Home Law Firm Law Library Laws

Jurisprudence Contact Us

August 1916 - Philippine Supreme Court

Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme
Court Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year

1916 > August 1916 Decisions > G.R. No. 10010
August 1, 1916 - CHU JAN v. LUCIO BERNAS

034 Phil 631:

FIRST DIVISION

ChanRobles On- [G.R. No. 10010. August 1, 1916. ]

Line Bar Review

CHU JAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LUCIO

BERNAS, Defendant-Appellant.
 Sulpicio V. Cea for Appellant.

No appearance for Appellee.

SYLLABUS

JUDGMENT; DISMISSAL OF ACTION. —

Ignorance of the special law applicable to a case
does not justify the court in terminating the
proceeding by dismissing it without a decision.

ChanRobles MCLE DECISION

On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. -

ARAULLO, J. :
ChanRobles MCLE On-line :
www.chanroblesmcleonline.com

On the afternoon of June 26, 1913, a match was

held in the cockpit of the municipality of Tabaco,
Albay, between two cocks belonging to the
plaintiff and to the defendant respectively. Each
of said persons had put up a wager of P160; and
as the referee of the cockpit had declared the
defendant’s cock the winner in the bout, the
plaintiff brought suit against the defendant in the
justice of the peace court of the said pueblo,
asking that his own rooster be declared the
winner. The justice of the peace court decided
that the bout was a draw. From this judgment
the defendant appealed to the Court of First
Instance of the province. For the purpose of the
appeal, the plaintiff files his complaint and
prayed this court to render judgment ordering
the defendant to abide by and comply with the
rules and regulations governing cockfights, to
pay the stipulated wager of P160; to return the
other like amount (both sums or wager being
held for safe-keeping by the cockpit owner,
Tomas Almonte) and to assess the costs of both
instances against the defendant.

The defendant denied each and all of the

allegations of the complaint and moved to
dismiss with the costs against the plaintiff. On
September 11, 1913, the said Court of first
Instance rendered judgment dismissing the
appeal without special finding as to costs. The
defendant excepted to this judgment as well as
to an order dictated by the same court on
November 8th of the same year, on the plaintiff’s
motion, ordering the provincial treasurer of Albay
and, if necessary, the municipal treasurer of
Tabaco of the same province, to release the
deposit of P160 and return it to its owner, the
plaintiff Chinaman, Chu Jan. These proceedings
have come before us on appeal by means of the
proper bill of exceptions.

The grounds for the dismissal pronounced by the

lower court in the judgment appealed from were
that court has always dismissed cases of this
nature, that he is not familiar with the rules
governing cockfights and the duties of referees
thereof; that he does not know where to find the
law on the subject and, finally, that he knows of
no law whatever that governs the rights of the
plaintiff and the defendant in questions
concerning cockfights.

The ignorance of the court or his lack of

knowledge regarding the law applicable to a case
submitted to him for decision, the fact that the
court does not know the rules applicable to a
certain matter that is the subject of an appeal
which must be decided by him and his not
knowing where to find the law relative to the
case, are not reasons that can serve to excuse
the court for terminating the proceedings by
dismissing them without deciding the issues.
Such an excuse is the less acceptable because,
foreseeing that a case might arise to which no
law would be exactly applicable, the Civil Code,
in the second paragraph of article 6, provides
that the customs of the place shall be observed,
and, in the absence thereof, the general
principles of law.

Therefore the judgment and the order appealed

from, hereinbefore mentioned, are reversed and
the record of the proceedings shall be remanded
to the court from whence they came for due trial
and judgment as provided by law. No special
finding is made with regard to costs. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, and Trent, JJ.,

concur.

Moreland, J., did not take part.

Back to Home | Back to Main

August-1916
Jurisprudence

G.R. No. 9366

August 1, 1916 - YAP
TICO & CO. v. H. C.
ANDERSON

034 Phil 626

G.R. No. 10010

August 1, 1916 - CHU
JAN v. LUCIO
BERNAS
034 Phil 631

G.R. No. 11371

August 1, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
CECILIA
MEMORACION

