Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ELEGADO v COURT OF William Taylor Graham Whether or not the The first assessment is final and
APPEALS, was an American first assessment is executory, it was protested and
National, and Philippine binding, being that it denied and no further action was
G.R. No. L-68385 May 12, 1989 resident; he died in is filed for by taken care of. Furthermore, the
Oregon, USA, leaving foreign lawyers. second assessment was merely
Ponente: Justice Cruz
behind shares of stock Yes. Final provisional.
Doctrines to remember: to his son, Ward Assessment is
Graham. binding. Elegados argument is also foolish
Lawyers in the case at bar are not as he claims that ignorance of the
excused from their compliance Ward Graham files an law is excusable, as it is not. If our
therewith just because of their estate tax return with own lawyers and taxpayers
ignorance of the law since they are the Philippine Revenue cannot claim similar preferences,
foreigners Representatives in San that is of ignorance, it follows
Francisco that foreigners are any less bound
by the laws in our country.
Commissioner of
Internal Revenue (CIR)
values his estate tax
return at P92, 306. This
is protested by Bump,
Yang and Walker Law
offices, which was
denied by the CIR
Meanwhile Ward
Graham appoints
Ilfonse Elegado as his
attorney-in-fact for his
allowance of will in the
Philippines
It is estimated to be
P72, 948. This was
protested by the Agrava
Law Office
ARTICLE 4
SIMON v CHAN, Eduardo Simon 1.) Whether or Yes, the civil action must be
G.R. No. 157547, February 23, (Simon), now deceased, not Chans dismissed.
2011 was charged with a civil action
violation of BP 22 or to recover There is no independent civil
Ponente: Justice Bersamin the Bouncing Checks the amount action to recover the value of a
Law in July 11, 1997. of the bouncing check issued in
Doctrines to remember: contravention of BP 22. This is
unfunded
He issued a check to check must clear from Rule 111 of the Rules of
Retroactivity of laws: The
respondent Chan in the be dismissed Court, effective December 1, 2000,
retroactive application of
amount of P336,000.00 Yes the which provides that:
procedural laws does not violate
well knowing that at the civil action
any right of a person who may feel Section 1. Institution of criminal
time of issue, he did no must be
adversely affected, nor is it and civil actions.
have sufficient funds dismissed
constitutionally objectionable. The
with Land Bank.
reason is that, as a general rule, no (a) When a criminal action is
2.) Whether or
vested rights may attach to or arise Three years later, on instituted, the civil action for the
not the new
from procedural laws. Any new rules August 3, 2000, recovery of civil liability arising
SC circular
may validly be made to apply to respondent Chan from the offense charged shall
pertaining to
cases pending at the time of their commenced a civil be deemed instituted with the
BP 22 can be
promulgation, considering that no action for the collection criminal action unless the
applied
party to an action has a vested right of the principal amount offended party waives the civil
retroactively
in the rules of procedure. Except with an application of a action, reserves the right to
that in criminal cases, the changes writ of preliminary institute it separately or
do not retroactively apply if they attachment. The MeTC institutes the civil action prior to
permit or require a lesser quantum issued a writ of the criminal action.
of evidence to convict than what is preliminary attachment,
required at the time of the (b) The criminal action for
through the sheriff
commission of the offenses, violation of Batas Pambansa
attaching a Nissan
because such retroactivity would Blg. 22 shall be deemed to
vehicle of Simon.
include the corresponding civil
be unconstitutional for being ex Simon filed a motion to action. No reservation to file
post facto under the Constitution. dismiss the instant such civil action separately shall
action on the ground of be allowed.
litis pendentia, averring
that because the basis of The aforequoted provisions, even if
the instant civil action not yet in effect when Chan
is the criminal commenced the civil case, are
complaint against him, nonetheless applicable. The
the instant action is retroactive application of
dismissible. Simon procedural laws does not violate
argues that when a any right of a person who may
criminal action is feel adversely affected, nor is it
instituted, the civil constitutionally objectionable.
action for recovery of The reason is that, as a general rule,
civil liability is no vested rights may attach to or
impliedly instituted arise from procedural laws. Any
with the criminal new rules may validly be made to
action, as stated on Rule apply to cases pending at the time
111 of the Rules of of their promulgation, considering
Court. that no party to an action has a
vested right in the rules of
procedure. Except that in criminal
cases, the changes do not
retroactively apply if they permit
or require a lesser quantum of
evidence to convict than what is
required at the time of the
commission of the offenses,
because such retroactivity would
be unconstitutional for being ex
post facto under the Constitution.
FRANCISCO v. COURT OF Petitioner is the legal Whether or not Articles 158 and 160 of the New
APPEALS, wife of private Article 116 of the Civil Code have been repealed by
respondent Eusebio by Family Code applies the Family Code which took effect
G.R. No. 102330. November 25, his second marriage. to this case because on August 3, 1988. The aforecited
1998 Private respondents Article 254 of the articles were expressly repealed by
Evangelista, Marilla, same Code Article 254 of the Family Code.
Ponente: Justice Quisumbing
and Antonio Francisco expressly repeals Nonetheless, Article 254 cannot be
* Accordingly, the repeal of Article are children of Articles 158 and invoked in this case without
158 and 160 of the New Civil Code Francisco by his first 160 of the New impairing prior vested rights
does not operate to prejudice or marriage. Civil Code. pursuant to Article 256 of the
otherwise affect real rights, which Family Code.
Petitioner alleges that
have become vested or accrued
since their marriage in Accordingly, the repeal of Article
while the said provisions were in
1962, she and Eusebio 158 and 160 of the New Civil
force. Hence, the rights accrued
have acquired various Code does not operate to
and vested while cited articles were
properties, to which she prejudice or otherwise affect real
in effect survive their repeal.
claims to be entitled to rights, which have become vested
Therefore, the issue of the nature of
be the administrator or accrued while the said
the contested properties shall be
thereof due to Eusebios provisions were in force. Hence,
resolved based on the provisions of
incapacity to administer the rights accrued and vested
the New Civil Code.
on account of while cited articles were in effect
tuberculosis, heart survive their repeal. Therefore, the
disease, and cancer. issue of the nature of the contested
properties shall be resolved based
Petitioner also claims on the provisions of the New Civil
that the children of Code.
Eusebio convinced their
father to sign a general The properties in question are
power of attorney capital properties of Eusebio
which authorized exclusively, and not conjugal as
Evangelista to claimed by petitioner, as these were
administer some of the acquired by the latter either through
subject properties. inheritance or through his industry
prior to his second marriage. Article
Petitioner filed a suit 160 of the New Civil Code provides
for damages and for that all property of the marriage is
annulment of said presumed to belong to the conjugal
general power of partnership, unless it be proved that
attorney. Petitioner also it pertains exclusively to the
sought to be declared as husband or the wife. However, the
the administratix of the party who invokes this presumption
properties in dispute. must first prove that the property in
controversy was acquired during
the marriage. Proof of acquisition
during the coverture is a condition
sine qua non for the operation of
the presumption in favor of the
conjugal partnership. In this case,
petitioner failed to adduce ample
evidence to show that the properties
which she claimed to be conjugal
were acquired
PESCA v PESCA, The couple (Lorna and Whether or not the The appellate court did not err in
Zosimo) got married in case of Molina its assailed decision for there is
G.R. No. 136921. April 17, 2001 March 3, 1975, and was should be applied absolutely no evidence that has
blessed with four (4) retroactively in been shown to prove
Ponente: Justice Vitug
children deciding for the case psychological incapacity on his
*The Molina doctrine should be Yes. part as the term has been so
The petitioner claimed defined in Santos v. CA; therefore
applied retroactively in deciding
that the respondent is there is no merit in the petition
for the case; The appellate court did
emotionally immature
not err in its assailed decision for
and irresponsible, The term, psychological
there is absolutely no evidence that
which started sometime incapacity, as a ground for the
has been shown to prove
in 1998. He was cruel declaration of nullity of a
psychological incapacity on his
and violent, and was marriage under Article 36 of the
part as the term has been so
also a habitual drinker, Family Code, has been explained
defined in Santos v. CA; therefore
staying with friends by the Court in Santos v. CA and
there is no merit in the petition
from 4:00 oclock in the reiterated in Molina.
