. The
doctrine recognizing the right of anyone born in
the territory of a state
to nationality or citizenship.
107. Doctrine of laches. A doctrine based upon
grounds of public policy which requires, for the
peace of society, the discouragement of stale
claims and is principally a question of the inequity
or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be
enforced or asserted. [Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, GR
L-21450 Apr. 15, 1968, 23 SCRA 29]. 2. The
time-honored rule anchored on public policy that
relief will be denied to a litigant whose claim or
demand has become “stale”, or who has
acquiesced for an unreasonable length of time, or
who has not been vigilant or who has slept on his
rights either by negligence, folly or inattention.
[Arradaza v. CA, GR 50422, Feb. 8, 1989, 170
SCRA 12]. Also Doctrine of stale demands.
108. Doctrine of lack of capacity to sue. The
doctrine of lack of capacity to sue based on failure
to first acquire a local license is based on
considerations of public policy. It was never
intended to favor nor insulate from suit
unscrupulous establishments or nationals in case
of breach of valid obligations or violations of legal
rights of unsuspecting foreign firms or entities
simply bec. they are not licensed to do business
in the country. [Facilities Mngt. Corp. v. De la
Osa, GR L-38649, Mar. 26, 1979, 89 SCRA 131].
109. Doctrine of last clear chance. A doctrine in the
law of torts which states that the contributory
negligence of the party injured will not defeat the
claim for damages if it is shown that the defendant
might, by the exercise of reasonable care and
prudence, have avoided the consequences of the
negligence of the injured party. In such cases, the
person who had the last clear chance to avoid the
mishap is considered in law solely responsible for
the consequences thereof. [Ong v. Metropolitan
Water District, GR L-7664, Aug. 29, 1958, 104
Phil. 397]. Also Doctrine of discovered peril or
Humanitarian doctrine. Also called Last clear
chance doctrine.
110. Doctrine of legal entity of the separate
personality of the corporation. The doctrine that a
corp. may not be made to answer for acts and
liabilities of its stockholders or those of legal
entities to which it may be connected or vice
versa. [Palay, Inc. v. Clave, GR L-56076, Sep. 21,
1983, 124 SCRA 638].
111. Doctrine of let the buyer beware. A warning
that notifies a buyer that the goods he or she is
buying are “as is,” or subject to all defects.
The principle under which the buyer could not
recover damages from the seller for defects on
the property that rendered the property unfit for
ordinary purposes. The only exception was if the
seller actively concealed latent defects or
otherwise made material misrepresentations
amounting to fraud. Also Doctrine of caveat
emptor.
112. Doctrine of lex loci celebrationis. The doctrine
under which the law of the place where a contract
was made or celebrated, as in the case of a
marriage, shall govern.
113. Doctrine of lex loci delicti commissi. The
doctrine that the substantive rights and obligations
arising out of a tort controversy are determined by
the law of the place of injury or the lex loci delicti.
114. Doctrine of liberal construction of retirement
laws. Con. The doctrine that retirement laws are
liberally construed and administered in favor of
the persons intended to be benefited. All doubts
as to the intent of the law should be resolved in
favor of the retiree to achieve its humanitarian
 purposes. [Borromeo v. CSC, GR 96032 July 31,
1991, 199 SCRA 911].
115. Doctrine of limited liability. The [doctrine that
the] ship agent shall also be civilly liable for the
indemnities in favor of 3rd persons which may
arise from the conduct of the captain in the care of
the goods which he loaded on the vessel; but he
may exempt himself therefrom by abandoning the
vessel with all the equipment and the freight it
may have earned during the voyage. [Art. 587,
Code of Commerce; Yangco v. Laserna, GR L-
47447-47449, Oct. 29, 1941, 73 Phil., 330]. Also
called Limited liability doctrine.
116. Doctrine of limited liability. Exceptions: (a)
Repairs and provisioning of the vessel before its
loss; [Art. 586, Code of Commerce]; (b) Ins.
proceeds. If the vessel is insured, the proceeds
will go to the persons entitled to claim from the
shipowner; [Vasquez v. CA, GR L-42926, Sep.
13, 1985, 138 SCRA 553]; (c) Workmen’s
Compensation cases (now Employees’
Compensation under the LC) [Oching v. San
Diego, GR 775, Dec. 17, 1946]; (d) When the
shipowner is guilty of fault or negligence; But if the
captain is the one who is guilty, the doctrine may
still be invoked, hence, abandonment is still an
option; (e) Private carrier; or (f) Voyage is not
maritime in character.
117. Doctrine of lis pendens. A pending suit. The
jurisdiction, power or control which a court
acquires over the property involved in a suit
pending the continuance of the action and until
final judgment thereunder.
118. Doctrine of logical relevance. Crim. Law. The
rule that allows a judge to draw a reasonable
inference from the appearance of an accused as
his appearance is a material fact. The inference
should then be weighed in light of the other legally
relevant evidence. [Puno, J., Dissenting Op.,
People v. Tapales, GR 125808, Sep. 3, 1999, 313
SCRA 610].
119. Doctrine of loss of confidence. Labor.
Requisites: Loss of confidence should not be
simulated; (b) it should not be used as a
subterfuge for causes which are improper, illegal,
or unjustified; (c) it may not be arbitrarily asserted
in the face of overwhelming evidence to the
contrary; (d) it must be genuine, not a mere
afterthought to justify an earlier action taken in
bad faith; and (e) the employee involved holds a
position of trust and confidence. [Midas Touch
Food Corp. v. NLRC, GR 111639, July 29,
1996, 259 SCRA 652]. Also called Loss of
confidence doctrine.
120. Doctrine of loss of trust and confidence.
Labor. The doctrine that loss of trust and
confidence, as a just cause for termination of
employment, is premised on the fact that an
employee concerned holds a position where
greater trust is placed by management and from
whom greater fidelity to duty is correspondingly
expected. [Wesleyan Univ. Phils. v. Reyes, GR
208321, July 30, 2014]
121. Doctrine of majority rule. The rule that is
almost universally used as a mechanism for
adjusting and resolving conflicts and
disagreements within the group after the
members have been given an opportunity to be
heard. While it does not efface conflicts,
nonetheless, once a decision on a contentious
matter is reached by a majority vote, the
dissenting minority is bound thereby so that the
board can speak with 1 voice, for those elected to
the governing board are deemed to implicitly
contract that the will of the majority shall govern in
matters within the authority of the board. [Velez v.
