PFL First Exam

PRELIMINARY TITLE
CHAPTER 1: Effect and Application of Laws

Law is a rule of conduct, just (binding to all Filipinos), obligatory, promulgated by legitimate
authority (Congress), and of common observance and benefit. -Sanchez Roman

Classification of law according to the manner of its promulgation:

Natural Law (promulgated
impliedly in our conscience and
body)
Positive Law (promulgated
expressly or directly)
Natural Moral Law- this applies to our high faculties such as to do good
and void evil.
Law of Nature- this applies to both our higher and lower faculties such as
the law of gravity.
Divine Positive Law- ex. the 10 commandments
Divine-Human Positive Law- ex. commandments of the Catholic Church

Human Positive Law- ex. Congressional Statutes or Executive Orders

Human Positive Law- is a reasonable rule of action, expressly or directly promulgated by

competent human authority for the common good, and usually, but not necessarily, imposing a
sanction in case of disobedience.

Classification of human positive law:

According to whether a right is given or merely the procedure for enforcement is laid down
1. Substantive Law- establishes rights and duties
2. Remedial/Procedural Law- prescribes the manner of enforcing legal rights and claims

According to scope or content of law

1. Private law-regulates the relations of the members of a community with one another
2. Public law-governs the relations of the individual with the State

According to force or effect

1. Mandatory/Prohibitive Law- have to be complied with because they are expressive of public
policy; disobedience is punished
2. Permissive/Suppletory law- may be deviated from, if the individual so desires

Article 1: This act shall be known as the Civil Code of the Philippines.

*Civil Law:
a. Branch of the law that generally treats of the personal and family relations of an
individual, his property and successional rights, and the effects of his obligations and
contracts.
b. Mass of precepts that determine and regulate the relations of assistance, authority and
obedience among members of a family, and those which exist among members of a society
for the protection of private interests
c. Branch of law that governs the relation of the members of the community with one
another.

*Civil Code- a collection of laws which regulate the private relations of the members of civil
society, determining their respective rights and obligations, with reference to persons, things, and
civil acts.
Civil Law vs. Civil Code
Civil Law
1. Mass of precepts that determine or
regulate the relations that exist between
members of a society for the protection
of private interests
2. Most of our civil laws are found in the
Civil Code.
3. Civil law is wider in concept than the
Civil Code.
Civil Code
1. Compilation of existing civil laws, scientifically
arranged into books, titles, chapters, and sub-
heads and promulgated by legislative authority
2. The Civil Code is not the only repository of our civil
laws. There are also other repositories like the
Family Code and the Child and Youth Welfare Code.
3. The Civil Code is part of civil law, but not all civil
laws are part of the Civil Code.

*Political Law
While civil law governs the relations of members of the community with one another, political law
deals with the relations of the people and the government.

Article 2: Laws shall take effect after 15 days following the completion of their publication in the
Official Gazette, or in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines, unless it is otherwise
provided. This code shall take effect one year after such publication.

This Article applies when there is no specific provision in Congress as to when a statute becomes
effective. If so, it becomes effective after 15 days following the completion of its publication in the
Official Gazette or newspaper of general circulation. One is independent from the other. It is
sufficient that a statute has been published in any of the two. There is no requirement that the
statute should be published in both.

-Under new amendment (EO 200) in 1987- publication may now be made through a newspaper of
general circulation.
-Reason: The Official Gazette is not an adequate medium in the publication of laws, executive
orders, circulars, and notices in this country of more than 7,100 islands. Very few people read the
Official Gazette. Many do not even know there is such a publication. It is not sold on newsstands.
Its circulation is very limited and often delayed.

General circulation:
a. made within the court’s jurisdiction
b. published at regular intervals
c. with bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers
d. not devoted to the interest or published for the entertainment of a particular class, profession,
trade, calling, race, or religious denomination

When do laws become effective?