The term, psychological incapacity, afternoon until 1:00
In the Molina case, guidelines were
as a ground for the declaration of oclock in the morning
laid down by the Supreme Court
nullity of a marriage under Article
The petitioner also before a case that would fall under
36 of the Family Code, has been
claimed that the the category of psychological
explained by the Court in Santos v.
respondent would beat, incapacity to declare a marriage
CA and reiterated in Molina.
slap and kick her. There null and void. This decision has
was also a time when force and effect of a law. These
*The phrase psychological she was chased by a guidelines are mandatory in nature.
incapacity, borrowed from Canon loaded shotgun and Hence, petition denied.
law, is an entirely novel provision in threatened to kill her in
The doctrine of stare decisis,
our statute books, and, until the front of their children.
relatively recent enactment of the The children also ordained in Article 8 of the New
Family Code, the concept has experienced physical Civil Code, expresses the judicial
escaped jurisprudential attention; it is violence from the decisions applying or interpreting
in Santos when, for the first time, the respondent. the law shall form part of the legal
Court has given life to the term; on system of the Philippines. The rule
the other hand, Molina, has November 19, 1992: follows the settled legal maxim -
additionally provided procedural petitioner and her legis interpretado legis vim
guidelines to assist the courts and children left the obtinet - that the interpretation
parties in trying cases for annulment conjugal abode to live placed upon the written law by a
of marriages grounded on in the house of her competent court has the force of
psychological incapacity; Molina sister in Quezon City as law.
has strengthened and not they could not longer
overturned Santos bear his violent ways; Petitioner has utterly failed, both in
two months later, her allegations in the complaint and
Doctrine to remember: petitioner decided to in her evidence, to make out a case
forgive respondent, and of psychological incapacity on the
Doctrine of Stare Decisis: (ordained she returned home to part of the respondent, let alone at
in Article 8 of the Civil Code), give him a chance to the time of the solemnization of the
expresses that judicial decisions change; but to her contract, in order to warrant a
applying or interpreting the law dismay, things did not declaration of nullity of the
shall form part of the legal system so turn out as expected marriage. Emotional immaturity
of the Philippines; the rule follows (matters became worse) and irresponsibility, invoked by
that settled legal maxim legis her, cannot be equated with
interpretado legis vim obtinet that Morning of March 22, psychological incapacity.
the interpretation placed upon the 1994: respondent
written law by a competent court assaulted petitioner for
has the force of law; decisions of about half an hour in
the court would form part of that the presence of the
law; it is only when a prior ruling children; she was
of the SC finds itself later battered black and blue;
overruled, and a different view is she therefore submitted
adopted, that the new doctrine herself to a medical
may have to be applied examination at the
prospectively in favor of parties Quezon City General
who have relied on the old doctrine Hospital, which
and have acted in good faith in diagnosed her injuries
accordance therewith under the as contusions and
familiar rule of lex prospicit, non abrasions
respicit.
Petitioner then filed a
complaint with the
barangay authorities,
and a case was filed
against respondent for
slight physical injuries
Acts executed against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void, except when the law itself authorizes their
validity
NERWIN v PNOC, The National Whether or not the The Court of Appeals ruled
Electrification Regional Trial Court that the RTC gravely abused
G.R. No. 167057, April 11, 2012 Admission (NEA) should have granted its discretion when they
published an invitation Nerwins issuance entertained Nerwins
Ponente: Justice Bersamin
in 1999 to bid contracts for a TRO in his complaint as it violated
*Republic Act No. 8975: expressly (IPB No. 80) for the Civil Case against Section 3 and 4 of Republic
prohibits any court, except the supply of 60,000 pieces the PNOC-Energy Act No. 8975, and when it
Supreme Court, from issuing any of woodpoles and Development issued the TRO and writ of
temporary restraining order 20,000 pieces of Corporation No. preliminary prohibitory
(TRO), preliminary injunction, or crossarms that will be injunction. Only the
preliminary mandatory injunction needed for the countrys Supreme Court and no
to restrain, prohibit or compel the Rural Electrification other court can issue
Government, or any of its Project. TROs against the
subdivisions or officials, or any government.
Private respondent
person or entity, whether public or
(Nerwin), along with 3 The Court affirmed the CAs
private, acting under the
other bidders were decision and the petitioner is
Governments direction, from: (a)
qualified and eligible to pay for the costs of the
acquiring, clearing, and developing
for the bid (IPB-80). suit.
the right-of-way, site or location of
any National Government project; Nerwin, as the lowest
(b) bidding or awarding of a bidder among the 4,
contract or project of the National was found to be the
Government; (c) commencing, most advantageous for
prosecuting, executing, the government in terms
implementing, or operating any of price difference
such contract or project; (d) compared to the other 3
terminating or rescinding any such bidders.
contract or project; (e)
undertaking or authorizing any However, in December
other lawful activity necessary for 19, 2000, the NEA
such contract or project passed a resolution to
reduce the required
*Accordingly, an RTC that ignores materials for IPB-80
the statutory prohibition and by 50% due to time
issues a TRO or a writ of limitations.
preliminary injunction or
preliminary mandatory injuction Nerwin in response,
against a government contract or protested the resolution
project ACTS CONTRARY TO alleging that it was to
LAW accommodate a losing
bidder.
PNOC-Energy
Development
Corporation which
claims to be under the
Department of Energy,
issued an invitation for
a pre-qualification of
the Samar Rural
Electrification Project
(O-ILAW project)
ARTICLE 6
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
Doctrines to remember:
On July 3, 2006,
Philcomsat filed an
appeal to the NLRC.
NLRC disregarded the
procedural lapse on the
provisions of Section
10, Rule VII of the
NLRC Rules of
Procedure (Technical
Rules Not Binding) and
proceeded to decide on
the appeal on its merits.
On July 4, 2008, NLRC
granted Philcomsats
appeal, reversing LA
Lustrias Decision made
on May 31, 2006.
NLRC dismissed the
case since Aujero failed
to allege and present
any evidence that
showed Philcomsat
pressuring him to sign
the quitclaim. NLRC
also states that Aujero
was well-educated and
in a position where he is
aware of the
consequences and
implications of signing
the quitclaim.
Dona Adela v Tidcorp, Petitioner Dona Adela WoN the petitioner No. RA 1405 provides
filed a petition for is bound by the exceptions when records of
G.R. No. 201931, February 11, Voluntary Insolvency TIDCORP-BPI deposits may be disclosed:
2015 on Aug. 23, 2006. The Joint Motion to 1) upon written permission
RTC issued an order Approve Agreement of the depositor, 2) in cases
Ponente: Justice Villarama, Jr.
declaring the petitioner to waive its rights to of impeachment, 3) upon
*In this case, the Joint Motion to as insolvent 5 days confidentiality of its order of a competent court
Approve Agreement was executed by later. bank deposits under in the case of bribery or
BPI and TIDCORP only. There was RA 1405 No. dereliction of duty of public
Atty. Arlene Gonzales officials, or 4) when the
no written consent given by
was appointed as money deposited or invested
petitioner or its representative,
Epifanio Ramos Jr., that petitioner receiver. She proceeded is the subject matter of the
is waiving the confidentiality of its to make the necessary litigation, and 5) in cases of
bank deposits. report, engaged violation of the Anti-Money
appraisers and required Laundering Act., the Anti
*Clearly, the waiver of the creditors to submit Money Laundering Council
confidentiality of petitioners bank proof of their respective may inquire into a bank
deposits in the BPI-TIDCORP claims. upon order of any
Joint Motion to Approve competent court
Agreement lacks the required Atty. Gonzales then
written consent of petitioner and filed a motion for In this case, the Joint
conformity of the receiver. Thus, parties to enter into Motion to Approve
the petitioner is not bound by the Compromise Agreement was executed by
said provision. Agreement BPI and TIDCORP only.
incorporating the There was no written
Doctrines to remember: proposed terms of consent given by petitioner
compromise. or its representative,
RA 1405 provides
Epifanio Ramos Jr., that
exceptions when records of Creditors TIDCORP petitioner is waiving the
deposits may be disclosed: and BPI also filed a confidentiality of its bank
1) upon written permission of Joint Motion to deposits.
the depositor, 2) in cases of Approve Agreement
impeachment, 3) upon order stating that the expenses Clearly, the waiver of
of a competent court in the and taxes shall be for confidentiality of
case of bribery or dereliction the account of the petitioners bank deposits
of duty of public officials, or petitioner and the in the BPI-TIDCORP
4) when the money deposited petitioner and its Board Joint Motion to Approve
or invested is the subject of Directors shall waive Agreement lacks the
matter of the litigation, and 5) all rights to required written consent
in cases of violation of the confidentiality under of petitioner and
Anti-Money Laundering Act., RA 1405. conformity of the receiver.
the Anti Money Laundering Thus, the petitioner is not
Council may inquire into a Petitioner filed a motion bound by the said
bank upon order of any for partial provision.
competent court reconsideration and
claimed that TIDCORP
and BPIs agreement
imposes on it
obligations such as
payment of expenses
and taxes and waiver of
confidentiality of its
bank deposits but it is
not a party and
signatory to the said
agreement.
ARTICLE 7
Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and their violation or non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or
practice to the contrary
Thornton vs. Thornton, The petitioner, Richard Whether or not The petition is granted. The Court
G.R. No. 154598 Aug. 16, 2004 Brian Thornton, an the Court of of Appeals should take cognizance
American, and the Appeals has of the case since there is nothing in
Ponente: Justice Corona respondent, Adelfa jurisdiction to RA 8369 that revoked its
Francisco Thornton, a issue writs of jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas
*The CA should take cognizance of
Filipino, were married habeas corpus corpus involving the custody of
the case since there is nothing in
on August 28, 1998 in cases minors.
R.A. 8369 that revoked its
and had one daughter involving
jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas
named Sequiera custody of
corpus involving the custody of
Jennifer Delle minors in the
minors
Francisco Thornton, a light of the
*The CA opines that R.A. 8369 year later. provision in RA
impliedly repealed R.A. 7902 and BP 8369 giving
After 3 years, the family courts
129 since, by giving family courts
respondent grew exclusive
exclusive jurisdiction over habeas
restless and bored as a original
corpus cases, the lawmakers intended
plain housewife; and jurisdiction
it to be the sole court which can issue
she wanted to return to over such
writs of habeas corpus
her old job as a GRO in petitions Yes.
*CA still has jurisdiction to issue a nightclub.
writs of habeas corpus in cases
Every time petitioner
involving the custody of children, in
was out of the country,
order to avoid people from being left
respondent would often
without any legal remedy
go out with her friends,
*The provisions of RA 8369 reveal leaving their daughter
no manifest intent to revoke the under the care of the
jurisdiction of the CA and SC to house help. The
issue writs of habeas corpus relating petitioner eventually
to the custody of minors; there is no found out about it and
doubt that the CA and SC have admonished her for her
concurrent jurisdiction with family irresponsibility, but she
courts in habeas corpus cases continued her ways.
where the custody of minors is
involved On December 7, 2001,
the respondent left
their family home
without telling her
husband and took their
daughter along with
her. She told the
servants that she was
bringing their daughter
to Purok Marikit, Sta.