De Vera, AC 6697, BM 1227, AM 05-5-15-SC,
July 25, 2006, 496 SCRA 345].
122. Doctrine of malicious prosecution. The
doctrine that pertains to persecution through the
misuse or abuse of judicial processes; or the
institution and pursuit of legal proceedings for the
purpose of harassing, annoying, vexing or injuring
an innocent person. [Villanueva v. UCPB, GR
138291, Mar. 7, 2000, 327 SCRA 391].
123. Doctrine of management prerogative. The
doctrine under which every employer has the
inherent right to regulate, acc. to his own
discretion and judgment, all aspects of
employment, incl. hiring, work assignments,
working methods, the time, place and manner of
work, work supervision, transfer of employees,
lay-off of workers, and discipline, dismissal, and
recall of employees. [Rural Bank of Cantilan, Inc.
v. Julve, GR 169750, Feb. 27, 2007, 517 SCRA
17].
124. Doctrine of mechanical equivalents. The
doctrine under which the patentee is pro-tected
from colorable invasions of his patent under the
guise of substitution of some part of his invention
by some well-known mechanical equivalent. It is
an infringement of the patent if the substitute
performs the same function and was well known
at the date of the patent as a proper substitute for
the omitted ingredient. [Gsell v. Yap-Jue, GR L-
4720, Jan. 19, 1909, 12 Phil. 519].
125. Doctrine of mortgagee in good faith. The rule
that all persons dealing with property covered by
a Torrens Certificate of Title, as buyers or
mortgagees, are not required to go beyond what
appears on the face of the title. The public interest
in upholding the indefeasibility of a certificate of
title, as evidence of the lawful ownership of the
land or of any encumbrance thereon, protects a
buyer or mortgagee who, in good faith, relied
upon what appears on the face of the certificate of
title. [Cavite Devt. Bank v. Lim, GR 131679, 1
Feb. 2000, 324 SCRA 346].
126. Doctrine of multiple admissibility. Evid. The
doctrine that the evidence may either be
admissible for several purposes or not admissible
for 1 purpose but may be admitted for a diff.
purpose if it satisfies all the requirements of the
latter.
127. Doctrine of mutuality of remedy. A civil law
doctrine founded on the idea that 1 party should
not obtain from equity that which the other party
could not obtain.
128. Doctrine of necessary implication. Con. 1. The
doctrine that states that what is implied in a
statute is as much a part thereof as that which is
expressed. [Natl. Assoc. of Trade Unions-
Republic Planters Bank Supervisors Chapter
v. Torres, GR 93468, Dec. 29, 1994, 239 SCRA
546]. 2. The doctrine that every statutory grant of
power, right or privilege is deemed to include all
incidental power, right or privilege.
[DENRv. United Planners Consultants, Inc.
(UPCI), GR 212081, Feb. 23, 2015].
129. Doctrine of no – estafa – in – bouncing –
checks – issued – in – payment – of – pre-existing
– obligations. The doctrine that a check issued in
payment of a pre-existing obligation does not
constitute estafa even if there is no fund in the
bank to cover the amount of the check. [People v.
Lilius, 59 Phil. 339 (1933)].
130. Doctrine of non-delegation. Law. The principle
that delegated powe0r constitutes not only a right
but a duty to be performed by the delegate
through the instrumentality of his own judgment
and not through the intervening mind of another.
131. Doctrine of non-delegation. Law. Exceptions
to this principle: (a) Delegation of tariff powers to
the Pres. under Sec. 28 (2) of Art. VI of the
Consti.; (b) Delegation of emergency powers to
the Pres. under Sec. 23(2) of Art. VI of the
Consti.; (c) Delegation to the people at large; (d)
Delegation to local govts.; and (e) Delegation to
admin. bodies. [Abakada Guro Party List v.
Ermita, GR 168056, Sep. 1, 2005, 469 SCRA 14].
132. Doctrine of non-esopprl. The doctrine in
election law that there can be no estoppel from
questioning coerced or irregular returns despite
failure of the affected candidate to attend or be
represented at the canvassing or to file his
objections during the canvassing. This is based
on the fundamental premise in election cases that
the candidates-protagonists are mere incidents
and that the real party in interest is the electorate
whose true will must be determined without
technicalities and equivocations. [Guiao v.
Comelec, GR L-68056, July 5, 1985, 137 SCRA
356].
133. Doctrine of non-interference. Law. The
doctrine holding that the judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction may not be opened,
modified, or vacated by any court of concurrent
jurisdiction. [Rep. v. Reyes, GR L-30263-5, Oct. 3,
1987, 155 SCRA 313]. Also Doctrine of judicial
stability.
134. Doctrine of non-suability. The basic postulate
enshrined in the Consti. that “(t)he State may not
be sued without its consent,” which reflects
nothing less than a recognition of the sovereign
character of the State and an express affirmation
of the unwritten rule effectively insulating it from
the jurisdiction of courts. It is based on the very
essence of sovereignty. [DA v. NLRC, GR
104269, Nov. 11, 1993, 227 SCRA 693].
135. Doctrine of operative fact. The doctrine that
nullifies the effects of an unconstl. law by
recognizing that the existence of a statute prior to
a determination of unconstitutionality is an
operative fact and may have consequences which
cannot always be ignored. The past cannot
always be erased by a new judicial declaration. It
is applicable when a declaration of
unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden
on those who have relied on the invalid law.
[Planters Products, Inc. v. Fertiphil Corp., GR
166006, 14 Mar. 2008, 548 SCRA 485]. Also
called Operative fact doctrine.
136. Doctrine of ostensible agency. The doctrine
that imposes liability, not as the result of the
reality of a contractual relationship, but rather bec.
of the actions of a principal or an employer in
somehow misleading the public into believing that
the relationship or the authority exists.
[Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR 126297,
126467 and 127590, Jan. 31, 2007, 513 SCRA
478]. See Doctrine of ostensible authority.
137. Doctrine of ostensible authority. The doctrine
holding that if a corp. knowingly permits 1 of its
officers, or any other agent, to do acts within the
scope of an apparent authority, and thus holds
him out to the public as possessing power to do
those acts, the corp. will, as against any person
who has in good faith dealt with the corp. through
such agent, be estopped from denying his
authority [Prudential Bank v. CA, GR 108957,
June 14, 1993, 223 SCRA 350]. Also Doctrine of
apparent authority.
