ANA BEATHA V.

CASTIL
11580534 | G02 | PFR
Week 1 Doctrines

WHEN LAW TAKES EFFECT

Tanada v. Tuvera

APRIL 24, 1985 G.R. No. L-63915 ESCOLIN, J

In Tañada v. Tuvera, Court ruled that the clause “unless it is otherwise provided” refers to the
effectivity date and not the publication itself. The clause does not automatically allow the force
and effect of the law upon approval or any other date. As required, there is a 15-day period, but
the legislature may in its discretion be able to shorten or extend it. The rule of law specifically
states that a person or the general public may only be bound by it if he is specifically informed
of its contents. Hence, issuances without publication have no force and effect. This also protects
the right of the people to be informed and not be apprehended without the due process that
publications follow.

WHEN LAW TAKES EFFECT

Umali v. Estanislao

MAY 29, 1992 G.R. No. 104037 PADILLA, J

On the issue of whether RA No. 7167 should cover income earned during calendar year 1991,
the Court decides that it should apply on the income received from January of 1991. The
applicability of RA No. 7167 means that if the effectivity of it is on January 30, 1992, and the
next filing would be not later than April 15, 1992, it would apply to compensation income
earned during the 1991 calendar year, and does not anymore extend to income from 1990
calendar year.

1
 WHEN LAW TAKES EFFECT

Fuentes v. Roca

APRIL 21, 2010 G.R. No. 178902 ABAD, J

The Court of Appeals find that there indeed was forgery, and that the affidavit was notarized in
Zamboanga and was contradicting of his claim that he witnessed Rosario signing in Paco,
Manila. The CA finds Plagata’s statement with no credence as he did admit to falsifying the
jurat of the affidavit of consent. Also, the spouses Rosario and Tarciano have been living
separately for 30 years already that it would have been reasonable if Tarciano would have just
chosen to forge the signature to be able to sell the property. Following the Civil Code, Rosario
and Tarciano’s marriage was in 1950, and the conjugal property was sold to the Fuentes in 1989,
to which, the Family Code should have taken effect already. As the heirs of Tarciano and
Rosario filed an annulment of sale against spouses Fuentes because the conjugal property was
sold without their mother’s consent, the NCC allows that they bring the action within 10 years
from transaction. The Court then ruled that the sale was void from the beginning and that the
Rocas may choose to indemnify the Fuentes for the costs of the improvements or paying the
value increase of the said property.

WHEN LAW TAKES EFFECT

Commissioner v Hypermix

FEBRUARY 1, 2012 G.R. No. 179579 SERENO, J

The respondent, as a regular importer of wheat, from China to Subic will be subjected to the
application of CMO 27-2003 and questions the fact that the applicability of such would mean
that he would then be charged 7% tariff for feed grade wheat instead of the 3% for food grade
wheat and would need to follow a process stipulated in the CMO 27-2003. If the latter followed
the need to publish and circulate notices, then the interested parties would have been able to
bring this up prior. Again, in the case of Tañada v. Tuvera, it was pointed out that it would be
of no force and effect if the laws are not published and does not follow the 15-day period after
publication.

2
 IGNORANCE OF THE LAW

Kasilag v. Rodriguez

DECEMBER 7, 1939 G.R. No. 46623 IMPERIAL, J.

The possession by the petitioner and receipts of the fruits of the land are illegal and void. The
contract is a lien and is prohibited by Sec 116 of RA No. 2874. The appellate Court found that
the petitioner acted in bad faith since he knew that the contract with Emiliana Ambrosio is
already flawed from the beginning. However, the question leads to whether the petitioner acted
in good faith if he was unaware of the flaw of the title and how he acquired such property. Gross
ignorance of the law may not be a basis of good faith, but rather excusable ignorance of law.
The Court finds that the petitioner did not think he was violating anything after accepting the
mortgage of improvements and the alienation of the land, hence, found to be in good faith.

IGNORANCE OF THE LAW

Elegado v. Court of Appeals

MAY 12, 1989 173 SCRA 285 CRUZ, J

An assessment of Php 96,509.35 by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for Warren Taylor
Graham’s estate when his son filed for an estate tax return which was protested by Bump, Young
and Walker law firm. A second assessment of Php 72,948.87 was made despite the finality and
executory of the first one. When the Court questioned the validity of the second assessment, it
was said that petitioner imposes that it was because of the ignorance of the foreign lawyers to
Philippine laws and procedures. The Court finds it unfair that foreign lawyers are given an
excuse as they are ignorant to the law to make such mistakes. Hence, the first assessment is
deemed valid.