Clara, Lamitan, Basilan
Province.
Kida v Senate, G.R. No. 196271 is one 1.) Is R.A.10153 First Issue:
of seven motions of consistent with the
G.R. No. 196271, February 28, reconsideration 1987 Philippine Yes. R.A. 10153 is pursuant of the
2012 assailing the Supreme Constitution? Yes. constitution.
Courts decision
Ponente: Justice Brion 2.) Is ARMM an On synchronization: It is mandated
regarding the
exception to the by the 1987 Constitution that there
*That the ARMM elections were constitutionality of
constitution that should be a single election from the
not expressly mentioned in the Republic Act (RA) No.
they should have President down to the municipal
Transitory Provisions of the 1987 10153. The SC upheld
their own special office in 1992. The framers has
Constitution on synchronization that RA. No. 10153 is
elections? made clear that the objective of the
cannot be interpreted to mean that pursuant to the
1992 elections is for a synchronized
the ARMM elections are not constitutional mandate
covered by the constitutional of election (According to the election. The Supreme Court said
mandate of synchronization synchronization NCC Article 7, only that ARMM is still covered by
the courts could saying that it is verba legis that is,
*The ARMM had not been yet RA. No. 10153 decide if a law is not wherever possible, the words used
officially organized at the time the postponed the regional pursuant of the in the Constitution must be given
Constitution was enacted and ratified elections in the constitution thus their ordinary meaning except
by the people; keeping in mind that a Autonomous Region in making void) where technical terms are
Constitution is not intended to Muslim Mindanao employed
provide merely for the exigencies of (ARMM) (which is to
a few years but is to endure through be held on the second Second Issue:
generations for as long as it remains Monday of August
unaltered by the people 2011) to the second On interim measures: To avoid
Monday of May 2013 disruption of the affairs of the
*The clear wording of Section 8, and recognized the ARMM and to synchronize
Article X of the 1987 Constitution Presidents power to elections, Congress has granted the
expresses the intent of the framers of appoint officers-in- President to appoint interim OICs.
the Constitution to categorically set a charge (OICs) to This measure is comparable to the
limitation on the period within which temporarily assume power granted by the BP 881
all elective local officials can occupy these positions upon (Omnibus Election Code) which
their offices; since elective ARMM the expiration of the allows the President to fill any
officials are also local officials, they terms of the elected vacancy for any cause in the
are, thus, bound by the three-year officials. Regional Legislative Assembly.
term limit prescribed by the 1987
Constitution Kida and other The Court DENIED the motion
appellants contested with FINALITY for lack of merit
*Short of amending the 1987 that RA No. 10153 is and UPHOLD the
Constitution, Congress has no unconstitutional on the constitutionality of of R.A. No.
authority to extend the three-year grounds that it has 10153
term limit by inserting a holdover allowed the President
provision in RA No. 9054; thus, the to appoint interim
term of three years for local officials officers and the
should stay at three (3) years, as synchronization of the
fixed by the Constitution, and cannot ARMM elections
be extended by holdover by
Congress
Yinlu Bicol v Trans-Asia, This case involves 13 mining WoN Yinlu Bicol The Court concluded that Yinlu
claims over the area located in Mining Corporation Bicol Mining Corporation has
G.R. No. 207942, Jan. 12 2015 Barrio Larap, Municipality of has vested and valid been vested mining rights over
Jose Panganiban, Camarines rights on the the disputed lands.
Ponente: Justice Bersamin
Norte, a portion of which was disputed parcels of
owned and mined by Philippine mineral land Yes. Mining rights acquired under the
*Yinlus mining patents
Philippine Bill of 1902 and prior to
constituted vested rights that could Iron Mines, Inc. (PIMI), which
the effectivity of the 1935
not be disregarded. The decision of ceased operations in 1975 due
to financial losses; PIMIs Constitution were vested rights that
the Office of the President was
portion was sold in a could not be impaired even by the
actually unassailable in point of
foreclosure sale to the Manila Government.
law and history
Banking Corporation (MBC)
Indeed, the mining patents of Yinlu
*The lands and minerals covered by and Philippine Commercial and
were issued in accordance to the
Yinlus mining patents are private Industrial Bank
Philippine Bill of 1902 and were
properties; the government, whether
1976: the Gold Mining already existing before
through the DENR or the MGB,
Development Project Team, promulgation and prescription of
could not alienate or dispose of the
Mining Technology Division, the 1935 Constitution.
lands or mineral through the MPSA
granted to Trans-Asia or any other The Mining Group of the
The Court affirms the decision of
Bureau of Mines prepared a so-
person or entity; Yinlu had called Technical Feasibility DENR and the Office of the
exclusive rights to explore, develop Study on the Possible Re- President that that the disputed
and utilize the minerals therein, Opening of the CPMI Project lands exclusively belongs to Yinlu.
and it could legally transfer or of PIM (Mining Aspect) and
assign such exclusive right; The the Exploration Program Therefore, the Court REVERSED
Court uphold the rulings of the (Uranium Project) at Larap, and SET ASIDE the decision of the
DENR Secretary and the Office of Jose Panganiban, Camarines CA promulgated on October 30,
the President to exclude the disputed Norte, which discussed in 2012, and REINSTATE the decision
areas that had been established to detail, an evaluation of the ore dated May 4, 2010 by the DENR
belong exclusively to Yinlu as reserve and a plan of and resolutions dated June 29, 2010
registered owner to be taken out of operation to restore the mine and March 31, 2011 made by the
the coverage of Trans-Asias MPSA to normal commercial mining Office of the President and
production and budgetary DIRECT the respondents to pay the
*Mining rights acquired under the estimate should the Bureau of costs of suit.
Philippine Bill of 1902 and prior to Mines take over and run the
the effectivity of the 1935 PIMI Larap Mines
Constitution were vested rights
that could not be impaired even by November 1978: the Benguet
the Government Corporation-Getty Oil
Consortium began exploration
for uranium under an
Exploration Permit of the area,
but withdrew in 1982 after four
years of sustained and earnes
exploration
ARTICLE 8
Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines
CASES FACTS ISSUES RULING
Pesca vs. Pesca, The couple (Lorna and WoN the guidelines Yes. In the Molina case, guidelines
Zosimo) got married in for psychological were laid down by the Supreme
G.R. No. 136921. April 17, 2001 March 3, 1975, and was incapacity in the Court before a case that would fall
blessed with four (4) case of Molina under the category of psychological
Ponente: Justice Vitug
children should be taken into incapacity to declare a marriage
*The Molina doctrine should be consideration in null and void. This decision has
The petitioner claimed deciding the case force and effect of a law. These
applied retroactively in deciding
that the respondent is Yes. guidelines are mandatory in nature.
for the case; The appellate court did
emotionally immature Hence, petition denied.
not err in its assailed decision for
and irresponsible, The doctrine of stare decisis,
there is absolutely no evidence that
which started sometime ordained in Article 8 of the New
has been shown to prove
in 1998. He was cruel Civil Code, expresses the judicial
psychological incapacity on his
and violent, and was decisions applying or interpreting
part as the term has been so
also a habitual drinker, the law shall form part of the legal
defined in Santos v. CA; therefore
staying with friends system of the Philippines. The rule
there is no merit in the petition
from 4:00 oclock in the follows the settled legal maxim -
The term, psychological incapacity, afternoon until 1:00 legis interpretado legis vim obtinet
as a ground for the declaration of oclock in the morning - that the interpretation placed upon
nullity of a marriage under Article the written law by a competent
36 of the Family Code, has been The petitioner also court has the force of law.
explained by the Court in Santos v. claimed that the
CA and reiterated in Molina. respondent would beat,
slap and kick her. There The appellate court did not err in
was also a time when its assailed decision for there is
*The phrase psychological she was chased by a absolutely no evidence that has
incapacity, borrowed from Canon loaded shotgun and been shown to prove
law, is an entirely novel provision in threatened to kill her in psychological incapacity on his
our statute books, and, until the front of their children. part as the term has been so
relatively recent enactment of the The children also defined in Santos v. CA; therefore
Family Code, the concept has experienced physical there is no merit in the petition
escaped jurisprudential attention; it is violence from the
in Santos when, for the first time, the respondent. The term, psychological
Court has given life to the term; on incapacity, as a ground for the
the other hand, Molina, has November 19, 1992: declaration of nullity of a
additionally provided procedural petitioner and her marriage under Article 36 of the
guidelines to assist the courts and children left the Family Code, has been explained
parties in trying cases for annulment conjugal abode to live by the Court in Santos v. CA and
of marriages grounded on in the house of her reiterated in Molina.
psychological incapacity; Molina sister in Quezon City as
they could not longer In the Molina case, guidelines were
has strengthened and not
bear his violent ways; laid down by the Supreme Court
overturned Santos
two months later, before a case that would fall under
Doctrine to remember: petitioner decided to the category of psychological
forgive respondent, and incapacity to declare a marriage
Doctrine of Stare Decisis: (ordained she returned home to null and void. This decision has
in Article 8 of the Civil Code), give him a chance to force and effect of a law. These
expresses that judicial decisions change; but to her guidelines are mandatory in nature.
applying or interpreting the law dismay, things did not Hence, petition denied.