138. Doctrine of outside appearance. The doctrine
that states that a corp. is bound by a contract
entered into by an officer who acts without, or in
excess of his actual authority, in favor of a person
who deals with him in good faith relying on such
apparent authority.
139. Doctrine of overbreadth. Law. [A]n exception
to the prohibition against 3rd-party standing, the
doctrine permitting a person to challenge a statute
on the ground that it violates the free speech
rights of 3rd parties not before the court, even
though the law is Constl. as applied to that
defendant. In other words, the overbreadth
doctrine provides that: “Given a case or
 controversy, a litigant whose own activities are
unprotected may nevertheless challenge a statute
by showing that it substantially abridges the [free
speech] rights of other parties not before the
court.” [Chemerinsky, Constl. Law, p. 86, 2nd Ed.
(2002)]. Compare with Doctrine of void for
vagueness.
140. Doctrine of parens patriae (father of his
country). The doctrine referring to the inherent
power and authority of the state to provide
protection of the person and property of a person
non sui juries. Under that doctrine, the state has
the sovereign power of guardianship over persons
under disability. Thus, the state is considered the
parens patriae of minors. [Govt. of the Phil.
Islands. v. Monte de Piedad, GR L-9959, Dec. 13,
1916, 35 Phil. 728].
141. Doctrine of pari delicto. The doctrine under
which no recovery can be made in favor of the
plaintiffs for being themselves guilty of violating
the law. [Ponce v. CA, GR L-49494 May 31,
1979, 90 SCRA 533].
142. Doctrine of part performance. An equitable
principle holding that where 1 party to an oral
contract has, in reliance thereon, so far performed
his part of the agreement that it would be
perpetuating a fraud upon him to allow the other
party to repudiate the contract and to set up the
statute of frauds in justification thereof, equity will
regard the case as being removed from the
operation of the statute and will enforce the
contract by decreeing specific performance of it,
or by granting other appropriate relief, such as
quieting title, establishing a resulting or a
constructive trust, enjoining interference with the
possession of property, or enjoining a conveyance
of property. [Shoemaker v. La Tondeña, Inc., GR
L-45667. May 9, 1939].
143. Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. The
principle that the corporate mask may be removed
or the corporate veil pierced when the corp. is just
an alter ego of a person or of another corp. For
reasons of public policy and in the interest of
justice, the corporate veil will justifiably be
impaled only when it becomes a shield for fraud,
illegality or inequity committed against 3rd
persons. [PNB v. Andrada Electric Eng’g. Co.,
430 Phil. 882 (2002)].
144. Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. Areas
of application: (a) defeat of public convenience as
when the corporate fiction is used as a vehicle for
the evasion of an existing obligation; (b) fraud
cases or when the corporate entity is used to
justify a wrong, protect fraud, or defend a crime;
or (c) alter ego cases, where a corp. is merely a
farce since it is a mere alter ego or business
conduit of a person, or where the corp. is so
organized and controlled and its affairs are so
conducted as to make it merely an instrumentality,
agency, conduit or adjunct of another corp. [PNB
v. HydroResources Contractors Corp, 706 Phil.
297 (2013)].
145. Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate
entity. The doctrine under which the legal fiction
that a corp. is an entity with a juridical personality
separate and distinct from its members or
stockholders may be disregarded when valid
grounds therefore exist [and] in such cases, the
corp. will be considered as a mere assoc. of
persons. The members or stockholders of the
corp. will be considered as the corp., that is
liability will attach directly to the officers and
stockholders. [Indophil Textile Mill Workers Union-
PTGWO v. Calica, GR. 96490, Feb. 3, 1992, 205
SCRA 697]. The doctrine that applies when the
corporate fiction is used to defeat public
convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, or
defend crime, or when it is made as a shield to
confuse the legitimate issues, or where a corp. is
the mere alter ego or business conduit of a
person, or where the corp. is so organized and
controlled and its affairs are so conducted as to
make it merely an instrumentality, agency, conduit
or adjunct of another corp. [Umali v. CA, GR
89561, Sep. 13, 1990, 189 SCRA 529].
146. Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate
fiction. The doctrine that allows the State to
disregard the notion of separate personality of a
corp. for justifiable reason/s. This is an exception
to the Doctrine of separate corporate entity.
147. Doctrine of political question. The well-settled
doctrine that political questions are not within the
province of the judiciary, except to the extent that
power to deal with such questions has been
conferred upon the courts by express Constl. or
statutory provisions. [Tañada v. Cuenco, GR L-
10520, Feb. 28, 1957, 103 Phil. 1051].
148. Doctrine of preclusion of issues. The doctrine
un which issues actually and directly resolved in a
former suit cannot again be raised in any future
case bet. the same parties involving a diff. cause
of action. [Borlongan v. Buenaventura, GR
167234, Feb. 27, 2006, 483 SCRA 405]. Also
Doctrine of collateral estoppel.
149. Doctrine of prejudicial question. The doctrine
that comes into play generally in a situation where
civil and crim. actions are pending and the issues
involved in both cases are similar or so closely
related that an issue must be preemptively
resolved in the civil case before the crim. action
can proceed. Thus, the existence of a prejudicial
question in a civil case is alleged in the crim. case
to cause the suspension of the latter pending final
determination of the former. [Quiambao v. Osorio,
GR L-48157, Mar. 16, 1988, 158 SCRA 674].
150. Doctrine of presumed-identity approach.
Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
 pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that
foreign law is the same as ours. [EDI-Staffbuilders
Intl., Inc. v. NLRC, GR 145587, Oct. 26,
2007, 537 SCRA 409]. Also Doctrine of
processual presumption.
151. Doctrine of presumption of regularity in the
performance of official duty. The doctrine holding
that every public official, absent any showing of
bad faith and malice, is entitled to the
presumption regularity in the performance of
official duties.
152. Doctrine of primacy of administrative
remedies. Rem. Law. The rule that before a party
may seek the intervention of the court, he should
first avail of all the means afforded him by admin.
processes; that the issues which admin. agencies
are authorized to decide should not be summarily
taken from them and submitted to a court without
first giving such admin. agency the opportunity to
dispose of the same after due deliberation. [Rep.
v. Lacap, GR 158253, Mar. 2, 2007, 517 SCRA
255].
153. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction. Law. The
doctrine that holds that if the case is such that its
determination requires the expertise, specialized
skills and knowledge of the proper admin. bodies
bec. technical matters or intricate questions of
facts are involved, then relief must first be
obtained in an admin. proceeding before a
remedy will be supplied by the courts even though
the matter is within the proper jurisdiction of a
court. [Ind’l. Ent., Inc. v. CA, GR 88550, Apr. 18,
1990, 184 SCRA 426].
154. Doctrine of prior resort. A doctrine in admin.
law holding that when a claim originally
cognizable in the courts involves issues which,
under a regulatory scheme, are within the special
competence of an admin. agency, judicial
proceedings will be suspended pending the
referral of these issues to the admin. body for its
view.
155. Doctrine of prior restraint. The doctrine
concerning official governmental restrictions on
the press or other forms of expression in advance
of actual publication or dissemination. [Bernas,
The 1987 Consti. of the Rep. of the Phils., A
Commentary, 2003 ed., p. 225].
156. Doctrine of prior use. The principle that prior
use of a trademark by a person, even in the
absence of a prior registration, will convert a claim
of legal appropriation by subsequent users.
157. Doctrine of privileged communication. The
doctrine that utterances made in the course of
judicial proceedings, incl. all kinds of pleadings,
petitions and motions, belong to the class of
communications that are absolutely privileged.
[Sison v. David, GR L-11268, Jan. 28, 1961, 1
SCRA 60]. 2. The doctrine that statements made
in the course of judicial proceedings are
absolutely privileged – that is, privileged
regardless of defamatory tenor and of the
presence of malice – if the same are relevant,
pertinent, or material to the cause in hand or
subject of inquiry. [Tolentino v. Baylosis, GR L-
15742, Jan. 31, 1961, 1 SCRA 396].
158. Doctrine of privity of Doctrine that provides
that a contract cannot confer rights or impose
obligations arising under it on any person or agent
except the parties to it. The basic premise is that
only parties to contracts should be able to sue to
enforce their rights or claim damages as such.
159. Doctrine of pro reo. Law. The doctrine that
where the evidence on an issue of fact is in
question or there is doubt on which side the
evidence weighs, the doubt should be resolved in
favor of the accused. [Abarquez v. People, GR
150762, 20 Jan. 2006, 479 SCRA 225]. Also
called Pro reo doctrine.
160. Doctrine of processual presumption. The
doctrine holding that where a foreign law is not
pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the
presumption is that foreign law is the same as
ours. [Atci Overseas Corp. v. Echin, GR 178551,
Oct. 11, 2010, 632 SCRA 528]. 2. The
presumption that, in the absence of anything to
the contrary as to the character of a foreign law, it
is the same as the domestic law on the same
subject. [Lim v. Insular Collector of Customs, GR
11759, Mar. 16, 1917, 36 Phil. 472]. Also
Doctrine of presumed-identity approach.
161. Doctrine of promissory estoppel. The doctrine
under which an estoppel may arise from the
making of a promise, even though without
consideration, if it was intended that the promise
should be relied upon and in fact it was relied
upon, and if a refusal to enforce it would be
virtually to sanction the perpetration of fraud or
would result in other injustice. In this respect, the
reliance by the promisee is generally evidenced
by action or forbearance on his part, and the Idea
has been expressed that such action or
forbearance would reasonably have been
expected by the promisor. Mere omission by the
promisee to do whatever the promisor promised
to do has been held insufficient ‘forbearance’ to
give rise to a promissory estoppel.’ [Ramos v.
Central Bank of the Phils., GR L-29352, Oct. 4,
1971, 41 SCRA 565].
162. Doctrine of proper submission. Law. All the
proposed amendments to the Consti. shall be
presented to the people for the ratification or
rejection at the same time, not piecemeal. 2.
Plebiscite may be held on the same day as
regular election provided the people are
sufficiently informed of the amendments to be
voted upon, to conscientiously deliberate thereon,
to express their will in a genuine manner.
 Submission of piece-meal amendments is
constitutional. All the amendments must be
submitted for ratification at 1 plebiscite only. The
people have to be given a proper frame of
reference in arriving at their decision. They have
no idea yet of what the rest of the amended
Consti. would be. [Tolentino v. Comelec, GR L-
34150, Oct. 16, 1971, 41 SCRA 702].
163. Doctrine of protection against compulsory
disclosures. The doctrine that no person could be
compelled to testify against himself or to answer
any question which would have had a tendency to
expose his property to a forfeiture or to form a link
in a chain of evidence for that purpose, as well as
to incriminate him. [Cabal v. Kapunan, Jr., GR L-
19052, Dec. 29, 1962, 6 SCRA 1059].
164. Doctrine of proximate cause. The doctrine
stating that proximate legal cause is that acting
first and producing the injury, either immediately
or by settling other events in motion, all
constituting a natural and continuous chain of
events, each having a close causal connection
with its immediate predecessor, the final event in
the chain immediately affecting the injury as a
natural and probable result of the cause which
first acted, under such circumstances that the
person responsible for the 1st event should, as an
ordinarily prudent and intelligent person, have
reasonable ground to expect at the moment of his
act or default that an injury to some person might
probably result therefrom. [Vda. de Bataclan v.
Medina, GR L-10126, Oct. 22, 1957, 102 Phil.
181].
165. Doctrine of public policy. The doctrine under
which, as applied to the law of contracts, courts of
justice will not recognize or uphold a transaction
when its object, operation, or tendency is
calculated to be prejudicial to the public welfare,
to sound morality or to civic honesty. [Cui v.
Arellano Univ., GR L-15127, 30 May 1961, 2
SCRA 205].
166. Doctrine of purposeful hesitation. The doctrine
that charges every court, incl. the SC, with the
duty of a purposeful hesitation before declaring a
law unconstitutional, on the theory that the
measure was first carefully studied by the exec.
and legislative depts. and determined by them to
be in accordance with the fundamental law before
it was finally approved. [Drilon v. Lim, GR 112497,
Aug. 4, 1994, 235 SCRA 135].