3
 RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS

Bernabe v. Alejo

January 21, 2002 G.R. No. 140500 PANGANIBAN, J.

Carolina Alejo, on behalf of Adrian Bernabe, filed a complaint praying that Adrian be declared
as an illegitimate son of the late Fiscal Bernabe. When the latter passed away, his estate was left
with a sole surviving heir Ernestina Bernabe. Ernestina claims that the death of the putative
father had barred the action of recognition. However, according to the Court, to maintain justice
for Adrian, he should be able to prove that he is late Bernabe’s illegitimate son. Adrian was
born in 1981 with the NCC governing his rights. And based on Article 285, he should be
allowed. As pointed out, illegitimate children who were still minors at the time FC took effect
and whose putative parent died during their minority – Adrian was 7 years old when FC took
effect, and 12 years old when his putative parent died. Hence, petition is denied.

4
 RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS

Simon v. Chan

MAY 31, 1991 G.R. Nos. 157547 BERSAMIN, J

The Decision of the Court to dismiss Chan’s complaint the decision was affirmed in toto.
However, Chan appealed to the court challenging the dismissal of his complaint for litis
pendentia where Simon claimed that he was embarrassed and suffered emotionally and that the
decision of the Court was valid. The decision of the RTC was overturned by CA in 2002 because
as a general rule, an offense does cause two classes of injuries where the offended may prove
civil liability of an accused due to a criminal case, as they are separately instituted. This was
only made effective on December 1, 2000. This issue is mere procedural, and retroactive effect
may apply to actions that are pending at the time of their passage.

RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS

Francisco v. CA

NOVEMBER 25, 1998 G.R. No. 102330 QUISUMBING, J

Eusebio Francisco have acquired different properties before his second marriage with Teresita
Francisco. He is the administrator of said properties. However, he has become ill wherein he
signed a General Power of Attorney authorizing his heir Conchita Evangelista to administer his
properties. Teresita files a complaint that she should be the administrator since according to the
Family Code those properties have become conjugal due to their marriage putting the NCC
aside stating Eusebio’s exclusive ownership as the properties were his prior to marriage. CA
did not agree with this as it will impair the rights acquired by Eusebio before the law has taken
effect. The petition of Teresita was denied by the appellate court.

Art. 256. This Code shall have retroactive effect insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested
or acquired rights in accordance with the Civil Code or other laws.

5
 RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS

CF: Pesca v. Pesca

APRIL 17, 2001 G.R. No. 136921 VITUG, J

Art 4, Civil Code – Laws shall have no retroactive effect unless the contrary is provided.
Lorna Pesca married Zosimo Pesca. They have children and later on, Lorna Pesca claims that
the “true color” of Zosimo Pesca came out. He is a habitual drinker, always with his friends and
violent. Eventually, Lorna Pesca stayed with his sister but came back with Zosimo as she
forgave him. The same thing happened again as she was battered and submitted herself to the
hospital. After such, she ended up moving to her sister’s and later on rented an apartment on
their own. Summons regarding Lorna’s complaint and her prayer to have her marriage annuled
invoking psychological incapacity were completely ignored by Zosimo until the Court decided
to declare their marriage null and void ab initio on the basis of psychological incapacity to which
Zosimo appealed to. Petitioner plead to the Court that it should base its decision using the Santos
and Molina cases where psychological incapacity should be a ground for nullity of marriage.
Court denies the petition of Lorna Pesca due to the fact that she failed to prove a case of
psychological incapacity against Zosimo.

RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS

David v. Agbay

MARCH 18, 2015 G.R. No. 199113 VILLARAMA,JR., J

Petitioner David, a Canadian citizen, acquired a property from Agbay. Later on, question of
falsification of documents and citizenship were brought up. According to David, he only
falsified documents as he was given guarantee by the CENRO that he could declare himself a
Filipino. He claims that the filing of a criminal case against him may not prosper as at the time
of filing, he is a Canadian citizen. It is asked to apply the ruling of the Court in the case of
Fivaldo v COMELEC and Altarejos v COMELEC on the retroactivity of the re-acquisition of
Philippine citizenship to the date of filing of his application, hence, may not be applied in this
case. No proof of application for re-acquisition of citizenship have been proven by the petitioner
before he made a declaration in the Public Land Application. Petition is denied.

