FERNANDEZ, ANALYN V.

LLB 1-A

De Roy, et. al. v. CA and Luis Bernal Sr, et. al.

GR No. 80718, January 29, 1988
Cortes, J.:

PRINCIPLE:

Publication of laws in the Official Gazette is indispensable for the law to become binding
and effective. However, Supreme Court decision has laid down a rule which is not
covered by the language of the Article 2 of the Civil code of the Philippines.

FACTS:

The firewall of a burned-out building owned by Feliza P. De Roy and Virgilio Ramos (the
herein “petitioners”) have collapsed and destroyed the tailoring shop occupied by the
family of Luis Bernal, et. al (the “private respondents”) resulting in injuries to private
respondents and the death of Marissa Bernal, a daughter. Private respondents had
been warned by the petitioners to vacate the shop in view of its proximity to the
weakened wall but the former failed to do so:

On August 17, 1987, the Court of Appeal has affirmed in toto the decision of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) that petitioners are guilty of gross negligence and awarding
damages to private respondents applying the rule laid down in the Habaluyas
Enterprises, Inc. vs. Japzon [GR No. 70895, August 5, 1985], a copy of the appellate
decision was received by petitioners on August 25, 1987.

On September 9, 1987, the last day of the fifteen-day period to file an appeal,
petitioners filed a motion for extension of time to file a motion reconsideration, which
was eventually denied by the appellate court in the Resolution of September 30, 1987.
Another motion for reconsideration was filed on September 24, 1987 and was denied in
the Resolution of October 27, 1987.

Supreme Court affirmed the decision of CA that it correctly applied the rule laid down in
Habaluyas Enterprises, Inc. v. Japzon [GR No. 70895, August 5, 1985], that the
fifteen-day period for appealing or of filing a motion for consideration cannot be
extended.

However, petitioners contend that the rule in the Habaluyas should not be made to
apply to the case at bar owing to the non-publication of the Habalayas decision in the
Official Gazette as of the time the subject decision of the CA was promulgated.
ISSUE:

Whether there is a law requiring Supreme Court decisions be published in the Official
Gazette for it to be binding and become effective?

RULING:

There is no law requiring the publication of Supreme Court decisions in the Official
Gazette before they can be binding as a condition to their becoming effective. Thus,
jurisprudence is not within the language of Article 2 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.

It is the bounden duty of counsel as lawyer in active law practice to keep abreast of
decisions of the Supreme Court particularly where issues have been clarified,
consistently reiterated, and published in the advance reports of Supreme Court
decisions (G.R. s) and in such publications as the Supreme Court Reports Annotated
(SCRA) and law journals.