167. Doctrine of qualification. of Laws. The process
of deciding whether or not the facts relate to the
kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. The
purpose of characterization is to enable the court
of the forum to select the proper law. [Agpalo,
Conflict of Laws, p. 18].
168. Doctrine of qualified political agency. Law.
The doctrine that holds that, as the Pres. cannot
be expected to exercise his control powers all at
the same time and in person, he will have to
delegate some of them to his Cabinet members,
who in turn and by his authority, control the
bureaus and other offices under their respective
jurisdictions in the exec. dept. [Carpio v. Exec.
Sec., GR 96409, Feb. 14, 1992, 206 SCRA 290].
169. Doctrine of quantum meruit. As much as one
deserves. The doctrine that prevents undue
enrichment based on the equitable postulate that
it is unjust for a person to retain benefit without
paying for it. [See Soler v. CA, GR 123892, 21
May 2001, 358 SCRA 57].
170. Doctrine of qui facit per alium. The doctrine
holding that, if in the nature of things, the master
is obliged to perform the duties by employing
servants, he is responsible for their acts in the
same way that he is responsible for his own acts.
See Doctrine of respondeat superior.
171. Doctrine of ratification in agency. The doctrine
pertaining to the adoption or confirmation by 1
person of an act performed on his behalf by
another without authority. The substance of the
doctrine is confirmation after conduct, amounting
to a substitute for a prior authority. [Manila
Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc. v. Linsangan, GR
151319, Nov. 22, 2004, 443 SCRA 377].
172. Doctrine of rational equivalence. The
reasonable necessity of the means employed [to
repel the unlawful aggression] does not imply
material commensurability bet. the means of
attack and defense [but] [w]hat the law requires is
rational equivalence, in the consideration of which
will enter the principal factors of the emergency,
the imminent danger to which the person attacked
is exposed, and the instinct, more than the
reason, that moves or impels the defense, and the
proportionateness thereof does not depend upon
the harm done, but rests upon the imminent
danger of such injury. [People v. Gutual, GR
115233, Feb. 22, 1996, 254 SCRA 37].
173. Doctrine of relation back. A principle that
something done today will be treated as if it were
done earlier. This doctrine is applied under certain
circumstances. For example, a document held in
escrow and then delivered later will be treated as
if delivered when it was put into escrow. Also
Doctrine of relations back or Relation back
doctrine.
174. Doctrine of relations back. That principle of
law by which an act done at one time is
considered by a fiction of law to have been done
at some antecedent period. It is a doctrine that,
although of equitable origin, has a well-recognized
application to proceedings at law; a legal fiction
invented to promote the ends of justice or to
prevent injustice end the occurrence of injuries
where otherwise there would be no remedy. The
doctrine, when invoked, must have connection
 with actual fact, must be based on some
antecedent lawful rights. [Allied Banking Corp. v.
CA, GR 85868, Oct. 13, 1989, 178 SCRA 526].
Also Doctrine of relation back or Relation back
doctrine.
175. Doctrine of renvoi. Refer back. The process
by which a court adopts the rules of a foreign
jurisdiction with respect to any conflict of laws that
arises. In some instances, the rules of the foreign
state might refer the court back to the law of the
forum where the case is being heard.
176. Doctrine of res gestae. Things done. Doctrine
that is a recognized exception to the rule
against hearsay evidence based on the belief
that, bec. certain statements are made naturally,
spontaneously, and without deliberation during
the course of an event, they leave little room for
misunderstanding or misinterpretation upon
hearing by someone else, i.e., by the witness,
who will later repeat the statement to the court,
and thus the courts believe that such statements
carry a high degree of credibility.
177. Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The thing itself
speaks. A doctrine of law that one is presumed to
be negligent if he had exclusive control of
whatever caused the injury even though there is
no specific evidence of an act of negligence, and
without negligence the accident would not have
happened.
178. Doctrine of res judicata. The doctrine that has
2 aspects. The 1st is the effect of a judgment as a
bar to the prosecution of a 2nd action upon the
same claim, demand or cause of action. The 2nd
aspect is that it precludes the relitigation of a
particular fact or issues in another action bet. the
same parties on a diff. claim or cause of action.
[Lopez v. Reyes, GR L-29498, Mar. 31, 1977, 76
SCRA 179].
179. Doctrine of res perit domino. The thing is lost
to the owner. The doctrine that states that when a
thing is lost or destroyed, it is lost to the person
who was the owner of it at the time.
180. Doctrine of residual jurisdiction. Rem. Law.
The doctrine that the residual jurisdiction of trial
courts is available at a stage in which the court is
normally deemed to have lost jurisdiction over the
case or the subject matter involved in the appeal.
This stage is reached upon the perfection of the
appeals by the parties or upon the approval of the
records on appeal, but prior to the transmittal of
the orig. records or the records on appeal. In
either instance, the trial court still retains its so-
called residual jurisdiction to: (a) issue protective
orders; (b) approve compromises; (c) permit
appeals of indigent litigants; (d) order execution
pending appeal; and (e) allow the withdrawal of
the appeal.
181. Doctrine of respect for administrative or
practical construction. The doctrine which the
courts apply by referring to several factors such
as: (a) the respect due the governmental
agencies charged with administration, their
competence, expertness, experience, and
informed judgment and the fact that they
frequently are the drafters of the law they
interpret; (b) the fact that the agency is the one on
which the legislature must rely to advise it as to
the practical working out of the statute; and (c) the
practical application of the statute presents the
agency with unique opportunity and experiences
for discovering deficiencies, inaccuracies, or
improvements in the statute. [Asturias v. Comm.
of Customs, GR L-19337, Sep. 30, 1969, 29
SCRA 617].
182. Doctrine of respondeat superior. Let the
master answer. A legal doctrine which states
that, in many circumstances, an employer is
responsible for the actions of employees
performed within the course of their employment.
183. Doctrine of restrictive foreign sovereign
immunity. The doctrine of intl. law under which a
State or State instrumentality is immune from the
jurisdiction of the courts of another State, except
with respect to claims arising out of activities of
the kind that may be carried on by private
persons.
184. Doctrine of ripeness for judicial review. This
doctrine determines the point at which courts may
review admin. action. The basic principle of
ripeness is that the judicial machinery should be
conserved for problems which are real and
present or imminent and should not be
squandered on problems which are future,
imaginary or remote. [Mamba v. Lara, GR
165109, Dec. 14, 2009, 608 SCRA 149].