6
 WAIVER OF RIGHTS

DM CONSUNJI v. CA

APRIL 20, 2001 G.R. No. 137873 KAPUNAN, J

A construction worker at DM Consunji named Juego fell 14 floors from Renaissance Tower,
Pasig City to his death. This was while he was performing his carpenter duties. His wife Maria
Juego files with the RTC a complaint for damages against DM Consunji however, the latter’s
defense is that Juego has already availed of benefits from the State Insurance Fund. The Court
ruled in favor of Juego to which DM Consunji appealed. One of the issues the latter brought up
is that the report of PO3 Villanueva is not admissible as only parts of it were of his personal
knowledge. In this case, the waiver of right is being invoked against Maria Juego, and her excuse
is that she had no knowledge of what options she has. DM Consunji still imposes that ignorance
of the law excuses no one. The Court considers the fact that Maria Juego did only finish until
elementary for her educational attainment and that her ignorance may not be held against her.

WAIVER OF RIGHTS

Aujero v. PhilComSat

JANUARY 18, 2012 G.R. Nos. 193484 REYES, J

Petitioner is entitled to his early retirement benefit amounting to 1 and a half of his monthly
salary (Php 274,805) for every year of service (34 years) with Philcomsat. He only received
Php9,439,327.91 which should have been Php14,015,055.00. Almost three years after he is
complaining that the lacking amount is being withheld by Philcomsat which should not be
allowed because the Trust account with UCPB is the one responsible for it. UCPB noted that
there was a release of the full amount to Philcomsat amounting to Php9,439,327.91 and
Php4,575,727.09. Decision for the Petitioner. The NLRC reversed the decision as it is said that
the Petitioner may not have just decided without thinking of its Release and Quitclaim in favor
of Philcomsat. It was shown that he is not an ordinary employee that can be intimidated in such
a way that he would accept a lower amount of retirement benefit.

7
 WAIVER OF RIGHTS

Dona Adela v. Tidcorp

FEBRUARY 11, 2015 G.R. No. 201931 VILLARAMA,JR., J

The petitioner filed a Petition for Voluntary Insolvency before the RTC. The latter declared that
the petition is sufficient declaring the petitioner insolvent. The assigned receiver, Atty.
Gonzales, made the necessary reports to engage appraisers and to ask them to submit their
necessary claims. She filed a Motion for Parties to Enter Into Compromise Agreement
incorporating such terms. TIDCORP and BPI filed a Joint Motion to Approve Agreement which
was approved. In their joint motion included waiver of confidentiality of bank deposits even not
a party and signatory to the agreement. On the basis of RA No. 1405, where it allows that
confidentiality be waived, and allowed disclosure of records of deposits, there are requisites to
it: (a) upon written permission of the depositor, (b) in cases of impeachment, (c) upon order of
a competent court in the case of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials or, (d) when
the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation, and (e) in cases of
violation of the Anti-Money Laundering Act, the Anti-Money Laundering Council may inquire
into a bank account upon order of any competent court. In the case at Bar, the petitioner is not
bound to waive its confidentiality being not a part of the signatory of the agreement.

WAIVER OF RIGHTS

Otamias v. Republic

JUNE 8, 2016 G.R. No. 189516 LEONEN, J

The Deed of Assignment should be considered as the law between the parties. The provisions
should be respected in the absence of allegations that Col. Otamias was coerced as he executed
it. As a general rule, a contract is the law between parties and are free to stipulate terms that are
not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order and public policy. Hence, as Col.
Otamias executed the Deed of Assignment, he also waived his right to claim his retirement
benefits as exempt from execution.

8
 REPEAL OF LAWS

Thornton v. Thornton

August 16, 2004 G.R. No. 154598 CORONA, J.

Richard Thornton filed an application for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus on behalf
of his daughter after his wife took their child to her custody. The petition was filed with
Family Court in Makati but was dismissed. He later on filed again an application for a Writ of
Habeas Corpus with the Appellate Court to which was also denied because according to RA
No. 8369, the Family Courts Act of 1997, only the Family Courts have exclusive original
jurisdiction over petitions for habeas corpus which repealed RA No 7902 and BP 129. The
latter states that the CA has jurisdiction to issue a writ of habeas corpus and was also
mentioned in RA No. 7902. There was implied repeal of both BP and RA because nothing in
RA No. 8396 revoked the jurisdiction of the CA.