shall form part of the legal system so turn out as expected
of the Philippines; the rule follows The doctrine of stare decisis,
(matters became worse)
that settled legal maxim legis ordained in Article 8 of the New
interpretado legis vim obtinet that Civil Code, expresses the judicial
Morning of March 22,
the interpretation placed upon the decisions applying or interpreting
1994: respondent
written law by a competent court the law shall form part of the legal
assaulted petitioner for
has the force of law; decisions of about half an hour in system of the Philippines. The rule
the court would form part of that the presence of the follows the settled legal maxim -
law; it is only when a prior ruling children; she was legis interpretado legis vim
of the SC finds itself later battered black and blue; obtinet - that the interpretation
overruled, and a different view is she therefore submitted placed upon the written law by a
adopted, that the new doctrine herself to a medical competent court has the force of
may have to be applied examination at the law.
prospectively in favor of parties Quezon City General
who have relied on the old doctrine Hospital, which Petitioner has utterly failed, both in
and have acted in good faith in diagnosed her injuries her allegations in the complaint and
accordance therewith under the as contusions and in her evidence, to make out a case
familiar rule of lex prospicit, non abrasions of psychological incapacity on the
respicit part of the respondent, let alone at
Petitioner then filed a the time of the solemnization of the
complaint with the contract, in order to warrant a
barangay authorities, declaration of nullity of the
and a case was filed marriage. Emotional immaturity
against respondent for and irresponsibility, invoked by
slight physical injuries her, cannot be equated with
psychological incapacity.
The respondent was
imprisoned for eleven
(11) days for slight
physical injuries (he
was convicted by the
Metropolitan Trial
Court of Caloocan City)
Petitioner and her
children left the
conjugal home for
good, and stayed with
her sister; eventually
they decided to rent an
apartment; petitioner
sued respondent
before the RTC for the
declaration of nullity
of marriage invoking
psychological
incapacity; petitioner
likewise sought the
custody of her minor
children and prayed
for support pendente
lite
Virtucio v Alegarbes, Respondent Jose Alegarbes WON the CA A decision of the CA does not
filed Homestead Application gravely erred in establish judicial precedent. The
G.R. No. 187451, August 29, 2012 No. V-33203 (EV-49150) for a disregarding the principle of stare decisis enjoins
24-hectare tract of unserveyed decision of Custodio adherence by lower courts to the
Ponente: Justice Mendoza
*It must be noted that the subject land situated in Basila in 1949. v. Alegarbes Yes. doctrinal rules established by this
property in the said case was lot 139 His application was approved Court.
allocated to Custodio and that but the land was subdivided
Virtucio was not a party to that case; into three lots, two of which
the latter cannot enjoy whatever were allocated to Ulpiano
benefits said favorable judgment Custodio and Jesus Virtucio as
may have had just because it a consequence of a public land
involved similar factual subdivision.
circumstances
Alegarbes opposed the
*It is settled that a decision of the homestead applications filed by
CA does not establish judicial Custodio and Virtucio, but was
precedent; the principle of stare denied by the Director of
decisis enjoins adherence by lower Lands, the Secretary of
courts to doctrinal rules Agriculture and Natural
established by this court in its final Resources, and the Office of
decisions; it is based on the the President. He was ordered
principle that once a question of by the Lands Management
law has been examined and Bureau of the DENR to vacate
decided, it should be deemed the subject lot, but he refused.
settled and closed to further
argument Virtucio filed a complaint
before the RTC, which ruled in
*The Court agrees with the position his favor. Alegarbes then
of Alegarbes that by Virtucios appealed before the CA. The
insistence that it was erroneous for CA promulgated its decision,
the CA to disregard its earlier declaring Alegarbes as the
decision in CA-GR CV 26286, he, in owner of Lot No. 140, Pls-19,
effect, calls upon this Court to adhere thereby reversing and setting
to that decision by invoking the stare aside the decision of the RTC.
decisis principle, which is not legally Virtucio then filed a petition
possible because only final decisions before the SC, averring that the
of this Court are considered CA gravely erred in
precedents disregarding the decision in
CA-GR CV-26286 for
Doctrines to remember: Recovery of Possession and
Ownership, Custodio v.
Doctrine of Stare Decisis: (to
Alegarbes, which contains
adhere to precedent and not to
same factual circumstances as
unsettle things that are settled); it
in this case and ruled against
simply means that a principle
Jose Alegarbes.
underlying the decision in one case
is deemed of imperative authority,
controlling the decisions of like
cases in the same court and in
lower courts within the same
jurisdiction, unless and until the
decision in question is reversed or
overruled by a court of competent
authority
Republic v Rehman Enterprises, Renman Enterprises Whether or not the Yes, the CA erred.
filed an application CA erred in
GR 199310, Feb.19, 2014 with the RTC for affirming the RTC The SC said that the certifications
judicial Decision dated presented by the respondent are
Ponente: Justice Reyes insufficient to prove that the subject
confirmation over May 16, 2007,
* It is elementary that the two parcels of land which granted the properties are alienable and
interpretation of a law by this Court situated in Barangay application for disposable.
constitutes part of that law from the Napindan, Taguig, registration filed by
date it was originally passed, since with an area of 29, the respondent The respondent claims that the
this Courts construction merely 945 square meters Yes. Courts ruling in Republlic v.
establishes the contemporaneous and 20, 357 square T.A.N. Properties (June 26, 2008)
legislative intent that the interpreted meters, respectively must be applied prospectively,
law carried into effect. "Such asserting that decisions of this
judicial doctrine does not amount to December 13, Court form part of the law of the
the passage of a new law, but 2001: the RTC land and, pursuant to Article 4 of
consists merely of a construction or issued the Order the Civil Code laws shall have no
interpretation of a pre-existing one." finding the retroactive effect.
respondents
Doctrines to remember: application for Court does not agree. It is
registration elementary that the interpretation
Section 14(1) of P.D. No. 1529: sufficient in form of a law by this Court constitutes
applicants for registration of title and substance and part of that law from the date it
must sufficiently establish the setting it for initial was originally passed, since this
following: hearing on Courts construction merely
February 21, 2002; establishes the contemporaneous
1.) That the subject land forms legislative intent that the
the scheduled
part of the disposable and interpreted law carried into effect.
initial hearing was
alienable lands of the public "Such judicial doctrine does not
later reset to May
domain; amount to the passage of a new law,
30, 2002
but consists merely of a
2.) That the applicant and his
May 30, 2002: construction or interpretation of a
predecessors-in-interest have
On day of pre-existing one."
been in open, continuous,
hearing, only the
exclusive, and notorious
possession and occupation of Laguna Lake Respondents application for
the same; and Development registration is denied.
appeared
3.) That it is under a bona fide opposing the
claim of ownership since respondents
June 12, 1945, or earlier application. RTC
issued an order of
Regalian Doctrine: all lands of the
default except to
public domain belong to the State,
LLDA. They
which is the source of any asserted
were given 15
right to any ownership of land; all
days to submit
lands not appearing to be clearly
comment
within private ownership are
presumed to belong to the State; Petitioner filed its
accordingly, public lands not shown opposition and they
to have been reclassified or released alleged that
as alienable agricultural land, or respondent failed to
alienated to a private person by the prove that they have
State, remain part of the inalienable been in open,
public domain continuous and
exclusive possession
*The burden of proof in overcoming
of the subject parcels
the presumption of State ownership
of land since June 12,
of the lands of the public domain is
1945 or earlier
on the person applying for
registration, who must prove that the During the trial, the
land subject of the application is testimonies of
alienable or disposable; to overcome respondents witnesses
this presumption, incontrovertible show petitioners claim
evidence must be presented to
establish that the land subject of the LLDA also alleged
application is alienable or disposable that the
respondents
application for
registration should
be denied since the
subject parcels of
land are not part of
the alienable and
disposable lands of
the public domain.
According to RA
4850, lands
surrounding
Laguna de Bay,
located at and
below the
reglementary
elevation of 12.50
m are public lands,
which form part of
the bed of said
lake. They argue
properties range
from 11.33 m to
11.77m.
Respondent
argued that
contrary to
petitioners
claim and based
on a topographic
survey, the
properties are
above 12.50 m.
ARTICLE 9
No judge or court shall decline to render judgement by reason of the silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws
ARTICLE 10
In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to
prevail
People v. Ritter, Heinrich Ritter brought Whether or not the SC reversed the judgment of
Jessie Ramirez & acquittal of Ritter in the lower court and
G.R. No. 88582, March 5, 1991 Rosario Baluyot to his a criminal case also acquitted Ritter
hotel room in Olangapo releases him from
Ponente: Justice Guiterrez, Jr. Since civil liability does not
and molested both civil liability No it
children does not. require proof beyond
*It does not necessarily follow that
reasonable doubt, Ritter is
the appellant is also free from civil
Ramirez saw the ordered to pay Php 30,000
liability which is impliedly
accused place his penis by way of moral and
instituted with the criminal action;
against Rosarios exemplary damages to the
the well-settled doctrine is that a
person while not criminally liable vagina however, it heirs of Rosario Baluyot
may still be civilly liable wont fit
Article 9 of the Civil Code:
*While the guilt of the accused in a The next morning,
criminal prosecution must be Ritter payed Rosario The court has the duty to decide on
established beyond reasonable Php 300 and Ramirez cases even if there is no law that
doubt, only a preponderance of Php 200 punishes the act. The court should
evidence is required in a civil take proper measures in order to
action for damages (Article 29 of Rosario told Ramirez ensure that right and justice shall
the Civil Code); the judgment of that the accused prevail.
acquittal extinguishes civil liability inserted something in
of the accused ONLY when it her vagina. Ramirez
includes a declaration that the asked her if the object
facts from which the civil liability was removed and she
might arise did not exist said yes. Ramirez saw
Rosario and complained
of the pain in her
vagina. Asking if the
object had been
removed, Rosario said
no.
