SIBAYAN, ELYZA R.

CRIM REVIEW
4C August 28, 2018

LEGAL MAXIMS

LEGAL MAXIM LEGAL IMPLICATION

1. ABERRATIO ICTUS Blow or stroke gone astray as when a
person receives a blow or a bullet
intended for another.

“The only rational explanation for

that lamentable aberratio ictus or
error en la persona is that, inasmuch
as the stabbing was perpetrated at
night, the inebriated assailants
mistakenly assumed that Metucua,
whom they had intended to kill, and
who was not a pedicab driver, was
the person inside the sidecar (for the
passenger) and that Candel, a
pedicab driver, was the person on the
driver’s seat of the pedicab. As
previously recounted, Candel, who
must have been drunk, was the one
inside the sidecar while Metucua was
on the driver’s seat.” (THE PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES vs. WARLITO
PLATEROS Y CALATRAVA, alias BABIE,
and MURILLO LAHOY Y BUENO, alias
BOY, G.R. No. L-37162, May 30,
1978).
2. ACTUS NON FACIT The act itself does not make a man
guilty unless his intentions were so.
REUM, NISI MENS SIT
REA
3. ACTION IN PERSONAM Action against a person on the basis
of his personal liability.
4. ACTION IN REM Action against the whole world. An
action against the thing itself, instead
of against the person.
5. ACTION QUASI IN REM Action not strictly speaking an action
in rem yet it partakes of that nature
and is substantially such.
6. ANIMUS POSSIDENDI Intent to possess.

“Possession has been defined to

be the detention or enjoyment of a
thing which a man holds or exercises
by himself or by another who keeps
or exercises it in his name. (Bouvier’s
Law Dictionary, Rawles’ revision, Vol.
II.) Clearly it involves a state of mind
on the part of the possessor whereby
he intends to exercise, and as a
consequence of which, he does
exercise a right of possession,
whether that right be legal or
otherwise; and while the intention
 and the will to possess may be, and
usually are inferred from the fact that
the thing in question is under the
apparent power and control of the
alleged possessor, nevertheless, the
existence of the animus possidendi
is subject to contradiction, and may
be rebutted by evidence which tends
to prove that the person under whose
power and control the thing in
question appears to be, does not in
fact exercise such power of control
and does not intend so to do. In order
to complete a possession two things
are required, that there be an
occupancy, apprehension, or taking;
that the taking be with an intent to
possess (animus possidendi).
Hence persons who have no legal
wills, as children of insufficient
understanding and idiots, can not
possess or acquire a complete
possession (Pothier, Etienne, see 1
Mer., 358; Abb. Sh., 9); so here stolen
property is placed in the house or
upon the premises of A, without his
knowledge or consent, A is not
properly speaking in possession of
such property, so long as he does not
assert a right to its control, and is not
moved by the animus possidendi with
reference thereto.”
7. STRICTISSIMI JURIS Strictly according to the language of
the law, is an associate doctrine.
When the law is clear, it must be
applied as found. The ordinary
language of a statute must be given
its ordinary meaning, and limited to a
reasonable interpretation.
Construction and interpretation come
only when it has been demonstrated
that application is impossible or the
law is inadequate. Interpretation
should be geared towards upholding
the very purpose of the statute.
(Republic Flour Mills vs. Comm. of
Customs, L-28463, 31 May 1971, 39
SCRA 269).
8. CASUS OMISSUS PRO Words or phrases may be supplied in
a law to eliminate repugnancy,
OMISSO HABENDUS EST inconsistencies, to complete the
sense, give effect to the intention of
the legislature, to supply omissions
because of clerical errors because of
accident or inadvertence.
9. CESSANTE RASIONE When the reason for the law ceases,
the law itself ceases.
LEGIS, CESSAT IPSA LEX
10. CESTUI QUE TRUST Other co-owners for whom a co-
owner holds property in trust for.
11. DILIGENTISSIMI Diligence of a good father of a family.
PATRIS FAMILIAS
12. DURA LEX SED LEX The law is harsh but it is the law.
13. EJUSDEM GENERIS Where general terms follow a
particular enumeration, the general
terms include all those specifically
enumerated.
14. FALSUS IN UNO, False in one, false in all. The rule is
not a mandatory rule of evidence.
FALSUS IN OMNIBUS
15. IGNORANTIA FACTI Ignorance of the facts excuses but
not ignorance of the law. In theory
EXCUSAT, IGNORANTIA every one is supposed to know the
JURIS NON EXCUSAT law, except children under a certain
age and insane persons.

Ignorance of a material fact may

excuse a party from legal
consequences of his conduct; as in, in
the absence of fraud, money paid
with full knowledge of the facts but
through ignorance of the law is not
recoverable, but not in ignorance of
the facts. Thus, where credit was not
paid in an account for a sum already
paid by the plaintiff, who in mistake
and in the hurry of business, paid the
balance shown to be due, recovery of
the over payment is allowed.
16. INCLUSIO UNIUS What is excluded is deemed not
included.
EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS
17. MALA IN SE Offense that is inherently wrong.
18. MALA PROHIBITA An act made an offense by law or
statute.
19. NULLUM CRIMEN, There is no crime where there is no
law punishing.
NULLA POENA, SINE
LEGE
20. NEMO TENETUR No one is bound to incriminate
himself.
SEIPSUM ACCUSARE