STARE DECISIS

Pesca v. Pesca

APRIL 17, 2001 G.R. No. 136921 VITUG, J

Lorna Pesca married Zosimo Pesca. They have children and later on, Lorna Pesca claims that
the “true color” of Zosimo Pesca came out. He is a habitual drinker, always with his friends and
violent. Eventually, Lorna Pesca stayed with his sister but came back with Zosimo as she
forgave him. The same thing happened again as she was battered and submitted herself to the
hospital. After such, she ended up moving to her sister’s and later on rented an apartment on
their own. Summons regarding Lorna’s complaint and her prayer to have her marriage annuled
invoking psychological incapacity were completely ignored by Zosimo until the Court decided
to declare their marriage null and void ab initio on the basis of psychological incapacity to which
Zosimo appealed to. Petitioner plead to the Court that it should base its decision using the Santos
and Molina cases where psychological incapacity should be a ground for nullity of marriage.
Court denies the petition of Lorna Pesca due to the fact that she failed to prove a case of
psychological incapacity against Zosimo. The doctrine of stare decisis expresses that judicial
decisions may form part of the legal system of the Philippines. “Legis interpretado legis
vim obtinet” that such may have the force of law.

9
 STARE DECISIS

De Castro v. JBC

APRIL 20, 2010 G.R. No. 191002 BERSAMIN, J

This case involves the controversial appointment of the fromer CJ Corona where the SC
actually reversed a decision made previously (In Re: Valenzuela and Vallarta). However, the
issue in this case is the appointment during the election ban, nothing related to Valenzuela’s
decision of appointment of the lower court judges.

STARE DECISIS

Republic v. Rehman Enterprises

FEBRUARY 19, 2014 G.R. No. 199310 REYES, J

Remman Enterprises filed an application with the RTC for judicial confirmation of the title to
which Laguna Lake Development Authority and Republic of the Philippines filed its
Opposition. The respondent was not able to prove that the subject properties form a part of
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain. They were able to present two
certifications issued by Calamno that those lots form part of alienable and disposable lands of
the public domain. The Court found those certifications insufficient. On the basis of RP v.
TAN Properties, Inc., in addition to certifications presented, there is also a requirement to
prove that DENR had approved the land classification and released the land as alienable and
disposable with original copies and custodian of records. Application for Registration was
denied.

10
 STARE DECISIS

UCPB v. Uy

JANUARY 10, 2018 G.R. No. 204039 MARTIRES, J

Spouses Uy purchsed a property from PPGI and Ganzon and were joint developers of Kiener
Hills Mactan. They entered in a Contract to Sell and it amounted to Php1, 151,718.75 payable
with 100,000 downpayment and installment of 40 months at Php26,297.97. PPGI and UCPB
entered into a MoA and sale of receivables and assignment of rights and interest. When PPGI
failed to build Kiener Hills, HLURB held PPGI and UCPB solidarily liable. UCPB appealed
before the CA and found that UCPB should not be held liable but still granting refund. The
appellate court cited a case with similar facts and issues (UCPB v O’Halloran) that removes
liability of UCPB in this case. However, it does not apply on the basis of the doctrine of stare
decisis because that case was decided by the CA and not the SC. Hence, does not form part of
the judicial system. The Court affirms that UCPB should pay Php157,757.82 as they have
received that amount from Sps. Uy with 6% interest per annum.

DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

People v. Ritter

MARCH 5, 1991 G.R. No. 88582 GUITERREZ,JR., J

This rape case against Ritter involving Baluyot and Ramirez. They were brought to MGM
hotel in Olongapo and were paid after sexual acts. Sadly, a foreign object was inserted inside
Baluyot causing her death later on. As the case went on, the evidentiary requirements were not
satisfied by witnesses of Rosario Baluyot. Despite the fact that the grandmother’s testimony is
admissible, it might be flawed as dates and other important information might not be accurate.
The accusation of rape does not prove anything as Rosario submitted herself to sexual acts and
was paid Php300.00 the next morning. Life circumstances led her to that kind of life. Ritter is
deemed innocent until otherwise proven. There are circumstances that prevent assumption of
the guilt of the appellant, hence the acquittal. It is the duty of the court to uphold the justice.
The Court finds that Ritter had committed acts contrary to morals and abused Filipino children
in exchange for money, thus awarding Rosario’s family Php30,000 and still acquitting Ritter
of the crime of rape.