034 Phil 633

G.R. No. 11497

August 1, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
LORENZO BLANZA

034 Phil 639

G.R. No. 11597

August 1, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
DARIO PADILLA

034 Phil 641

G.R. No. 11634

August 1, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
BARAMBANGAN

034 Phil 645

G.R. No. 8452

August 2, 1916 -
DEAN C.WORCESTER
v. MARTIN OCAMPO

034 Phil 646

G.R. No. 11389

August 2, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
JUAN SELLANO

034 Phil 655

G.R. No. 11425

August 2, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
NGAN PING

034 Phil 660

G.R. Nos. 10114 &

10137 August 3,
1916 - MELECIO
MONTINOLA v. JOSE
G. MONTALVO ET AL.

034 Phil 662

G.R. No. 11050

August 7, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
LIM SOON

034 Phil 668

G.R. No. 11159

August 7, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
MANUEL B. ASENSI

034 Phil 671

G.R. No. 11420

August 7, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
WAN YANG

034 Phil 679

 G.R. No. 9957
August 8, 1916 -
PERFECTO DE LA
VEGA ET AL. v.
TOMAS BALLILOS (or
BALIELOS)

034 Phil 683

G.R. No. 11477

August 8, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
TORIBIIO ANDAYA

034 Phil 690

G.R. No. 11507

August 8, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
SEVERO DE LOS
REYES

034 Phil 693

G.R. No. 11510

August 8, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
BAHATAN

034 Phil 695

G.R. No. 10712

August 10, 1916 -
ANSELMO
FERRAZZINI v.
CARLOS GSELL

034 Phil 697

G.R. No. 11566

August 10, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
MARCELO JOSE

034 Phil 715

G.R. No. 11565

August 11, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
MARCELO JOSE

034 Phil 723

G.R. No. 11162

August 12, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v. F.
LULING

034 Phil 725

G.R. No. 11530

August 12, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
JUAN PONS

034 Phil 729

G.R. No. 10100

August 15, 1916 -
GALO ABRENICA v.
MANUEL GONDA

034 Phil 739

G.R. No. 11165

August 15, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
MANUEL B. ASENSI

034 Phil 750

 G.R. No. 11338
August 15, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
TAN OCO

034 Phil 772

G.R. No. 11480

August 17, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
ROBERTO PANGILION

034 Phil 786

G.R. No. 10374

August 18, 1916 -
PIO MERCADO v.
MARIA TAN-LINGCO

034 Phil 793

G.R. No. 10891

August 18, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
EUGENIO KILAYKO

034 Phil 796

G.R. No. 11711

August 18, 1916 -
MANUEL CEMBRANO
CHAN GUANCO v.
INSULAR COLLECTOR
OF CUSTOMS

034 Phil 802

G.R. No. 10988

August 19, 1916 -
ROQUE SAMSON v.
BRAULIO GARCIA
034 Phil 805

G.R. No. 11488

August 19, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
LICERIO CASTEN

034 Phil 808

G.R. No. 11653

August 19, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
GENOVEVA AQUINO

034 Phil 813

G.R. No. 12096

August 22, 1916 -
EMILIO DE CASTRO
v. FERNANDO SALAS

034 Phil 818

G.R. No. 11401

August 23, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
GREGORIO
CRISTOBAL ET AL.

034 Phil 825

G.R. No. 11427

August 23, 1916 - VY
LIONG LIN v.
INSULAR COLLECTOR
OF CUSTOMS

034 Phil 832

 G.R. No. 11505
August 25, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
SATAOA BUNGAOIL

034 Phil 835

G.R. No. 11737

August 25, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
MARCELO JOSE ET
AL.

034 Phil 840

G.R. No. 11739

August 25, 1916 -
CESAR MERCADER v.
ADOLPH WISLIZENUS

034 Phil 846

G.R. No. 11986

August 25, 1916 -
MANUEL ORIA Y
GONZALEZ v.
RICHARD CAMPBELL

034 Phil 850

G.R. No. 11071

August 26, 1916 - S.
CHASE DE KRAFFT v.
APOLINAR VELEZ

034 Phil 854

G.R. No. 10868

August 28, 1916 -
LEOCADIO JOAQUIN
v. O. MITSUMINE
034 Phil 858

G.R. No. 11267

August 31, 1916 -
SEE CHIAT SEE HUAN
v. INSULAR
COLLECTOR OF
CUSTOMS

034 Phil 865

G.R. No. 11562

August 31, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
SIMON LAZARO

034 Phil 871

G.R. No. 11772

August 31, 1916 -
UNITED STATES v.
GAN LIAN PO

034 Phil 880

Copyright © 1998 - 2023 Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions | ReDiaz
ChanRobles™ | Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™