CASE LAW DECISIONS

It is the decisions, interpretations made by judges while deciding on the legal issues before them It refers to the judgment, decree, or determination of findings of fact and/or of law by a judge,
which are considered as the common law or as an aid for interpretation of a law in subsequent arbitrator, court, governmental agency, or other official tribunal (court).
cases with similar conditions.
It is the conclusion reached after an evaluation of facts and law.
Case laws are used by advocates to support their views to favor their clients and also it influences
A decision is the pronouncement of the solution of the court or judgment in a case, while an
the decision of the judges.
opinion is a statement of the reasons for its determination made by the court.
It comes from judicial authorities of the state and is the 2nd major category of primary sources of
law
EFFECTS OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS
CLASSES OF CASE LAW
(1) An authoritative settlement of the particular controversy before it; and
(2) As a precedent for future cases
I- DECISIONS PROPER
a. Decisions of the Supreme Court RES JUDICATA
b. Decisions of the Court of Appeals
c. Decisions of the Sandiganbayan
It is a matter adjudged, judicially acted upon or decided, or settled by judgment.
d. Decisions of the Court of Tax Appeals
It provides that a final judgment on the merits rendered by a court of competent
e. Decisions of the Regional Trial Courts
jurisdiction is conclusive as to the rights of the parties and their privies; and constitutes an absolute
f. Decisions of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts and the
bar to subsequent actions involving the same claim, demand or cause of action.
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts

REQUISITES:
II- SUBORDINATE DECISIONS
1. The former judgment must be final;
a. Decisions of the Senate Electoral Tribunal and the House of Representatives Electoral
2. The court that rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
Tribunal
3. It is a judgment on the merits (rendered after consideration of evidence and
b. Decisions of Administrative Agencies Exercising Quasi-judicial Powers, such as:
stipulations); and
1. COMELEC
4. There is — between the first and the second actions — an identity of parties, subject
2. CSC
matter and cause of action
3. COA
4. National Labor Relations Commission
5. Insurance Commission STARE DECISIS
6. Housing Land Use Regulatory Board
7. Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
The principle that the decisions of a court are a binding authority on the court that issued the
decisions and on the lower courts for the disposition of factually similar controversies. Stand on
JUDICIAL SYSTEM what has been decided

1-PRE-SPANISH PERIOD: “Adherence to precedents”, states that once a case has been decided one way, then another case,
involving exactly the same point at issue, should be decided in the same manner.
-Court was composed of CHIEFTAIN as “JUDGE” and BARANGAY ELDERS as “JURY”.
-TRIAL were held PUBLICLY and DECISIONS were rendered PROMPTLY. NOTE: Supreme Court is not bound by this doctrine because it can overturn precedents.

2-SPANISH PERIOD: KINDS OF STARE DECISIS

-The foundation of Spanish sovereignty over the Philippines had been laid.
-The administration of justice in the Philippines during the Spanish period had five 1. Vertical Stare Decisis
components: -Duty of lower courts to apply the decisions of the higher courts to cases involving the same facts.
1. law; (Obligation)
2. judiciary (included both ordinary and special courts and the prosecutions);
3. law enforcement agencies; 2. Horizontal Stare Decisis
4. prison system; and -Higher courts must follow its own precedents (Policy) -Constitutional Stare Decisis are judicial
5. legal profession. interpretations of the Constitution; while, Statutory Stare Decisis are interpretations of statutes.

3-AMERICAN PERIOD:
-provost court and military commissions were created. REVERSAL & OVERRULING
-SUPREME COURT was created composed of a Chief Justice and 8 associate justices.