11
 DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

People v. Tulagan

MARCH 12, 2019 G.R. No. 227363 PERALTA, J

Tulagan allegedly raped AAA, a 9-year-old minor in San Carlos City, to which he pleaded not
guilty upon the arraignment. BBB, the aunt testified that she saw AAA as a man suspiciously
came close to her and suddenly left. BBB asked her what happened but did not respond but
asked her to get inside and checked her genitalia and found it swollen. Then AAA admitted
what Tulagan had done to her and expressed that she wanted Tulagan to be put in jail. A genital
examination was made and found that AAA has healed lacerations. RTC found that prosecution
successfully discharged of the burden of proof in two offenses of rape against AAA. The Trial
court found against Tulagan on the credence of the victim’s testimony. CA affirmed with
modification upon appeal of Tulagan’s conviction for sexual assault and statutor rape. Again,
Tulagan appealed that the CA erroneously decided for AAA despite failure to prove his guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. Both RTC and CA found the testimony credible for sexual assault
and second elements were present for statutory rape.

DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

Alonzo v. Padua

MAY 28, 1987 150 SCRA 379 CRUZ, J

5 Heirs of Padua equally received shares of a parcel of land from their deceased parents.
Celestino and Eustaquia both sold their shares to the same vendee, the Petitioner herein. One of
the five co-heirs sought to redeem said sold area but failed because he was an American citizen,
then another of the 5 co-heirs Tecla Padua filed her own complaint invoking the same right of
redemption. Art. 1088 stipulates that there should have been notice to the co-heirs that their
shares were to be sold, and Art. 1623 says the right to redemption shall be exercised only 30
days from notice. The right of redemption is invoked by Tecla 13 years after and the claim that
they had no idea is not valid as it could be safely assumed that the other siblings were notified
of the sale.

12
 DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

Barcellano v. Bañas

SEPTEMBER 14, 2011 G.R. No. 165287 PEREZ, J

Bañas is an heir to a simple lot in Albay. Adjoining a property of Medina in the same Title with
an area of 1,887. The shares of Medina was offered to be sold to the heirs of Bartolome Bañas
which they agreed to buy at Php60,000.00. The property was instead sold to Barcellano due to
the failure of the heirs of Bañas to tender the payment. The latter went to complain at the
Barangay for redemption. The Court decided for Barcellano. The CA reversed the ruling of the
RTC and found that they have the right to redeem the property. Barcellano then appeals, but
CA still finds that there should have been a 30-day notice to the heirs Bañas and is given 30
days to pay the Php60,000.00. It is also found that when the language of the law is clear, the
intent of the law should be brought about and applied as interpreted.

DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

Magat v. Tantrade

AUGUST 23, 2017 G.R. No. 205483 LEONEN, J

Tantrade filed a complaint for Collection of a Sum of Money with Damages praying that Magat
pays sum plus interest, attorney’s fees, etc. Juliana denied and claimed that it was the contractor,
Borja who purchased these. However, MTC found Juliana liable. Borja also is bound to pay
because of Owner-Contractor agreement ordering to reimburse Juliana. In the course of the case,
Juliana passed away and her heirs took over. Heirs requested an extension to file for appeal due
to financial problems due to long hospitalization of original petitioner but still able to pay for
the fees. CA denied the petition. However, appealed that the latter erroneously did not grant
their petition to extend their appeal considering that they followed the requirement to appeal
within 15 days. They filed the petition two days before the 15-days lapsed. There was no abuse
on the process of the court since they did not exhaust the 15 days period.

13
 DUTY TO RENDER JUDGEMENT

Piedad v. Bobilles

NOVEMBER 27, 2017 G.R. No. 208614 LEONEN, J

Heirs of Piedad filed a case for annulment of an absoluted deed of sale against Candelaria and
Mariano Bobilles on the ground of forgery to which the Court ruled in favor of the Petitioners.
Bobilles appealed to the trial Court but deemed it final and executory with a writ of demolition
against Bobilles. A motion for reconsideration by the latter was denied by Judge Gaviola. A
Petition of Probate of the Last Will and Testament of Piedad was filed by Candelaria which was
granted to be heard by Judge Gaviola but was raffled to Villarin. Candelaria also filed for TRO
against the Sheriff holding the writ of demolition. The TRO and preliminary injunction petition
was raffled to Judge Estrera, to which he issued as well. The motions were filed before Judge
Villarin but never resolved them. Hence the administrative case against Judges Estrera and
Villarin and are both found guilty of gross ignorance of the law. It was found by the Court how
deliberate the delay of the execution of the final judgments since. It is the duty of the court to
not delay a case, impede the execution of a judgment or misuse the court processes according
to the Code of Professional Responsibility.

