UNIVERSITY OF CALOOCAN CITY

COLLEGE OF LAW
FIRST SEMESTER, A.Y. 2021-2022

SYLLABUS IN PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS

ATTY. JEFFREY G. AGUILAR

I. Effect and Application of Laws (Civil Code)

a. Art. 2 – Date of effectivity of laws
(i) Indispensability of Publication; Purpose of Publication
• Tanada vs. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915, April 24, 1985 (Decision)
• Tanada vs. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915, December 29, 1986 (Resolution)
• La Bugal B’laan Tribal Assn. vs. Ramos, G.R. No. 127882, Jan. 27, 2004
• Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. vs Military Shrine Services, G.R. No.
187587, June 5, 2013
(ii) Where to Publish; Requisites of a “Newspaper of General Circulation”
• Garcillano vs. House of Representatives Committees, G.R. No. 170338, Dec. 23, 2008
• Fortune Motors vs. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co., G.R. No. 115068, November
28, 1996
(iii) Covered Issuances / Exceptions
• Villanueva vs Judicial and Bar Council, G.R. No. 211833, April 7, 2015
• Roy vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80718, January 29, 1988
(iv) Publication/Effectivity of Local Ordinances
• Sections 59 and 188, Local Government Code (R.A. 7160)
(v) Publication/Effectivity of Administrative Rules and Regulations
• Chapter 2 of Book VII, Revised Administrative Code (Executive Order No. 292)
b. Art. 3 – Ignorantia legis non excusat
(i) Reason and Basis for the Rule; Laws Covered
• Tanada vs. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915, April 24, 1985 (Decision)
• Fajardo vs. Atty. Danilo Dela Torre, A.C. No. 6295, April 14, 2004
(ii) Exceptions to the Rule
• Arts. 526 (3), 1334, 2155, New Civil Code
(iii) Ignorance of Law vs Mistake of Fact
(iii) Doctrine of Processual Presumption or Presumed-Identity Approach
• ATCI Overseas Corp. vs. Echin, G.R. No. 178551, October 11, 2010
c. Art. 4 – Prospective application of laws
(i) Exceptions to the principle of non-retroactivity
• Articles 22 and 62, Revised Penal Code
• People vs Domingo Valdez, G.R. No. 127753, December 11, 2000
• Inmates of New Bilibid Prison vs. Sec. De Lima, GR No. 212719, June 25, 2019
• Narzoles vs NLRC, G.R. No. 141959, September 29, 2000
d. Art. 5 – Concept of Mandatory and Prohibitory Laws
(i) GR: violation makes act void
(ii) Exceptions.
e. Art. 6 – Waiver of rights
(i) General Rule vs Exception
(ii) Requisites of a valid waiver.
• People of the Philippines v. Donato, G.R. No. 79269, June 5, 1991
• Cui vs. Arellano University, GR No. L-15121, May 30, 1961
• Mindoro Lumber and Hardware vs. Bacay, Et Al., GR No. 158753, June 8, 2005
f. Art. 7 – Repeal of laws
(i) Express and implied repeal; Test of Implied Repeal
• Iloilo Palay Corn Planters Assn. Inc. vs. Feliciano, 13 SCRA 377
 • CIR vs Primetown Property Group, Inc., GR No. 162155, August 28, 2007
(ii) Effect of Repeal of Repealing Laws
(iii) Effect of Declaration of Unconstitutionality of a Law; Doctrine of Operative Fact
• Araullo vs Aquino, GR No. 209287, February 3, 2015
g. Art. 8 – Judicial decisions form part of the law of the land
(i) Law and jurisprudence
• People vs Jabinal, 55 SCRA 607
(ii) Stare decisis; Obiter Dictum