REVERSAL:
DIFFERENT TYPES OF COURTS
IN THE PHILIPPINES It has reference to the action of the Supreme Court on a lower courts’ judgement in the same
particular controversy.
TRIAL COURTS OF LIMITED JURISDICTION (inferior courts)
When the SC reviews the judgement of the lower court in a case and concludes that the lower
a. Metropolitan Trial Court;
court reached an erroneous result in the case, it will “reverse”, ie., set aside, the lower court’s
b. Municipal Trial Court; and
judgement.
c. Municipal Circuit Trial Court.
OVERRULING:
TRIAL COURTS OF GENERAL JURISDICTION
a. Regional Trial Court;
When the SC “overrules” one of its past decisions, the conclusiveness of that earlier decision as
b. Shari’a Courts
a settlement of its particular controversy is not affected, but the overruled decision is no longer
an authoritative precedent for other cases that may arise in the future.
INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT
a. Court of Appeal
-generally has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over the decisions of the RTC and
RATIO DECIDENDI & OBITER DICTUM
Quasi-Judicial agencies.
-sits in Manila
-consists of PRESIDING JUSTICE and 50 ASSOCIATE JUSTICES RATIO DECIDENDI:
-17 divisions each composed of 3 MEMBERS
-It is the holding of the principle of law on which a case is decided.
b. Sandiganbayan (special appellate court) -It sets the precedent and is binding on courts in the future.
- appellate jurisdiction over the certain criminal decisions by the RTC -It must be considered in conjunction with their facts of the case.
-original jurisdiction over certain types of criminal cases.
EFFECT: BINDING (mandatory)
c. Court of Tax Appeal
-acts only on protest of private persons adversely affected by the tax and customs OBITER DICTUM:
law. -It is language in a decision that is not necessary to the decision.
COURT OF THE LAST RESORT -Dictum comes from Lati verb decire “to say”, and refers to what is “said by the way”.
a. Supreme Court -Although dictum is not binding on future case, it might be persuasive.
-at the top of the judicial hierarchy which determines the finality of what the law is
and what it should be. EFFCT: PERSUASIVE
-sits in Manila consisting of 1 CHIEF JUSTICE and 14 ASSOCIATE JUSTICES - Although the court is “bound to follow dicta from prior decision, it may do so if it is carefully
Which decide cases in 3 DIVISIONS of 5 MEMBERS except in case where they sit EN reasoned.
BANC
-has the power to review on appeal or certiorari final judgements and order of
lower courts.
--has ORIGINAL JURISDICTION over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus,
quo warranto, and habeas corpus. PEOPLE VS. ESCOBAR
FACTS:

An information was filed before the Regional Trial Court charging Escobar as a co-conspirator in
the kidnapping for ransom. He then filed a petition for bail (first petition), but was denied by the
RTC and by the C.A.

A subsequent development in the accused's case compelled him to file a second petition for bail,
however, the same was denied by the of res judicata.

The CA overturned the RTC Order and granted the second petition for bail. According to the Court
of Appeals, Escobar's Second Bail Petition was not barred by res judicata, which applies only if the
former judgment is a final order or judgment and not an interlocutory order.

Hence, the prosecution, through the OSG , filed a petition assailing the CA’s order of granting the
second bail petition, the prosecution avers that the doctrine of res judicata must be respected.

ISSUE:
Whether or not a second petition for bail is barred by res judicata.

RULING:

The Court held that the CA correctly ruled Second Bail Petition was not barred by res judicata.

Res judicata applies only in a final judgment in a civil case, not in an interlocutory order in a criminal
case. An order disposing a petition for bail is interlocutory.

Even assuming that this case allows for res judicata as applied in civil cases, Escobar’s Second Bail
Petition cannot be barred as there is no final judgment on the merits.

Res judicata requires the concurrence of the following elements:

1. The judgment sought to bar the new action must be final;

2. The decision must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the parties and the
subject matter;
3. The disposition of the case must be a judgment on the merits; and
4. There must be between the first and second actions, identity of parties, of subject matter, and
of causes of action.
The grant of the Escobar’s 2nd bail petition does not attain finality when a new matter warrants a
second look on the application for bail.

Being an interlocutory order , Escobar' s Second Bail Petition is not barred by res judicata.

NEPOMUCENO VS. CITY OF SURIGAO

FACTS:

ISSUE:

RULING

LAZATIN VS. DESIERTO

FACTS:

ISSUE:

RULING