PRESUMPTION AND APPLICABILITY OF CUSTOM

Martinez v. Van Buskirk

DECEMBER 27, 1910 18 PHIL 79 MORELAND, J

In the accident caused by the horses that ran over the carromata occupied by Martinez that
caused injury to her and her child does not exactly make the driver liable for what happened.
The existence of carromatas and horses attached to it does not exactly prove destructive or
injurious effects to society. It has already been a custom everyone is used to where horses are
okay to be left on the sidewalk for delivery of merchants. The Court finds that the respondent
is not liable and the initial decision was reversed.

14
 LEGAL PERIODS

Internal Revenue v. Primetown

August 28, 2007 G.R. No. 162155 Corona, J.

A petition by Primetown applied for refund or credit of income tax as its business died in the
latter part of the year. The respondent is entitled to Php26,318,398.32 however according to and
was completely complied with the requirements, but no response from BIR. Then a petition for
review was filed with the CTA on April 14, 2000. It was dismissed on the ground that it was
filed beyond the 2-year prescriptive period. However, Art. 13 of the Civil Code states that a
year should be counted as 365 days and months respectively how many days they are. There
was no distinguished definition between a regular year and a leap year. Hence, the Court found
that in the manual computation of the days in a year, the petition of the respondent was filed
within the reglementary period.

LEGAL PERIODS

Comr. v. Aichi Forging

OCTOBER 6, 2010 G.R. No. 184823 DEL CASTILLO, J

Aichi filed a claim for VAT refund for the period of 2002-2004 with CIR. On the same day, it
filed a review with the CTA for the refund of the same input VAT. The CIR contends that the
claims were filed BEYOND 2-year prescriptive period and a prior filing of an administrative
claim is a condition precedent before a judicial claim can be filed. In the case at Bar, the two-
year period to file a claim for tax refund/credit for the period July 1, 2002 to Sept. 30, 2002
expired on Sept. 30, 2004. Hence, filed at the right time.

15
 APPLICABILITY OF PENAL LAWS

Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem

DECEMBER 10, 2014 G.R. No. 193707 PERALTA, J

The respondent being a citizen of Holland or Netherlands is subject to the laws of his country
and not the Philippine law. The law in question is the obligation to support his child and what
consequences are constituting of failure to do so. If a conflict arises on which law applies, and
if a party wants to prove the application of a foreign law to a case, the burden of proving it is
on the party proving the foreign law. If not proven, application of our local laws will be
assumed. Hence, the information against Van Wilsem does not apply to an alien because there
was failure to prove the national law of the Netherlands. Petition was granted.

BINDING EFFECT

Tenchavez v. Escano

NOVEMBER 29, 1965 15 SCRA 355 REYES,J.B.L., J

In the case at bar, Vicenta argues that when she got married, she was under the undue influence
of Tenchavez. Where thus the marriage remains valid until annulled by a competent Court. The
divorce decree of Vicenta may not be recognized in the Philippine courts but entitles Tenchavez
to a decree of legal separation. As stated, a foreign divorce between Filipino citizens sought and
decreed after the effectivity of NCC is not entitled with recognition in the Philippines.

16
 BINDING EFFECT

Board of Commissioners v. de la Rosa

MAY 31, 1991 197 SCRA 853 BIDIN, J

According to the Philippine law, following the lex loci celebrationis, is that a marriage is
formally valid where it is celebrated, is valid everywhere. The doubt that arises to the validity
of a marriage and how the validity is extended follows Art. 220 of the NCC. Hence, he who
believes there is doubt as to the validity of marriage under our law bears the burden of proof
to present the foreign law.

BINDING EFFECT

Yao Kee v. Gonzales

NOVEMBER 24, 1988 167 SCRA 736 CORTES, J

In the case at bar, the petitioners were not able to present a competent evidence relating to a
custom or law of China on marriage. The failure to prove the foreign law or custom means
failure to prove the validity of the marriage of Yao Kee and Sy Kiat in the Philippines. It is
also well-established in the Philippines that our courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign
laws, because they must be alleged and proved as any other fact. In the absences of proof of
marriage in Chinese law, the law in the Philippines apply. It was also admitted by Yao Kee
that there was no solemnizing officer during their marriage.