• Lazatin vs Desierto, GR No. 147097, June 5, 2009
(iii) Modification / Reversal of a Doctrine / Principle of Law
• Section 4 (3), Article VIII, 1987 Phil. Constitution
(iv) Prospective vs Retroactive Application of New Doctrines
• Albino Co vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993
• Apiag vs Judge Cantero, AM No. MTJ-95-1070, February 12, 1997
• Philippine International Trading Corp (PITC) vs Comm. on Audit, G.R. No. 205837,
November 21, 2017
h. Arts. 9 &10 – Duty to render judgment; Rule on interpretation/application of laws
(i) Courts’ duty to render judgment vs Judicial Legislation;
• In the Matter of Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia, GR No. 148311, Mar
31, 2005
• Floresca vs Philex Mining, GR No. L-30642, April 30, 1985
• Republic vs Manalo, GR No. 221029, April 24, 2018
(ii) Rule on interpretation of doubtful statutes vs Dura Lex Sed Lex
• People vs Amigo, GR No. 116719, January 18, 1996
• Karen Salvacion vs. Central Bank of the Phils., G.R. No. 94723, August 21, 1997
i. Arts. 11 &12 – Customs; Absence of presumption.
(i) Requisites of a Custom
• In the Matter of Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia, GR No. 148311, Mar
31, 2005
j. Art. 13 – Legal Periods (as amended by Book I, Sec 31, Admin Code of 1987, E.O. 292)
• CIR vs. Primetown Property Group, G.R. No. 162155, August 28, 2007
k. Art. 14 – Applicability of Penal laws
(i) Principles of territoriality and generality
(ii) Exceptions.
l. Art. 15, 16, 17 – lex nationalii, lex rei sitae and lex loci celebrationis
(i) Art. 15 -- Nationality Principle; Exception
• Del Socorro vs. Van Wilsem, G.R. No. 193707, December 10, 2014, 744 SCRA 516
• Tenchavez vs Escaño, GR No. L-19671, November 29, 1965
(ii) Principle of Lex Rei Sitae; Exceptions; Renvoi Doctrine
• Miciano vs. Brimo, 50 Phil 867
• Testate Estate of Amos Bellis, et al. vs. Edward A. Bellis, 20 SCRA 358
• Testate Estate of Edward Christensen, GR No. L-16759, January 31, 1963
(iii) Principle of Lex Loci Celebrationis vs. Lex Contractus
• Hasegawe vs. Nikamura, GR No. 149177, November 23, 2007
(iv) Effect of Foreign Law, Judgments or Conventions
• Del Socorro vs. Van Wilsem, G.R. No. 193707, December 10, 2014, 744 SCRA 516
• Tenchavez vs Escaño, GR No. L-19671, November 29, 1965
• Article 26, Family Code of the Philippines
• Republic vs Manalo, GR No. 221029, April 24, 2018
II. Human Relations
A. Arts. 19 to 21
(i) Abuse of rights; Requisites; Concept of Malicious Prosecution
• Albenson Enterprises vs Court of Appeals, GR No. 88694, January 11, 1993
• Yasoña vs De Ramos, GR No. 156339, October 6, 2004
• California Clothing, Inc. vs. Quinones, GR No. 175822, October 23, 2013
(ii) Difference between Arts. 20 and 21
(iii) Breach of promise to marry; When actionable
• Hermosisima vs. Court of Appeals, L-14628, September 30, 1960
• Wassmer vs. Velez, L-20089, December 26, 1964
• Gashem Shookat Baksh vs. CA, 219 SCRA 115
• Buñag, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 101749, July 10, 1992
(iv) Damnum absque injuria; Volenti non fit injuria
• Spouses Custodio vs Court of Appeals, GR No 116100, February 9, 1996
• Nikko Hotel Manila Garden, et al. vs. Roberto Reyes, aka Amay Bisaya, G.R. No.
154259, February 28, 2005