Alonzo v Padua, Five (5) brothers and Whether or not It was held that actual
sisters inherited in actual knowledge knowledge of the sale by the
G.R. No. 72873, May 28, 1987 equal pro indiviso satisfied the co-heirs satisfied the
shares of a parcel of requirement of requirement of law
Ponente: Justice Cruz
land under the names Article 1088 of the
of their deceased New Civil Code The Court cannot accept the
*The co-heirs in this case were
parents Yes it did. private respondents
undeniably informed of the sales,
pretense that they were
although no notice in writing was
Celestino Padua unaware of the sales made
given to them. There is also no
transferred his by their brother and sister in
doubt either that the 30-day period
undivided share by 1963 and 1964
began and ended during the 14
way of absolute sale to
years between the sales in question
the Alonzos. A year While the Court do not here
and the filing of the complaint for later, Eustaquia (his declare that this period
redemption in 1977, without the sister) sold her share in started from the dates of
co-heirs exercising their right of Con Pacto de Retro such sales in 1963 and 1964,
redemption Sale the Court does say that
sometime between those
Doctrine to remember: Petitioners occupied years and 1976, when the
after the said sales, first complaint for
While the general rule is, that to of the lot representing redemption was filed, the
charge a party with laches in the the portion sold to other co-heirs were actually
assertion of an alleged right it is them enclosed with a informed of the sale and that
essential that he should have fence. With their thereafter the 30-day period
knowledge of the facts upon which consent, their son, started running and
he bases his claim, yet if the Eduardo and his wife ultimately expired; this
circumstances were such as should built a semi-concrete could have happened any
have induced inquiry, and the house on part of the time during the interval of
means of ascertaining the truth enclosed area 13 years, when non of the
were readily available upon
co-heirs made a move to
inquiry, but the party neglects to Mariano Padua sought redeem the properties sold;
make it, he will be chargeable with to redeem the area sold by 1977, in other words,
laches, the same as if he had to the petitioners but when Tecla Padua filed her
known the facts was denied because he complaint, the right of
was an American redemption had already
citizen. Tecla Padua, been extinguished because
filed her own the period for its exercise
complaint invoking the had already expired
same right of
redemption of her Decision of trial court was
brother
RTC dismissed the reversed
complaint on the
ground that the right
had lapsed, not having
been exercised within
30 days from notice of
sales.
Barcellano v Barza, Respondent Dolores Bans, an WoN the RTC The court denied the petition, and
heir of Bartolome Bans owned decision to deny the affirmed the appellate court
G.R. 165287, September 14, 2011 a lot in Bacacay, Albay. Bans heirs of their decision granting the Bans heirs
Adjoining the said lot is a right of legal the right to redeem the subject
Ponente: Justice Perez
property owned by Vicente redemption is valid property.
Doctrines to remember: Medina. In 1997, Medina No.
offered his lot for sale to the The decision was based on the
Article 1623 of the New Civil owners of the adjoining lots. provisions of article 1623 of the
Code: The right of legal pre-emption The property was eventually New Civil Code. A written notice
or redemption shall not be exercised sold to Armando Barcellano. must be issued by the prospective
except within thirty days (30) from The heirs of Bans contested vendor. Nothing in the record and
the notice in writing by the the sale, and conveyed their pleadings submitted by the parties
prospective vendor, or by the vendor, intention to redeem the showed that there was a written
as the case may be. The deed of sale property. However, according notice sent to the respondents.
shall not be recorded in the Registry to Medina, the deed of sale has
Without a written notice, the period
of Property, unless accompanied by been executed. There was also
of 30 days within which the right of
an affidavit of the vendor that he has mention that the Bans heirs
legal redemption may be exercised
given written notice thereof to all failed to give the amount
does not exist.
possible redemptioners required by medina for them to
*Indispensability of a written notice redeem the lot. Action to In this case, the law was clear. A
has long been discussed in the early redeem the property was filed written notice by the vendor is
case of Conejero v. Court of before the RTC. It denied the mandatory.
Appeals: The written notice was petition on the ground that the
obviously exacted by the Code to Bans heirs failed to exercise
remove all uncertainty as to the their right to redemption within
sale, its terms and its validity, and the period provided in article
to quiet any doubts that the 1623 of NCC. On appeal, such
alienation is not definitive (the ruling was reversed.
same ruling in Verdad v. CA and in
Gosiengfiao Guillen v. CA this
court again emphasized the
mandatory character of a written
notice in legal redemption)
ARTICLE 11
Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public policy shall not be countenanced
ARTICLE 12
Martinez v. Van Buskirk, A delivery wagon, WoN an employer It appears from undisputed
attached to unhitched who has furnished a evidence that the cochero has a
G.R. No. L-5691 December 27, horses running away at gentle and tractable habit of leaving the horses in the
1910 great speed, collided team and a trusty condition they were left on the day
with the carromata and capable driver is of he accident and no accident has
Ponente: Justice Moreland
(Kalesa) occupied by liable for the ever occurred due to such practice.
*The cochero of the defendant was the plaintiff Carmen negligence of such
Ong De Martinez and driver No. To leave the horses in the manner
not negligent in leaving the horses
her child. The described on the day of the accident
in the manner prescribed by the
carromata overturned, was the custom of all cocheros who
evidence in this case; it is believed
severely wounding said delivered the same merchandise.
that acts or performances which,
plaintiff by making a This is the custom in all cities. It
in a long time, have not been
serious cut upon her has not been productive of
destructive and which are
head accidents or injuries. The public,
approved by the society are
finding itself unprejudiced by such
considered as a custom; hence,
The defendant practice, has acquiesced for years
they cannot be considered as
presented evidence that without objection.
unreasonable or imprudent
the cochero, who was
driving his delivery The act of the defendants driver in
*The reason why they have been
wagon at the time the leaving the horses unhitched was
permitted by the society is that
accident occurred, was not unreasonable or negligent. Acts,
they are beneficial rather that
prejudicial. One could not easily a good servant and was which the performance of has not
hold someone negligent because of considered a safe and proved destructive or injurious and
some act that led to an injury or reliable driver which have been acquiesced in by
accident. It would be unfair society for so long they have
therefore to render the cochero According to the ripened into custom can not be held
negligent because of such defendant, for the to be themselves unreasonable or
circumstances. purpose of delivery of negligent.
some forage, the
*The court further held that it is a cochero driving the
universal practice of merchants wagon as defendants
during that time to deliver employee tied the
products through horse-drawn driving lines of the
vehicles; and it is also considered horses to the front end
universal practice to leave the of the delivery wagon
horses in the manner in which they and then went back
were left during the accident. It inside of the wagon for
has been practiced for a long time the purpose of
and generally has not been the unloading the forage to
cause of accidents or injuries the be delivered. While
judgment is therefore reversed. unloading the forage,
the horses attached to
the delivery wagon
heard noises, which
frightened them and
caused them to run
away. The driver was
thrown out of the
wagon and was not able
to stop the horses which
then came into collision
with Petitioners
carromata
Tomawis v Balindong, Civil Case No. 102-97 Whether or not the Appellate court DISMISSED the
(Pumbaya v. Tomawis) SDC (Sharia District petition - CA was not empowered to
G.R. No. 182434, March 5, 2010 - private respondents Court) can validly resolve decisions, orders, or final
filed with the SDC an take cognizance judgments of the SDCs.
Ponente: Justice Velasco, Jr.
action for quieting of (taking of
titla a parcel of land jurisdiction) of Civil There is no legal basis to
Supreme Court: PD 1083 is a
against Jerry Tomawis Case No. 102-97 petitioners contention that
special law. It cannot be
Held, petition Art. 143 of PD 1083, insofar
superseded by laws of general
Absolute owners of the denied as it granted the SDC
application.
land (legal heirs of concurrent jurisdiction over
* There is no legal basis to Acraman Radia) certain real actions, was
petitioners contention that Art. repealed by the BP 129
143 of PD 1083, insofar as it Tomawis assumed provisions adverted to.
granted the SDC concurrent ownership (he bought
from Mangoda Radia - Art 143 of PD 1083 vests
jurisdiction over certain real
claimed that he SDC with original
actions, was repealed by the BP
inherited it) jurisdiction over all other
129 provisions adverted to.
personal and real actions not
*Art 143 of PD 1083 vests SDC with Informed that their land mentioned in paragraph 1
original jurisdiction over all other was leveled and houses (d) wherein the parties
personal and real actions not built thereon with the involved are both Muslims
mentioned in paragraph 1 (d) permission of Tomawis except those for forcible
wherein the parties involved are both entry and unlawful detainer,
Muslims except those for forcible Unlawfully deprived of which shall fall under the
entry and unlawful detainer, which their possession of the exclusive original
shall fall under the exclusive original land jurisdiction of the Municipal
jurisdiction of the Municipal Circuit Circuit Court. On the other
Court. On the other hand, BP 129, as Tomawis filed - motion hand, BP 129, as amended,
amended, vests the RTC or the to dismiss the case: vests the RTC or the
municipal trial court with exclusive SDCs lack of municipal trial court with
original jurisdiction in all civil jurisdiction over the exclusive original
actions that involve the title to or subject matter of the jurisdiction in all civil
possession of real property, or any case pursuant to Batas actions that involve the title
interest in it. Pambansa Blg. (BP) to or possession of real
129 or Judiciary property, or any interest in
Reorganization Act of it.