185. Doctrine of secondary meaning. The doctrine
that a word or phrase originally incapable of
exclusive appropriation with reference to an article
in the market, bec. geographical or otherwise
descriptive might nevertheless have been used so
long and so exclusively by 1 producer with
reference to this article that, in that trade and to
that group of the purchasing public, the word or
phrase has come to mean that the article was his
produce. [Ang v. Teodoro, GR L-48226, Dec. 14,
1942, 74 Phil., 50].
186. Doctrine of self-help. The doctrine enunciated
in Art. 429 of the Civ. Code which provides: “The
owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the right
to exclude any person from the enjoyment and
disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use
such force as may be reasonably necessary to
repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful
physical invasion or usurpation of his property.”
187. Doctrine of separability. The doctrine that
enunciates that an arbitration agreement is
independent of the main contract. The arbitration
agreement is to be treated as a separate
 agreement and the arbitration agreement does
not automatically terminate when the contract of
which it is part comes to an end. [Gonzales v.
Climax Mining Ltd., GR 161957, Jan. 22,
2007, 512 SCRA 148]. Also called Doctrine of
severability.
188. Doctrine of separate (legal) personality. A
well-settled doctrine both in law and in equity that
as a legal entity, a corp. has a personality distinct
and separate from its individual stockholders or
members. [Cruz v. Dalisay, AM R-181-P, July 31,
1987, 152 SCRA 482].
189. Doctrine of separate juridical personality. 1.
The doctrine which provides that a corp. has a
legal personality separate and distinct from that of
people comprising it. [Heirs of Tan Uy v. Intl.
Exchange Bank, 703 Phil. 477(2013)]. 2. The
doctrine by virtue of which stockholders of a corp.
enjoy the principle of limited liability: the corporate
debt is not the debt of the stockholder. [PNB v.
Hydro Resources Contractors Corp., 706 Phil.
297 (2013)].
190. Doctrine of separation of church and state.
The doctrine enshrined in Sec. 6, Art. II of the
1987 Phil. which provides that: “The separation of
Church and State shall be inviolable.” The idea
advocated by this principle is to delineate the
boundaries bet. the 2 institutions and thus avoid
encroachments by one against the other bec. of a
misunderstanding of the limits of their respective
exclusive jurisdictions. [Austria v. NLRC, GR
124382, 16 Aug. 1999, 312 SCRA 410].
191. Doctrine of separation of powers. A basic
postulate that forbids 1 branch of govt. to exercise
powers belonging to another coequal branch; or
for 1 branch to interfere with the other’s
performance of its constitutionally-assigned
functions. [Velasco, Jr., concurring op., Neri v.
Senate Committee on Accountability of Public
Officers and Investigations, GR 180643, Mar. 25,
2008, 549 SCRA 77].
192. Doctrine of severability. Also called Doctrine
of separability.
193. Doctrine of shifting majority. For each House
of Congress to pass a bill, only the votes of the
majority of those present in the session, there
being a quorum, is required.
194. Doctrine of sole and exclusive competence of
the labor tribunal. The doctrine that recognizes
the Labor Arbiters’ exclusive jurisdiction to hear
and decide the ff. cases involving all workers,
whether agricultural or non-agricultural: (a) Unfair
labor practice cases; (b) Termination disputes; (c)
If accompanied with a claim for reinstatement,
those cases that workers may file involving
wages, rate of pay, hours of work and other terms
and conditions of employment; (e) Claims for
actual, moral, exemplary and other forms of
damages arising from the employer-employee
relations; (f) Cases arising from any violation of
Art. 264 of the LC, incl. questions involving the
legality of strikes and lockouts; and (g) Except
claims for employees compensation, social
security, medicare and maternity benefits, all
other claims arising from employer-employee
relations, incl. those of persons in domestic or
household service, involving an amount
exceeding P5,000.00, whether or not
accompanied with a claim for reinstatement.
[From Art. 217, LC].
195. Doctrine of sovereign immunity. The doctrine
expressly provided in Art. XVI of the 1987 Consti.,
viz: “Sec. 3. The State may not be sued without its
consent.” 2. The doctrine that holds that a
sovereign is exempt from suit, not bec. of any
formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the
logical and practical ground that there can be no
legal right as against the authority that makes the
law on which the right depends. Also Doctrine of
non-suability.
196. Doctrine of specialty. A principle of Intl. law
included in most extradition treaties whereby a
person who is extradited to a country to stand trial
for certain crim. offenses may be tried only for
those offenses and not for any other pre-
extradition offenses.
197. Doctrine of stale demands. 1. [A doctrine]
based upon grounds of public policy which
requires, for the peace of society, the
discouragement of stale claims and is principally a
question of the inequity or unfairness of permitting
a right or claim to be enforced or asserted. [Tijam
v. Sibonghanoy, GR L-21450, Apr. 15, 1968, 23
SCRA 29]. 2. The time-honored rule anchored on
public policy that relief will be denied to a litigant
whose claim or demand has become “stale”, or
who has acquiesced for an unreasonable length
of time, or who has not been vigilant or who has
slept on his rights either by negligence, folly or
inattention. [Arradaza v. CA, GR 50422, Feb. 8,
1989, 170 SCRA 12]. Also Doctrine of laches.
198. Doctrine of stare decisis. The doctrine that
enjoins adherence to judicial precedents. It
requires courts in a country to follow the rule
established in a decision of its Supreme Court.
That decision becomes a judicial precedent to be
followed in subsequent cases by all courts in the
land. [Phil. Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) v.
Comelec, GR 190529, Apr. 29, 2010, 619 SCRA
585]. Also Doctrine of adherence to judicial
precedents.
199. Doctrine of stare decisis. Instances when the
doctrine may be abandoned: (a) When adherence
to it would result in the govt.’s loss of its case; (b)
when the application of the doctrine would cause
great prejudice to a foreign national; and (c) when
it is necessary to promote the passage of a new
law.
200. Doctrine of stare decisis et non quieta
movere. To adhere to precedents and not to
unsettle things which are established. The
doctrine that enjoins adherence to judicial
precedents. It requires courts in a country to
follow the rule established in a decision of its
Supreme Court. That decision becomes a judicial
precedent to be followed in subsequent cases by
all courts in the land. The doctrine of stare decisis
is based on the principle that once a question of
law has been examined and decided, it should be
deemed settled and closed to further argument.