1. If the law provided a specific date for its effectivity (ex. one year after publication), it
becomes effective only upon the lapse of said period following its complete publication, and
not before.
2. A law which provides for its immediate effectivity upon approval becomes effective only
after its complete publication, and not immediately after its signing by the President.
3. If there is no date specified for its effectivity, the law becomes effective after 15 days
following the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or newspaper of general
circulation. (16th day following the law’s publication)
*If the law is voluminous and is published in series, the reckoning shall begin from the release of
the last of the series.

-The phrase “unless otherwise provided” in Article 2 refers to the date of effectivity of laws, and
not to the requirement of publication. Publication is indispensable. No law can become immediately
effective upon approval without full publication.
-Reason: This protects the due process doctrine in the Constitution. Omission would offend due
process in so far as it would deny public of the knowledge of laws that are supposed to govern
them.

-A law that is not published is not effective. It does not take effect. One cannot be bound by the
said law because of its non-compliance to the requirement of publication. However, it does not
mean that the law is void, because being void refers to the very substance of the law, such as
when it is unconstitutional. A law only becomes void when it has been decreed by the Court to be
unconstitutional.

What laws must be published?

-All statutes shall be published, including those of local application and private laws (even central
bank circulars, implementing rules and regulations and executive orders that are
punitive/correctional in character).
-In Tanada vs. Tuvera, even a law granting citizenship to a foreigner, or renaming a street needs to
be published.

Exceptions:
1. Internal instructions of administrative agencies
2. Municipal ordinances (governed by the Local Government Code)
3. Decisions of the Supreme Court, because these are not laws. They merely interpret the law or
the Constitution. A lawyer has the obligation to be abreast of the latest decisions of the Court.

Villafuerte vs. Cordial: Resolution 13-2013 issued by the Sangguinang Panlalawigan of Caramoan,
Camarines Sur is not a law that must be published. The publication of such resolution is not
required. The resolution only binds the residents in the said local government unit. It is neither
penal in nature as it does not provide for any sanction or punishment, nor is it a tax revenue-
seeking measure. These two kinds of municipal ordinances are the only ones that require
publication as mandated by the Local Government Code.

-Unless the publication of the law is full or complete, there is no publication to be considered at all
since its purpose is to inform the public of the full contents of the law.

Article 3: Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith.

Reason: The rule is intended to prevent evasion of the law. Justice would easily be frustrated if
violators can successfully plead ignorance of the law and escape the legal consequence of their
acts.
Application: This Article applies to all laws of local application, more so to mandatory laws (such
as provisions in the Civil Code) and prohibitive laws (such as provisions in the RPC), and not to
permissive or suppletory laws.

Why not? Because the law that would bind the parties to a contract would be the stipulations of the
parties in the contract.

Exception: Minors who, due to their lack of intelligence, should be treated differently.

*Ignorance- want or absence of knowledge; the state of being unaware or uninformed of something.

Ignorance of want of knowledge of the laws of the land.

law
Ignorance of want of knowledge of facts relating to the subject matter on hand. It excuses or
 fact is a ground for relief.
-Ignorance of foreign law is ignorance of fact, not ignorance of law, because our courts do not take
judicial notice of them. They must be proved under Rule 100 of the Rules of Court.

*Processual presumption- a foreign law is a matter of fact that must be proven with evidence. In
the absence of such proof, it is presumed that the foreign law is the same as our laws. (The law of
a foreign country is the same as our law.)
-The party who claims the applicability of a foreign law has the burden of proof.

Article 4: Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.

General rule: Laws operate prospectively.

It looks forward. The Courts frown in giving laws retroactive application.

Exception: If an intention to give them retroactive effect is expressly declared from the language
used. If there is doubt, the doubt must be resolved against retroactivity.

*Retroactivity- when a law is made applicable to situations or acts already done before the
passage of the said law.
-It creates a new obligation, imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect to a
transaction already past.