1980 (ruling: denied the
motion by Judge Rasad The Code of Muslim
Balindong) Personal Laws was
promulgated to fulfill the
Tomawis filed - Urgent aspiration of the Filipino
Motion to Dismiss with Muslims to have their
Prayer to Correct the system of laws enforced in
Name of Defendants to their communities. It is a
Read Sultan Yahta special law intended for
Jerry M. Tomawis and Filipino Muslims.
Mangoda M. Radia: he
alleged that possession A reading of the pertinent
of real property or provisions of BP 129 and
interest in it was the PD 1083 shows that the
subject matter of the former, a law of general
complaint which is application to civil courts,
within the original has no application to, and
exclusive jurisdiction of does not repeal, the
the regular courts in provisions found in PD
consonance with the 1083, a special law, which
law (SDC denied) only refers to Sharia courts.
A look at the scope of BP
Tomawis filed an urgent 129 clearly shows that
motion for Sharia courts were not
reconsideration and included in the
SDC dismissed it. reorganization of courts that
were formerly organized
Tomawis repaired to under RA 296.
CA - petition for
certiorari, mandamus, We have held that a general
and prohibition (under law and a special law on the
Rule 65 to nullify on same subject are statutes in
jurisdictional grounds). pari materia and should be
read together and
harmonized, if possible,
with a view to giving effect
to both. In the instant case,
we apply the principle
generalia specialibus non
derogant. A general law
does not nullify a special
law. The general law will
yield to the special law in
the specific and particular
subject embraced inthe
latter.
Furthermore, a ruling
otherwise will defeat the
will of the Legislature in
enacting the Code.
When the laws speak of years, months, days or nights, it shall be understood that years are three hundred sixty-five (365) days
each; months, of thirty (30) days; days, of twenty-four (24) hours; and nights, from sunset to sunrise.
If months are designated by their name, they shall be computed by the number of days which they respectively have.
In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded, and the last day included.
Internal Revenue v Primetown, On March 11, 1999, Whether or not the Pursuant to the Administrative
Gilbert Yap, the Vice respondents Code of 1987, a year shall be
GR 162155, August 28, 2007 Chair of the Respondent petition was filed understood to be 12 calendar
(Primetown Property within the two-year months. The SC defined a calendar
Ponente: Justice Corona
Group Inc.) applied for prescriptive period month as month designated in the
*E.O. 292 should be applied in refund/credit of income Yes. calendar without regard to the
computing the legal period being tax paid in 1997. number of days it may contain. The
the more recent law, governs the court held that Administrative Code
Yap explained that the of 1987 impliedly repealed Article
computation of legal periods. Lex
increase in the cost of 13 of the New Civil Code as the
posteriori derogate priori.
labor caused the real provisions are irreconcilable.
*Both Article 13 of the Civil Code estate industry to slow
and Section 31, Chapter VIII, down where respondent Primetown is entitled for the
Book I of the Administrative Code suffered losses. refund since it is filed within the
of 1987 deals with the same subject two-year reglementary period.
matter the computation of legal Therefore, the
periods; Under the Civil Code, a respondent was not
year is equivalent to 365 days liable for income taxes
whether it be a regular year or a but still paid its
leap year; under the quarterly corporate
Administrative Code of 1987, income tax and remitted
however, a year is composed of 12 creditable withholding
calendar months (under this Code, tax to the BIR.
the number of days is irrelevant)
Resulting for the
*We therefore hold that respondent to be
respondents petition (filed on entitled with a tax
April 14, 2000) was filed on the last refund or tax credit.
day of the 24th calendar month
from the day respondent filed its On May 13,1999, a
final adjusted return; hence, it was revenue officer required
filed within the reglementary the respondent to
period submit additional
documents to support
the claim. Respondent
complied but its claim
was not acted upon.
Respondent then,
appealed to the Court of
Appeals (CA)
ARTICLE 15
Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the
Philippines, even though living abroad.
Tenchavez v. Escao, In 1948 Vicenta Whether or not the No. Their marriage was valid
Escao, 27 years old, divorce obtained since it met the essential requisite
G.R. No. L-19671 November 29, married Pastor abroad by Vicenta for marriage: legal capacity and
1965 Tenchavez , 32 years Escao was legally consent.
of age, without her binding/valid?
Ponente: Justice J.B.L. Reyes The questioned authority of
parents knowledge.
*Civil Code of the Philippines does Their love story was a No. the solemnizing officer was
not admit divorce. Philippine courts culmination of a a formal requisite and does
cannot give recognition on foreign previous love affair not make the marriage ab
decrees of absolute divorce between and their marriage was initio void since both
Filipino citizens because it would be duly registered with parties acted in good faith
a violation of the Civil Code. Such the local civil register. believing that their
grant would arise to discrimination in solemnizing officer was
favor of rich citizens who can afford After their wedding, empowered to do so. It is
divorce in foreign countries. the plan to elope did clear that their marriage
not materialize due to was still subsisting
*The adulterous relationship of her mother discovering regardless of the divorce
Escano with her American husband about the affair. She obtained abroad by Vicenta
is enough grounds for the legal later admitted to her because she was still then a
separation prayed by Tenchavez. parents that they were Filipino citizen making her
already married. still subjected to Philippine
*In the eyes of Philippine laws,
law and Article 15 of the
Tenchavez and Escano are still The Escao spouses Civil Code Laws relating
married. A foreign divorce between sought priestly advice to family rights and duties
Filipinos sought and decreed is not from Father Reynes or to the status, condition
entitled to recognition neither is the who suggested a re- and legal capacity of
marriage of the divorcee entitled to celebration to persons are binding upon
validity in the Philippines. Thus, the validate their the citizens of the
desertion and securing of an invalid marriage since the Philippines, even though
divorce decree by one spouse entitled chaplain who living abroad was already
the other for damages. officiated the marriage in force at that time. Our
lacked authority from laws do not allow absolute
WHEREFORE, the decision under Archbishop or parish
appeal is hereby modified as follows; divorce only legal
priest. separation. For our laws to
(1) Adjudging plaintiff-appellant However, the marriage recognize foreign divorce
Pastor Tenchavez entitled to a decree ceremony did not push between Filipino citizens
of legal separation from defendant through due to a letter could be a violation of
Vicenta F. Escao; which alleges public policy (Art 17 CC) It
Tenchavez having an can be considered that her
(2) Sentencing defendant-appellee amorous relationship marriage to Russell Moran
Vicenta Escao to pay plaintiff- with Pacita Noel. was invalid and technically
appellant Tenchavez the amount of her having relations with
P25,000 for damages and attorneys' Despite the someone apart from her
fees; controversy, the couple husband constitutes
lived separately but adultery which entitles
(3) Sentencing appellant Pastor were still Tenchavez for legal
Tenchavez to pay the appellee, communicating separation.
Mamerto Escao and the estate of his through letters.
wife, the deceased Mena Escao,
P5,000 by way of damages and On June 24, 1950,
attorneys' fees. Vicenta applied for a
US visa without
informing her husband
and indicating in the
application that she
was single.
Tenchavez initiates
the proceedings
against Vicenta, and
her parents whom he
claims was to blame
for them drifting
apart and the
Catholic church for
granting the
annulment of
marriage. He
petitions for legal
separation and one
million pesos in
damages. The lower
court did not grant
legal separation but
freed Tenchavez
from supporting his
wife and acquire
property to exclusion
of his wife.
Board of Commissioners vs. de la On July 6, 1960: WoN the marriage YES. The Supreme Court ruled that
Rosa, Santiago Gatchalian, of Gatchalian in in the absence of the evidence to
grandfather of William China is valid in the contrary foreign laws on a
G.R. Nos. 95122-23 May 31, Gatchalian, was accordance with particular subject are presumed to
1991 recognized by the Philippine Law be the same as those of the
Bureau of Immigration Yes. Philippines. This is known as
Ponente: Justice Bidin
as a native born Processual Presumption.
Doctrine: Processual Presumption; Filipino citizen;
Santiago Gatchalian In the case at bar, there being no
he who asserts that the marriage is
testified that he has proof of Chinese law relating to
is not valid under our law bears
five (5) children marriage, there arises a
the burden of proof to present the
presumption that it is the same of
foreign law (Miciano Case)
June 27, 1961: that of Philippine law the said
William Gatchalian marriage is then declared valid.
(then a 12-year old), Therefore, William Gatchalian
arrived in Manila and following the citizenship of his
sought admission as a father is a Filipino citizen.
Filipino citizen which
was eventually
granted by the board Also, William Gatchalian also
of special inquiry; belongs to the class of Filipino
however, the Secretary citizens contemplated under Section
of Justice issued a 1, Article IV of the 1987
memorandum Constitution, which specifically
(Memorandum No. 9) mentions the following: those who
setting aside all are citizens of the Philippines at the
decisions and directed time of the adoption of this
the Board of Constitution . . .
Commissions to
review all cases where
entry was allowed
among which was that
of William Gatchalian
ATCI Overseas Corp vs. Echin, Josefina Echin was Whether or not the No, the SC ruled that Philippine
hired by ATCI, the Labor laws of labor laws shall stand in the case
G.R. No. 178551, Oct. 11, 2010 agency of the Ministry Kuwait shall be at hand given the doctrine of
of Public Health of applied No. processual presumption where
Ponente: Justice Carpio Morales
Kuwait, as a medical foreign law is not pleaded but
Doctrine to remember: technologist. proven, if not proven, the
presumption is that the foreign
Doctrine of Processual -Under a MOA, Echin law is the same as the law of the
Presumption foreign law is not would go under a Philippines.
pleaded but proven; if not proven, probationary period of 1
the presumption is that the foreign year and covered by In the case, the petitioners
law is the same as the law of the Kuwait Civil Service submitted the MOA, Termination
Philippines Laws. letter and letter of reconsideration.