17
 NCC 16

Aznar v. Garcia

JANUARY 31, 1963 7 SCRA 95 LABRADOR, J

Christensen, an American living in Calfornia, came to the Philippines until his death. He
instituted his daughter Maria Lucy as his only heir, and Helen Garcia, a legacy of Php 3600 in
his will as someone he is not related to. She claims that there is deprivation of legitime as a
natural child and that the California law shall prevail, if not the Philippine law allowing her
share to be increased. However, Maria Lucy claims that the national law of the deceased must
apply not allowing compulsory heirs and a testator of his property. Art. 16 of the NCC states
the territory of which a real property and a personal property’s law must prevail. The conflict
of laws rule in California, stating that the domicile of the deceased must be followed which is
the Philippines, hence, the law of the Philippines must prevail.

NCC 16

Amos v. Bellis

JUNE 6, 1967 20 SCRA 358 BENGZON,J.P., J

Bellis, a citizen of Texas USA, executed a will in the Philippines. He later on died, but his will
was admitted to probate in CFI Manila. Maria Cristina and Miriam Bellis both filed their
oppositions to the partition on the ground that they were deprived of their legitime as illegitimate
children. RTC denied such opposition and approved the partition. On the basis of NCC Art 16,
the national law of Bellis which is Texas did not really provide for legitime. The decision of the
probate court was correct in applying the Texas law because the renvoi doctrine is pertinent to
where the decedent is a national of at the time of his death.

18
 NCC 16

Tayag v. Benguet Consolidated

NOVEMBER 29, 1968 G.R. L-23145 FERNANDO, J

The possession of two stock certificates of Perkins is left with County Trust Company of New
York who refuses to give it to the probate court of the Philippines where the latter requested
from Benguet Consolidated to issue new certificates as they claim these stock certificates are
lost. However, Benguet Consolidated refused to as they are not lost. It is deemed that in this
case, holding the decision of Wells Fargo Bank and Union v. CIR, the situs of the share of stocks
being in the Philippines, must follow the Philippine laws.

NCC 17 CONFLICT OF LAWS

Raytheon v. Rouzie

FEBRUARY 26, 2008 G.R. No. 162894 TINGA, J

The assertion that the contract between respondent and BMSI with the choice of law clause,
that the contract is supposed to be governed by the laws of the State of Connecticut. Foreign
elements in the dispute namely: (1) the parties and witnesses are American citizens and
corporations; (2) the evidence to be presented is not in the Philippines making our courts not
reasonable as a forum. According to Hasegawa v. Kitamura, there are three phases to follow
when it comes to conflicts of laws: jurisdiction, choice of law and recognition of judgments.

19
 NCC 18 SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE CIVIL CODE

Tamano v. Ortiz

June 29, 1998 G.R. No. 126603 BELLOSILLO, J

Tamano is married with Zorayda in civil rites. Their marriage remained valid and subsisting
until his death on May 18, 1994. Before his death, Tamano also married Estrelita Tamano in
civil rites as well. The first wife, along with her son, filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity
of Marriage of Mamintal Abdul Jabar and Estrelita because the first marriage was never
divorced between Tamano and Zorayda as well as Estrellita and Llave. Estrelita said that only
a party to the marriage may file an action for the annulment and that the first marriage between
Tamano and Zorayda was under Sharia Courts. She filed a Motion to dismiss which was
consequently denied by the lower Court. Estrelita never mentioned that they were married under
Sharia Court, hence Civil Code shall apply.

NCC 18

Llave v. Republic

FEBRUARY 19, 2014 G.R. No. 199310 REYES, J

Estrelita did not file her reply before the RTC made a decision that her marriage with Tamano
is void ab initio as it was found that the marriage of Zorayda and late Tamano were solemnized
both under Muslim rites and civil rites. The law in force governing marriages between a Muslim
and non-Muslim is the Civil Code of 1950 stating that only one marriage may exist at any given
time. RA No. 394 also existed on recognition of divorce but was not availed of in this case. It
was also with finality that Zorayda has the personality to file such petition as her marriage with
Tamano was valid because she was an injured spouse. All Philippine laws are made to protect
the marital union of a couple in a way that rights are preserved most especially protection against
bigamy. CA decision is upheld.

