A.

WAIVER OF RIGHTS
1. CONCEPT
Waiver is defined as “a voluntary and intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known existing
legal right, advantage, benefit, claim or privilege, which except for such waiver the party would have
enjoyed; the voluntary abandonment or surrender, by a capable person, of a right known by him to exist,
with the intent that such right shall be surrendered and such person forever deprived of its benefit; or
such conduct as warrants an inference of the relinquishment of such right; or the intentional doing of an
act inconsistent with claiming it.” (F.F. Cruz & Co., Inc. v. HR Construction Corp., G.R. No. 187521, 14
March 2012)

A waiver is essentially contractual. (Radio Mindanao Network, Inc. v. Amurao III, G.R. No. 167225, 22
October 2014)

Quitclaims are contracts in the nature of a compromise where parties make concessions, a lawful device
to avoid litigation. It is a valid and binding agreement between the parties, provided that it constitutes a
credible and reasonable settlement and the one accomplishing it has done so voluntarily and with a full
understanding of its import. In so doing, the parties adjust their difficulties in the manner they have
agreed upon, disregarding the possible gain in litigation and keeping in mind that such gain is balanced
by the danger of losing. While quitclaims are generally intended for the purpose of preventing or putting
an end to a lawsuit, jurisprudence nonetheless holds that the parties are not precluded from entering
into a compromise even if a final judgment had already been rendered. (F.F. Cruz & Co. Inc. v. Galandez,
G.R. No. 236496, 08 July 2019)

a. Doctrine of waiver
Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or
good customs, or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law. (Article 6, Civil Code)

The doctrine of waiver extends to rights and privileges of any character, and, since the word “waiver”
covers every conceivable right, it is the general rule that a person may waive any matter which affects
his property, and any alienable right or privilege of which he is the owner or which belongs to him
or to which he is legally entitled, whether secured by contract, conferred with statute, or guaranteed
by constitution, provided such rights and privileges rest in the individual, are intended for his sole
benefit, do not infringe on the rights of others, and further provided the waiver of the right or
privilege is not forbidden by law, and does not contravene public policy; and the principle is
recognized that everyone has a right to waive, and agree to waive, the advantage of a law or rule
made solely for the benefit and protection of the individual in his private capacity, if it can be
dispensed with and relinquished without infringing on any public right, and without detriment to the
community at large. (F.F. Cruz & Co., Inc. v. HR Construction Corp., supra.)

1) Express or implied
Waiver may be either express or implied. (Vda. de Garcia v. Locsin, G.R. No. L-45950, 29 June
1938)

2) Constitutional rights, included

The waiver of the right to cross-examine a witness may be express or implied. In these instances,
no violation of the constitutional right to due process is committed as the party himself or
herself has opted not to exercise the right. The validity of a waiver of the right to cross-examine
is recognized in our jurisdiction. The difficulty, however, is in cases where the waiver of the right
is only implied. An implied waiver may take various forms. In ascertaining whether a party has
waived his or her right to cross-examine a witness, this Court has identified a general standard
that depends, for its application, on the surrounding facts of each particular case. In one case,
this Court said that a party may be deemed to have waived his or her right to cross-examine a
witness when he or she was given an opportunity to confront and cross-examine an opposing
witness but failed to do so for reasons attributable to himself or herself alone. (Dy Teban
Trading, Inc. v. Dy, G.R. No. 185647, 26 July 2017)

3) Limitation
While rights may be waived, the same must not be contrary to law, public order, public policy,
morals or good customs or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law. (Land
and Housing Development Corporation v. Esquillo, G.R. No. 152012, 30 September 2005)