These documents failed to provide
The SC ruled that Philippine Echin was deployed substantive evidences to prove that
labor laws shall stand in the from work on February Echin was legally terminated as a
case at hand given the 17, 2000 but was probationary employee under the
doctrine of processual terminated on February Kuwait Civil Service laws.
presumption 11, 2001.
Instead of submitting a copy of the
Upon returning to the Kuwait labor laws which would
Philippines, Echin filed attest to the legality of their
an illegal dismissal case termination of Echin, the above
with the NLRC mentioned documents did not
(National Labor prove that the labor laws of Kuwait
Relations Commission) differ from the laws of the
against ATCI, Philippines.
represented by Amalia
Ikdal
ARTICLE 16
Real property, as well as personal property, is subject to the law of the country where it is situated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional
rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession
is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be
found
Amos v Bellis Amos G. Bellis, born in Which law must Doctrine of Renvoi: where
Texas, was a citizen of apply Texas or the decedent is a national of
G.R. No. L-23, June 6, 1967 the State of Texas and Philippine Law? one country, and a domicile
Ponente: Justice J.P. Bengzon of the U.S Texas Law should of another
still govern
Doctrines to Remember: By his first wife (Mary Present case: it is not
E. Mallen) who he disputed that the decedent
* THE PHILIPPINE LAW ON divorced, he had five was both a national of Texas
LEGITIMES CANNOT BE (5) legitimate children; and a domicile thereof at the
APPLIED TO THE TESTACY OF by his second wife time of his death
AMOS G. BELLIS (Violet Kennedy), who
survived him, he has So even assuming Texas has
1.) Doctrine of Renvoi; (not a conflict of law rule
three (3) legitimate
applicable in this case) where providing that a domiciliary
children; he also had
the decedent is a national of one system (law of the domicile)
three (3) illegitimate
country, and a domicile of the should be govern, the same
children
other would not result in a
August 5, 1952: Bellis reference back (renvoi) to
2.) Article 16, paragraph 2. And
executed a will in the Philippine law, but would
Article 1039 of the Civil Code:
Philippines, in which still refer to Texas law
render applicable the national
he directed that after
law of the decedent, in intestate
all taxes, obligations, Nonetheless, if Texas has a
or testamentary successions,
and expenses of conflicts rule adopting the
with regard to four items:
administration are situs theory (lex rei sitae)
(a) The order of paid for, his calling for the application of
succession; distributable estate the law of the place where
should be divided in the properties are situated,
(b) The amount of the following order: renvoi would arise, since the
successional properties here involved are
rights; o $240,000 to his first found in the Philippines
wife (Mary E.
(c) The intrinsic Mallen) In the absence, however, of
validity of the proof as to the conflict of
provisions of the o P120,000 to his law rule of Texas, it should
will; and three illegitimate not be presumed different
children, or from ours; appellants
(d) The capacity to P40,000 each; and position is therefore not
succeed rested on the doctrine of
o After the foregoing
renvoi
two items have
been satisfied, the The appellants argue that
remainder shall go their case falls under the
to his seven (7) circumstances mentioned
surviving children in the third paragraph of
by his first and Article 17, in relation to
second wives Article 16 of the Civil
Code
July 8, 1958: Amos G.
Bellis died a resident of Article 16, par. 2, and Art.
San Antonio, Texas, 1039 of the Civil Code,
USA; his will was render applicable the
admitted to probate in national law of the
the Court of First decedent, in intestate or
Instance of Manila on testamentary successions,
Septembeer 15,1958 with regard to four items:
(a) the order of succession;
The Peoples Bank and
(b) the amount of
Trust Company (as
successional rights; (c) the
executor of the will),
intrinsic validity of the
paid all the bequests, provisions of the will; (d)
as approved by the the capacity to succeed
lower court
Both Article 16 and Article
January 8, 1964: the 1039 would say that the
executor submitted and nation of the decedent (its
filed its Executors law) shall govern
Final Account, Report
of Administration and However, the appellants
Project of Partition would counter that Article
which reported the 17 (3) of the Civil Code
satisfaction of the prevails as the exception to
legacy of Mary E. Article 16 (2) of the Civil
Mallen by the delivery Code THIS IS NOT
of her shares of stock CORRECT
amounting to $240,000,
Congress deleted the phrase
and the legacies of
Amos Bellis Jr. and notwithstanding the
Maria Cristina Bellis provisions of this and the
and Miriam Palma next preceding article when
Bellis in the amount of they incorporated Article 11
P40,000 each or a total of the old civil code as
of P120,000; in Article 17 of the new Civil
accordance to the Code, while reproducing
Twelfth clause of the without substantial change
testators Last Will and the second paragraph of
Testament, the executor Article 10 of the old Civil
divided the residuary Code as Article 16 in the
estate into seven (7) new
equal portions for the
benefit of the It must have been their
testators seven purpose to make the second
legitimate children by paragraph of Article 16 as a
his first and second specific provision in itself
marriages which must be applied in
testate and intestate
January 17, 1964: succession
Maria Cristina Bellis
and Miriam Palma Congress added a new
Bellis filed their provision, under Article
respective oppositions 1039, which decrees that
to the project of capacity to succeed is to be
partition on the ground governed by the national
that they were law of the decedent
deprived of their
legitimes as It is therefore evident that
illegitimate children whatever public policy or
and, therefore, good customs may be
compulsory heirs of involved in our System of
the deceased (and legitimes, Congress has
Amos Bellis Jr. not intended to extend the
interposed no same to the succession of
opposition to this) foreign nationals; for it
has specifically chosen to
April 30, 1964: the leave, the amount of
lower court issued an successional rights, to the
order overruling the decedents national law;
oppositions and specific provisions must
approving the prevail over general ones
executors final
account, report and
administration and
Appellants would also point
project of partition
out that the decedent
Article 16 of the Civil executed two wills one to
Code it applied the govern his Texas estate and
national law of the the other his Philippine
decedent, which in this estate arguing from this
case is Texas Law, that he intended Philippine
which did not provide law to govern his Philippine
for legitimes estate; assuming that such
was the decedents intention
June 11, 1964: the in executing a separate
respective motions for Philippine will, it would
reconsiderations have not alter the law, for as
been denied by the this Court ruled in
lower court; and the Miciano v. Brimo, a
oppositors-appellants provision in a foreigners
have appealed to the SC will to the effect that his
properties shall be
distributed in accordance
with Philippine law and
not with his national law,
is illegal and void, for his
national law cannot be
ignored in regard to those
matters that Article 10
now Article 16 of the
Civil Code states said
national law should
govern
Del Socorro v Van Wilsem, Petitioner Norma A. 1.) WoN a First Issue: YES
Del Socorro and foreign
GR 193707, Dec. 10, 2014 respondent Ernst Johan national has To determine whether or not
Brinkman Van Wilsem an obligation a person is criminally liable
*The Divorce Covenant presented under R.A. No. 9262, it is
contracted a marriage in to support
by respondent DOES NOT imperative that the legal
Holland on September his minor
COMPLETELY SHOW THAT HE obligation to support exists
25, 1990 child under
IS NOT LIABLE TO GIVE
Philippine
SUPPORT TO HIS SON AFTER January 19, 1994: they Del Socorro invokes Article
law YES
THE DIVORCE DECREE WAS were blessed with a son 195 of the Family Code,
ISSUED named Roderigo Norjo which provides the parents
Van Wilsem, who at the obligation to support his
* Even if the laws of the 2.) WoN a child; she contends that
time of the filing of the
Netherlands neither enforce a foreign notwithstanding the
instant petition was (16)
parents obligation to support his national can existence of a divorce
years of age
child nor penalize the be held decree issued in relation to
noncompliance therewith, such criminally
Unfortunately, their Article 26 of the Family
obligation is still duly enforceable liable under Code, respondent is not
marriage bond ended on
in the Philippines because it would R.A. No. excused from complying
July 19, 1995 by virtue
be of great injustice to the child to 9262 for his with his obligation to
of a Divorce Decree
be denied of financial support unjustified support his minor child with
issued by the
when the latter is entitled thereto failure to petitioner
appropriate Court of
Holland; at that time, support his
Ponente: Justice Peralta
their son was only minor child On the other hand,
Doctrines to remember: eighteen (18) months -- YES respondent contends that
old. Thereafter, Del there is no sufficient and
Doctrine of Processual Socorro and her son clear basis presented by
Presumption if the foreign law came home to the Del Socorro that she, as
involved is not properly pleaded and Philippines well as her minor son, are
proved, our courts will presume that entitled to financial
the foreign law is the same as our According to Del support; he also added
local or domestic or internal law Socorro, her former that by reason of the
husband made a Divorce Decree, he is not
Territoriality Principle (Criminal promise to provide obligated to give any
Law; in relation to Article 14 of the monthly support to financial support
New Civil Code) penal laws and their son in the
those of public security and safety amount of two The SC agrees with
shall be obligatory upon all who live hundred fifty (250) respondent that Del Socorro
and sojourn in Philippine territory, Guildene (equivalent cannot rely on Article 195
subject to the principle of public to Php 17,500 more or of the New Civil Code in
international law and to treaty less); howevern since demanding support from
stipulations the arrival of Del respondent, who is a foreign
Socorro and her son in citizen, since Article 15 of
It is indisputable that the
the Philippines, the New Civil Code stresses
alleged continuing acts of
respondent never gave the principle of nationality;
respondent in refusing to
support to the son, insofar as Philippine laws
support his child with Del
Roderigo are concerned, specifically
Socorro is committed here in
the provisions of the Family
the Philippines as all of the Not long thereafter, Code on support, the same
parties herein are residents of respondent came to the only applies to Filipino
the Province of Cebu City; as Philippines and citizens. By analogy, the
such, our courts have remarried in same principle applies to
territorial jurisdiction over Pinamungahan, Cebu, foreigners such that they are
the offense charged against and since then, have governed by their national
respondent been residing thereat; law with respect to family
respondent and his new rights and duties
wife established a
business known as The obligation to give
Paree Catering, located support to a child is a matter
at Barangay Tajao, that falls under family rights
Municipality of and duties; Since the
Pinamungahan, Cebu respondent is a citizen of
City Holland or the
Netherlands, we agree
with the RTC-Cebu that
he is subject to the laws of
August 28, 2009: Del his country, not to
Socorro, through her Philippine law, as to
counsel, sent a letter whether he is obliged to
demanding support give support to his child,
from respondent; as well as the
however, the consequences of his failure
respondent refused to to do so
receive the letter
Jurisprudence: Vivo v.