B. Art. 22 to 23 – Unjust enrichment
(i) Principle of unjust enrichment; Conditions
(ii) Accion in rem verso vs Solutio Indebiti (see Article 2154, Civil Code)
• Republic vs Ballocanag, GR No. 163794, November 28, 2008
• Republic vs. Lacap, GR No. 158253, March 2, 2007
• Willem Beumer vs. Avelina Amores, GR No. 195670, December 3, 2012
C. Art. 24 – Court’s duty to be vigilant for the protection of the disadvantaged
(i) Principle of Parens Patriae
• Valenzuela vs Court of Appeals, GR No. L-56168, December 22, 1988
• Sps. Domingo vs Astorga, GR No, 130982, September 16, 2005
D. Art. 25 – Enjoining thoughtless extravagance
(i) Requisites
E. Art. 26 – Respect of rights of others; civil actions for violation.
• Concepcion vs Court of Appeals, GR No. 120706, January 31, 2000.
• Spouses Hing vs Choachuy, GR No. 179736, June 26, 2013
E. Art. 27 – Relief against public officials
(i) Ministerial vs Discretionary functions
• Zulueta vs Nicolas, GR No. 8252, Jan. 31, 1958
• Ledesma vs Court of Appeals, GR No. L-54598, April 15, 1988
F. Arts. 28 – Unfair competition
(i) Requisites
• Willaware Products Corp vs Jusichris Manufacturing Corp, GR No. 195549,
Sept. 3, 2014
G. Art. 29 - Effect of acquittal of the accused in the criminal case on the civil action
(i) Concept of criminal liability vs civil liability; Basis of civil liability in crimes
• Art. 100, Revised Penal Code
• Section 1(a), paragraph 1, Rule 111, Rules of Court
• Banal vs Tadeo, Jr., 156 SCRA 225
(ii) Proof beyond reasonable doubt vs. Preponderance of evidence
(ii) 2 kinds of acquittal; When acquittal extinguishes civil liability
• Section 2, par. 4, Rule 111, Rules of Court
• Lumantas vs Calapiz, GR No. 163753, January 15, 2014
H. Art. 30 – Quantum of proof required in civil actions arising from crimes
I. Arts. 31 to 35, 2176 – Independent civil actions
• See Sections 2-3, Rule 111, Rules of Court
• Aberca vs Ver, April 15, 1988, GR No. L-69866
 • Vinzonz-Chato vs Fortune Tobacco Corporation, GR No. 141309, Dec. 23, 2008
(Resolution)
• Madeja vs Caro, GR L-51183, December 21, 1983
J. Art. 36 – Prejudicial question
(i) Elements;
• see Sections 6-7, Rule 111, Rules of Court
• Domingo vs Spouses Singson, GR No. 203287, April 5, 2017
• Landicho vs Relova, GR No. L-22579, February 23, 1968
• Zapanta vs Montesa, GR No. L-14534, February 28, 1962
• Pulido vs People, GR No. 220149, July 27, 2021
• Pimentel vs People, GR No. 172060, September 13, 2010

III. Persons and Personality

A. Art. 37 - Juridical capacity; Capacity to act.
B. Art. 38 to 39 - Restrictions on capacity to act
C. Arts. 40 to 41 - Birth; Civil personality
(i) Presumptive civil personality of unborn child
• See Arts. 742, 760, 854, Civil Code
• Geluz vs Court of Appeals, GR No. L-16439, July 20, 1961
D. Art. 42-43 – Death
(i) Presumption of Survivorship
• See Rule 131, Section 3 (jj) and (kk), Rules of Court
E. Arts. 44 to 47 - Juridical persons

IV. Citizenship and Domicile

A. Art. 48-49 – Citizens of the Philippines
(i) Modes of Acquiring Citizenship
• See Article IV, 1987 Philippine Constitution
(ii) Citizenship of Foundlings
• David vs SET, Mary Grace Poe Llamanzares, GR No. 221538, Sept. 20, 2016
B. Arts. 50 to 51 – Domicile and Residence
• Romualdez-Marcos vs. Comelec, 248 SCRA 300