20
 NCC 18

Zamoranos v. People

JUNE 1, 2011 G.R. No. 193902 REYES, J

Zamoranos married De Guzman under Islamic rites, hence governed by PD No. 1083. This was
later on divorced. Zamoranos then married Pacasum. They have 3 children, but they later on
had to battle for custody to which Zamoranos won. Pacasum later on filed numerous cases
against Zamoranos such as petition for annulment, bigamy and dismissal and disbarment. The
matter of Bigamy is an offense that the accused is contracting a second marriage while the first
one is still valid. It was found that RTC Iligan does not have a jurisdiction to try Zamoranos for
bigamy and that the divorce of Zamoranos and De Guzman was confirmed by an Ustadz and
Judge Jainul of the Shari’a Circuit Court that it was a valid divorce, entitled to remarry.

NCC 18

Villagracia v. Sharia

APRIL 23, 2014 G.R. No. 188832 LEONEN, J

In the consideration that Vivencio is not a Muslim, the respondent had no jurisdiction over
Roldan’s action for recovery of possession of real property. It is found void despite the
application of Civil Code of the Philippines. However, the proceeding in the Shari’a Court is
not invalidated just because the provisions of the Civil Code was used. Only when customary
contracts are involved then is the Muslim law applicable.

21
 HUMAN RELATIONS

Wassmer v. Velez

DECEMBER 26, 1964 12 SCRA 648 BENGZON,J.P., J

Wassmer and Velez were set to get married on Sept. 4, 1954. However, 2 days before said date,
Velez sent a letter that their marriage must be postponed, that his mother opposes such marriage
and that he promises to return. Velez never returned and Wassmer filed for damages. Court
finds that a breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong, however, Article 21 states
that loss or injury caused to another in a willful manner that is contrary to morals, good customs
or public policy shall compensate for damages.

HUMAN RELATIONS

Tanjanco v. CA

DECEMBER 17, 1966 18 SCRA 994 REYES,J.B.L., J

Santos and Tanjanco were together with one child conceived out of wedlock. According to
Santos, she suffered mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock and
social humiliation just because Tanjanco refuses to marry her. There was no promise to marry
in this case. It was stated that there was mutual passion, and no seduction was done, and she
could have left knowing that Tanjanco does not intend to marry.

22
 HUMAN RELATIONS

Baksh v. CA

FEBRUARY 19, 1993 G.R. No. 97336 DAVIDE,JR., J

Marilou and Gashem were together and the latter made a promise to marry. They lived together
in the Lozano apartments. Later on, it was found that Gashem was already married to someone
else and that he was maltreating Marilou. Petition was filed by Marilou and praying for damages
amounting to Php45,000, actual expenses and attorney’s fees. He denied the promise to marry,
securing consent from Marilou’s parents and the allegation of maltreatment. RTC decided for
Marilou and was affirmed by the CA to which Gashem appealed. The Court states that Art. 21
is applicable where a promise to marry result to intercourse – fraud and deceit behind willful
injury to her honor and reputation. The Court also found that there was intent to fraudulently
make Marilou believe that he loved her.

HUMAN RELATIONS

Abanag v. Mabute

APRIL 4, 2011 AM P-11-2922 BRION, J

Abanag and Mabute were together, they lived together and a promise to marry by Mabute was
in place. When Abanag got pregnant, Mabute brought her to a manghihilot to abort the baby,
but she did not agree causing Mabute to be cold and distant. Abanag was abandoned. Mabute
denies all the allegations. The Court found that it is not enough to hold Mabute liable for
immoral conduct because there was voluntary intimacy between a man and a woman who are
not married, where both are not under any impediment as well as no deceit was present. Hence,
should not cost him his dismissal from service.

23
 HUMAN RELATIONS

Navarro-Banaria vs. Banaria, et al.

JULY 28, 2020 G.R. No. 217806 REYES, J. JR.,J.

Pacasio, a 90-year-old brother/father/grandfather, is to celebrate his 90th birthday. There were

many preparations made by his children and grandchildren. A promise by Adelaida to bring him
to the venue on the day they have agreed but on the day of his celebration, Pacasio was nowhere
to be found. When Pacasio and Adelaida were found, the latter said that she had no knowledge
and that it was nice to have missed such a celebration because Pacasio was already defacating
and urinating without being able to control it. Adelaida was ordered by the Court to pay for
damages. She appealed stating that she did not violate Art. 19. As stated, her right as the legal
wife and guardian of Pacasio, there must also be a limit to such. An abuse of rights was stated
to have elements such as the following: (1) legal right or duty; (2) exercised in bad faith; and
(3) sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.

24