Due to repondents Cloribel . . . being still
refusal to receive the aliens, they are not in
letter, Del Socorro filed position to invoke the
a complaint affidavit provisions of the Civil
with the Provincial Code of the Philippines,
Prosecutor of Cebu for that Code cleaves to
City against the principle that family
respondent for rights and duties are
violation of Section 5, governed by their personal
paragraph E (2) of law (the laws of the nation
R.A. No. 9262, for the to which they belong even
latters unjust refusal when staying in a foreign
to support his minor country)
child with Del Socorro
It cannot be gainsaid,
Respondent submitted therefore, that the
his counter-affidavit respondent is not obliged
thereto, to which Del to support Del Socorros
Socorro also submitted son under Article 195 of
her reply-affidavit the Family Code as a
consequence of the
Thereafter, the Divorce Covenant
Provincial Prosecutor of obtained in Holland; this
Cebu City issued a does not however, mean
Resolution that respondent is not
recommending the obliged to support Del
filing of an Socorros son altogether
information for the
crime charged against In international law, the
herein respondent party who wants to have a
foreign law applied to a
Upon motion and after dispute or case has the
notice and hearing, the burden of proving the
RTC-Cebu issued a foreign law; in the case at
Hold Departure Order bar, respondent hastily
against respondent concludes that being a
national of the
Respondent was Netherlands, he is
arrested, and, governed by such laws on
subsequently, posted the matter of provision of
bail; Del Socorro also and capacity to support.
filed a While respondent pleaded
Motion/Application of the laws of the
Permanent Protection Netherlands in advancing
Order to which his position that he is not
respondent filed his obliged to support his son,
Opposition he never proved the same
Territoriality Principle in
criminal law, in relation to
Article 14 of the New Civil
Code applies to this case
Dispositive: Petition is
GRANTED
ARTICLE 17
The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in which
they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign
country, the solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be observed in their execution
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their object public order, public policy and
good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments promulgated, or determinations or conventions agreed upon in
a foreign country.
Raytheon v Rouzie, Sometime in 1990, 1.) WoN the CA Petitioner mainly asserts
GR 162894, February 26, 2008 Brand Marine Services, erred in that the written contract
Inc. (BMSI), a refusing to between respondent and
Ponente: Justice Tinga corporation duly dismiss the BMSI included a valid
organized and existing complaint choice of law clause, that is,
*Jurisdiction and choice of law are
under the laws of the for failure to that the contract shall be
two distinct concepts; jurisdiction
State of Connecticut, state a cause governed by the laws of the
considers whether it is fair to cause
United States of of action State of Connecticut; it also
a defendant to travel to this state;
America, and against mentions the presence of
choice of law asks the further
respondent Stockton W. Raytheon foreign element in the
question whether the application of
Rouzie, Jr., an International dispute namely, the parties
a substantive law which will
American citizen, , Inc. and witnesses involved are
determine the merits of the case is
entered into a contract American corporations and
fair to both parties
whereby BMSI hired citizens and the evidence to
Doctrines to remember: respondent as its be presented is located
2.) WoN the CA
representative to outside the Philippines
appeals erred
Forum non Conveniens: negotiate the sale of that renders our local courts
in refusing to
Under the doctrine of forum services in several inconvenient forums;
dismiss the
non conveniens, a court, in government projects in petitioner theorizes that
complaint on
conflicts-of laws cases, may the Philippines for an the foreign elements of the
the ground
refuse impositions on its agreed renumeration of dispute necessitate the
of forum non
jurisdiction where it is not the 10% of the gross immediate application of
conveniens
most convenient or receipts the doctrine of forum non
available forum and the conveniens
parties are not precluded from March 11, 1992: Rouzie
seeking remedies elsewhere; (respondent) secured a Hasegawa v. Kitamura:
petitioners averments of the service contract with the Court outlined three
foreign elements in the the Republic of the consecutive phases involved
instant case are not sufficient Philippines on behalf of in judicial resolution of
to oust the trial court of its BMSI for the dredging conflicts-of-laws problems,
jurisdiction over Civil Case of rivers affected by Mt. namely: jurisdiction, choice
No. 1192-BG and the parties Pinatubo eruption and of law, and recognition and
involved mudflows enforcement of judgments
Petitioner filed a
Motion for
Reconsideration of the
order, which motion
was opposed by Rouzie
In matters which are governed by the Code of Commerce and special laws, their deficiency shall be supplied by the provisions of
this code.
Petitioner likewise
contended that since
Tamano and Zorayda
were both Muslims and
married in Muslim rites
the jurisdiction to hear
and try the instant case
was vested in the
sharia courts pursuant
to Article 155 of the
Code of Muslim
Personal Laws
Petitioner is now
reiterating her earlier
argument that it is the
sharia court and not the
RTC which has
jurisdiction over the
subject and nature of
the action
Llave vs Republic, Around 11 months Whether or not the The Civil Code governs the
before his death, marriage between marriage of Zorayda and the
GR 169766, March 30, 2011 Senator Tamano (Sen. Estrellita and the late Sen. Tamano. Their
Tamano) married late Senator Tamano marriage was never
Ponente: Justice Del Castillo
Estrellita Juliano-Llave was bigamous No. invalidated by PD 1083.
Doctrine to remember: (Estrellita) twice --
initially under the The marriage between the
Article 13(1) of PD 1083 cannot Islamic laws and late Sen. Tamano and
benefit Estrellita. Firstly, the said traditions on 27 May Zorayda was celebrated in
article provides that the law applies 1993, and subsequently 1958, solemnized under
to marriage and divorce wherein under a civil ceremony civil, and Muslim rites. The
both parties are Muslims, or wherein on 2 June 1993. In their only law in force governing
only the male party is a Muslim and marriage contracts, marriage relationships
the marriage is solemnized in Sen. Tamanos civil between Muslims, and non-
accordance with Muslim Law or this status was indicated as Muslims alike was the Civil
Code in any part of the Philippines. divorced. Code of 1950.
However, the court already ruled that
Article 13 of PD 1083 does not On 23 November 1994, Article 13(1) of PD 1083
provide for a situation where the Haja Putri Zorayda A. cannot benefit Estrellita.
parties were married both in civil Tamano (Zorayda), and Firstly, the said article
and Muslim rites. her son Adib Ahmad A. provides that the law applies
Tamano (Adib) filed a to marriage and divorce
complaint with the wherein both parties are
RTC of Quezon City Muslims, or wherein only
for the declaration of the male party is a Muslim
nullity of marriage and the marriage is
between Sen. Tamano, solemnized in accordance
and Estrellita for being with Muslim Law or this
bigamous. Code in any part of the
Philippines. However, the
Zorayda alleged that court already ruled that
Sen. Tamano married Article 13 of PD 1083 does
her on 31 May 1958 not provide for a situation
under civil rites. where the parties were
Furthermore, the married both in civil and
former alleged that Muslim rites.
Sen. Tamanos status
being declared as Moreover, the Muslim Code
divorced has no took effect only on 4
factual or legal basis. February 1977, and this law
cannot retroactively
Summons was then override the Civil Code
served on Estrellita, but which already bestowed
she filed for an certain rights on the
extension to file her marriage of Sen. Tamano,
answer multiple times. and Zorayda.
However, after being
given multiple
extensions, and
postponements, she
refused to file an
answer.
Ultimately, the
Supreme Court ruled
that Article 13 of PD
1083 (Muslim Code)
does not provide for a
situation where the
parties were married
both in civil and
Muslim rites.
Thereafter, in order to
strengthen the ties of
their marriage,
Zamoranos and
Pacasum renwed their
marriage vows in a civil
ceremony before Judge
Valerio Salazar of the
RTC, Iligan City;
however, unlike in
Zamoranoss first
marriage to De
Guzman, the union
between her and
Pacasum was blessed
with progeny, namely:
Samson, Sr., Sam Jean,
and Sam Joon
The volatile
relationship of
Zamoranos and
Pacasum escalated into
a bitter battle for
custody of their minor
children
Eventually, Zamoranos
and Pacasum arrived at
a compromise
agreement which vested
primary custody of the
children in the former,
with the latter retaining
visitorial rights thereto