[Fermin v. People, GR 157643, Mar. 28,
2008, 550 SCRA 132].
201. Doctrine of state immunity from suit. 1. The
doctrine under which a state cannot be sued in
the courts of another State, without its consent or
waiver. [Jusmag Phils. v. NLRC, GR 108813,
Dec. 15, 1994, 239 SCRA 224]. 2. The doctrine
holding that a sovereign is exempt from suit, not
bec. of any formal conception or obsolete theory,
but on the logical and practical ground that there
can be no legal right as against the authority that
makes the law on which the right depends.
[Kawamanakoa v. Polyblank, 205 US 353, 51 L.
ed. 834]. Also called Royal prerogative of
dishonesty.
202. Doctrine of state responsibility to aliens. Law.
The doctrine that a state is under obligation to
make reparation to another state for the failure to
fulfill its primary obligation to afford; in accordance
with intl. law, the proper protection due to an alien
who is a national of the latter state. Also called
State responsibility doctrine.
203. Doctrine of statistical improbability. Law. The
doctrine that is applied only where the unique
uniformity of tally of all the votes cast in favor of
all the candidates belonging to 1 party and the
systematic blanking of all the candidates of all the
opposing parties appear in the election return.
[Sinsuat v. Pendatun, GR L-31501, June 30,
1970, 33 SCRA 630]. Also known as the
Lagumbay doctrine. [Lagumbay v. Comelec, GR
L-25444, Jan. 31, 1966, 16 SCRA 175].
204. Doctrine of stewardship. A doctrine under
which private property is supposed to be held by
the individual only as a trustee for the people in
general, who are its real owners. As a mere
steward, the individual must exercise his rights to
the property not for his own exclusive and selfish
benefit but for the good of the entire community or
nation. [Mataas na Lupa Tenants Assoc. v.
Dimayuga, GR L-32049, June 25, 1984, 130
SCRA 30].].
205. Doctrine of strained relations. The rule that
where reinstatement is not feasible, expedient or
practical, as where reinstatement would only
exacerbate the tension and strained relations bet.
the parties, or where the relationship bet. the
employer and employee has been unduly strained
by reason of their irreconcilable differences,
particularly where the illegally dismissed
employee held a managerial or key position in the
company, it would be more prudent to order
payment of separation pay instead of
reinstatement. [Quijano v. Mercury Drug Corp.,
GR 126561, July 8, 1998, 292 SCRA 109].
206. Doctrine of strict compliance. 1. A settled rule
in commercial transactions involving letters of
credit (LCs) that the documents tendered must
strictly conform to the terms of the LC. The tender
of documents by the beneficiary (seller) must
include all documents required by the letter. A
correspondent bank which departs from what has
been stipulated under the letter of credit, as when
it accepts a faulty tender, acts on its own risks
and it may not thereafter be able to recover from
the buyer or the issuing bank, as the case may
be, the money thus paid to the beneficiary. [Feati
Bank and Trust Co. v. CA, GR 94209, Apr. 30,
1991, 196 SCRA 576]. 2. The doctrine in land
registration holding that in order to establish that
the land subject of the application is alienable and
disposable public land, all applications for orig.
registration under the Property Registration
Decree (PD 1529) must include both: (a) a
CENRO or PENRO certification; and (b) a
certified true copy of the orig. classification made
by the DENR Sec. [Rep. v. Vega, GR 177790.
Jan. 17, 2011, 639 SCRA 541]. Also called Strict
compliance doctrine.
207. Doctrine of subrogation. The principle that
covers a situation wherein an insurer who has
paid a loss under an insurance policy is entitled to
all the rights and remedies belonging to the
insured against a 3rd party with respect to any
loss covered by the policy. It contemplates full
substitution such that it places the party
subrogated in the shoes of the creditor, and he
may use all means that the creditor could employ
to enforce payment. [Keppel Cebu Shipyard, Inc.
v. Pioneer Ins. and Surety Corp., GR 180880-81
& 180896-97, Sep. 25, 2009, 601 SCRA 96].
208. Doctrine of substantial compliance. A rule in
land registration recognizing and affirming
applications for land registration on other
substantial and convincing evidence duly
presented, as an exception to the gen. rule on
strict compliance, where such applications are
without any opposition from the LRA or the
DENR. [Rep. v. Vega, GR 177790. Jan. 17,
2011, 639 SCRA 541].
209. Doctrine of supervening event. The doctrine
under which facts and events transpiring after the
judgment or order had become final and
executory [which circumstances] affect or change
the substance of the judgment and render its
 execution inequitable would justify the suspension
or nullification of such final and executory
judgment or order.
210. Doctrine of successor-employer. Labor. 1. The
doctrine that rests on the in personam character
of employer-employee relationship. A 3rd party
that buys the business of the employer does not
become the new employer of the employees of
the latter. For this reason, it is totally insulated
from the liabilities of the latter in relation to its
displaced employees. 2. The doctrine holding that
transfer or absorption of employees from one
company to another, as successor employer, may
be held as valid as long as the transferor is not in
bad faith and the employees absorbed by a
successor-employer enjoy the continuity of their
employment status and their rights and privileges
with their former employer. Also called Successor-
employer doctrine.
211. Doctrine of supervening facts in double
jeopardy. The doctrine in crim. law that where,
after the 1st prosecution for a lesser crime, new
facts have supervened which, together with those
already in existence at the time of the 1st
prosecution, have made the offense graver and
the penalty 1st imposed legally inadequate, the
accused cannot be said to be in 2nd jeopardy if
indicted for the new offense. [Melo v. People, GR
L-3580, Mar. 22, 1950]. Also called the Melo
doctrine.
212. Doctrine of supervening negligence. The
doctrine to the effect that where both parties are
negligent, but the negligent act of one is
appreciably later in time than that of the other, or
when it is impossible to determine whose fault or
negligence should be attributed to the incident,
the party who had the last clear opportunity to
avoid the impending harm and failed to do so is
chargeable with the consequences thereof. [Picart
v. Smith, GR L-12219, Mar. 15, 1918, 37 Phil.
