PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES 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 trial.

Doctrine of absorption of common crimes. Also called Hernandez doctrine. 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 Rev.
Penal Code. [Enrile v. Amin, GR 93335, Sept. 13, 1990]. It held that the crime of rebellion under the Rev. Penal
Code of the Phils. is charged as a single offense, and that it cannot be made into a complex crime.

Doctrine of actio personalis moritur cum persona. Lat. [The doctrine that] personal action terminates or dies with the
person. [Santos v. Sec. of Labor, L-21624, 27 Feb. 1968].

Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction. Rem. 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 [e]ven 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, 301 SCRA 96]. Also called
Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction.

Doctrine of adherence tojudicial precedents. Also called the 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 Sup.
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].

Doctrine of agency by estoppel. Also known as the 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.

Doctrine of alter ego. A doctrine based upon the misuse of a corporation 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 corporation. The doctrine imposes upon the
individual who uses a corporation merely as an instrumentality to conduct his own business liability as a
consequence of fraud or injustice perpetuated not on the corporation, but on third persons dealing with the
corporation. [Cited Sulo ng Bayan, Inc. v. Araneta, Inc., GR L-31061 Aug. 17, 1976].