809]. 2. The doctrine holding that an antecedent
negligence of a person does not preclude the
recovery of damages for supervening negligence
of, or bar a defense against the liability sought by,
another if the latter, who had the last fair chance,
could have avoided the impending harm by the
exercise of due diligence. [Pantranco North
Express, Inc. v. Baesa, GR Nos. 79050-51, Nov.
14, 1989, 179 SCRA 384]. Also Doctrine of
discovered peril.
213. Doctrine of the law of the case. That principle
under which determination of questions of law will
generally be held to govern a case throughout all
its subsequent stages where such determination
has already been made on a prior appeal to a
court of last resort. It is “merely a rule of
procedure and does not go to the power of the
court, and will not be adhered to where its
application will result in an unjust decision.” It
relates entirely to questions of law, and is
confined in its operation to subsequent
proceedings in the same case. [Villa v.
Sandiganbayan, GR 87186, Apr. 24, 1992, 208
SCRA 283].
214. Doctrine of the mortgagee in good faith. The
doctrine applicable to a situation where, despite
the fact that the mortgagor is not the owner of the
mortgaged property, his title being fraudulent, the
mortgage contract and any foreclosure sale
arising therefrom are given effect by reason of
public policy. [Cavite Devt. Bank v. Lim, GR
131679, Feb. 1, 2000, 324 SCRA 346].
215. Doctrine of the proper law. of Laws. The
doctrine applied in the choice of law stage of
a lawsuit involving the conflict of laws. In a
conflicts lawsuit, 1 or more state laws will be
relevant to the decision-making process. If the
laws are the same, this will cause no problems,
but if there are substantive differences, the choice
of which law to apply will produce a diff.
judgment. Each state therefore produces a set of
rules to guide the choice of law, and 1 of the most
significant rules is that the law to be applied in any
given situation will be the proper law. This is the
law which seems to have the closest and most
real connection to the facts of the case, and so
has the best claim to be applied.
216. Doctrine of the real and hypothecary nature of
maritime law. Ins. The rule that a ship owner’s
liability is merely co-extensive with his interest in
the vessel, except where actual fault is
attributable to the shipowner. [Aboitiz Shipping
Corp. v. CA, GR 121833, Oct. 17, 2008, 569
SCRA 294].
217. Doctrine of the third group. The doctrine to the
effect that the right of the owner of the shares of
stock of a Phil. Corp. to transfer the same by
delivery of the certificate, whether it be regarded
as statutory on common law right, is limited and
restricted by the express provision that “no
transfer, however, shall be valid, except as bet.
the parties, until the transfer is entered and noted
upon the books of the corp.” [Uson v. Diosomito,
GR L-42135, June 17, 1935, 61 Phil., 535].
218. Doctrine of transformation. Intl. Law. The
doctrine which holds that the generally accepted
rules of intl. law are not per se binding upon the
State but must first be embodied in a legislation
enacted by the lawmaking body and only when so
transformed will they become binding upon the
State as part of its municipal law. [Cruz, Intl. Law,
2000]. Compare with Doctrine of incorporation.
219. Doctrine of ultimate consumption. Goods
intended for civilian use which may ultimately find
their way and be consumed by belligerent forces,
may be seized on the way. Also called Ultimate
consumption doctrine.
220. Doctrine of ultimate destination. The final legal outgrowth of judicial abhorrence so to speak,
destination in the territory of an enemy or under of a person’s taking inconsistent positions and
its control making goods contraband under the gaining advantages thereby through the aid of
doctrine of continuous voyage. Also called courts. [Lopez v. Ochoa, GR L-7955, May 30,
Ultimate destination doctrine. 1958, 103 Phil. 950].
221. Doctrine of ultra vires. Beyond the powers. 229. Doctrine of waiver of double jeopardy. The
The doctrine in the law of corps. that holds that if doctrine that holds that when the case is
a corp. enters into a contract that is beyond the dismissed with the express consent of the
scope of its corporate powers, the contract is defendant, the dismissal will not be a bar to
illegal. another prosecution for the same offense; bec. his
222. Doctrine of unforeseen events. The doctrine action in having the case dismissed constitutes a
enunciated by Art. 1267 of the Civ. Code which is waiver of his Constl. right or privilege, for the
not an absolute application of the principle of reason that he thereby prevents the court from
rebus sic stantibus that would endanger the proceeding to the trial on the merits and rendering
security of contractual relations. [So v. Food Fest a judgment of conviction against him. [People v.
land, Inc., GR 183628 & 183670, Apr. 7, 2010, Salico, GR L-1567, Oct. 13, 1949, 84 Phil. 722].
617 SCRA 541]. Art. 1267 provides: “When the 230. Doctrine of willful blindness. A doctrine in
service has become so difficult as to be manifestly taxation that an individual or corp. can no longer
beyond the contemplation of the parties, the say that the errors on their tax returns are not
obligor may also be released therefrom, in whole their responsibility or that it is the fault of the
or in part. accountant they hired.
223. Doctrine of vagueness. An aspect of the due
process requirement of notice which holds that a
law is facially invalid if persons of “common
intelligence must necessarily guess as at its
meaning and differ as to its application.”
224. Doctrine of vicarious liability. A legal doctrine
that assigns liability for an injury to a person who
did not cause the injury but who has a particular
legal relationship to the person who did act
negligently. Also referred to as Imputed
225. Doctrine of virtual representation. See
Doctrine of class suit.
226. Doctrine of void for vagueness. Law. The
doctrine that is most commonly stated to the
effect that a statute establishing a crim. offense
must define the offense with sufficient
definiteness that persons of ordinary intelligence
can understand what conduct is prohibited by the
statute. It can only be invoked against that specie
of legislation that is utterly vague on its face, i.e.,
that which cannot be clarified either by a saving
clause or by construction. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, GR. 148560, 19 Nov. 2001, 369
SCRA 394]. Compare with Doctrine of
overbreadth.
227. Doctrine of volenti non fit injuria. The doctrine
that self-inflicted injury or to the consent to injury
precludes the recovery of damages by the person
who has knowingly and voluntarily exposed
himself to danger, even if he is not negligent in
doing so. [Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes,
GR 154259, Feb. 28, 2005, 452 SCRA 532].
228. Doctrine of waiver. A doctrine resting upon an
equitable principle which courts of law will
recognize, that a person, with full knowledge of
the facts shall not be permitted to act in a manner
inconsistent with his former position or conduct to
the injury of another, a rule of judicial policy, the