Exceptions/ Laws that are given retroactive effect:

1. Remedial laws- because no vested rights will be prejudiced by giving a procedural law
retroactive effect.
2. Penal laws- 2 requisites (1) favorable to the accused (2) the accused must not be a habitual
delinquent
3. Emergency laws- designed to meet emergency situations. Emergency laws can be given
retroactive application to favor those who were victims of these situations prior to approval
of the laws that will benefit them.
4. Curative laws- designed to correct lapses or defects of a prior law, provided that they do not
impair vested rights nor affect final judgments (ex. Article 73 of the Family Code)
5. Tax laws- always given retroactive application as thy are to be interpreted strictly against
the taxpayer and in favor of the state.
6. Laws creating new rights, provided no vested right of same origin is affected (ex. The
Family Code erased the distinctions between different types of illegitimate children. We
now only have legitimate and illegitimate children. There is no more distinction as in the Old
Civil Code on acknowledged and unacknowledged children by legal fiction. Under the Family
Code, children given legitimate status will inherit more from their parents.)

Reasons:
1. To protect vested rights. One may lose his rights previously acquired, if a retroactive law is
subsequently passed and designed to deprive him of those rights.
2. Because a law creates a new obligation, imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in
respect to a transaction already past.

*Vested rights- some right or interest in the property which has become fixed and established and
is no longer open to doubt or controversy.

*Habitual delinquent- person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within a period of ten
years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of robo, hurto, estafa,
or falsificacion, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.

Prospective application of laws on judge-made laws

-In accordance with Article 8 providing that judicial decisions applying or interpreting laws or the
Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines, Article 4 shall apply to judicial
decisions, which, although in themselves are not laws, are nevertheless evidences of what the law
means.

Cases:

Carolina vs. Senga

-The Court said the Pension and Gratuity Management Center (PGMC) erred when it deprived
Carolino of his pension because of the enactment of PD 1638 (that the name of a retiree who loses
his Filipino citizenship shall be removed from the retired list and his retirement benefits terminated
upon such loss). Carolino has already retired under a law prior to the said presidential decree.
-Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided. PD 1638 does not contain
any provision regarding its retroactive application, nor the same may be implied from its language.
The rule is familiar that after an act is amended, the original act continues to be in force with
regard to all the rights that had accrued prior to its amendment. Pension is a proprietary right.
Pension cannot be deprived without due process of law. Therefore, laws on pensions cannot be
given retroactive effect. In this case, if PD 1638 will be given retroactive effect, it will impair
Carolino’s vested right to the benefits that are protected by the due process clause.

Carlos vs. Sandoval: EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION (Procedural law that is given prospective
application)
-Here, Juan de dios Carlos asserted that the marriage between his late brother and Felicidad
Sandoval was a nullity in view of the absence of the required marriage license. Does he have the
right to file petition for annulment of his brother against respondent Felicidad?
-No. Under A.M. 02-11-10-SC known as “Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages
and Annulment of Voidable Marriages”, a petition for the declaration of absolute nullity of void
marriages may be filed solely by a husband or wife. Thus, it may not be filed by any party outside
marriage. Exceptions are (1) nullity of marriage cases commenced before the effectivity of A.M. 02-
11-10-SC and (2) marriages celebrated during the effectivity of Civil Code.
-Since A.M. 02-11-10-SC is prospective in application, the rule does not apply to cases already
commenced before March 15, 2003. The marriage in controversy was celebrated on May 14, 1962.
It was solemnized prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, so the applicable law is the Civil Code
which was in effect at the time of its celebration. Since the Civil Code is silent as to who may bring
an action to declare the marriage void, the absence of such provision in the code cannot be
construed as a license for any person to institute a nullity of a marriage case. Only a party who can
demonstrate “proper interest” can file the same. A petition to declare the nullity of marriage, like
any other actions, must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party-in-interest and
must be based on a cause of action.
*Family Code became effective on August 3, 1988.

Exceptions to the prospective operation of laws

Atienza vs. Brillantes
-In the absence of any showing that certain rights will be prejudiced, then procedural laws are
given retroactive application.
-Article 40 of the Family Code that requires a prior judicial declaration of nullity of a previous
marriage before a party may remarry, is applicable to remarriages entered into after the effectivity
of the Family Code on August 3, 1988 regardless of the date of the first marriage. It is also given
“retroactive effect insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights
in accordance with the Civil Code or other laws.” This is particularly true with Article 40, as it is
a rule of procedure, and the respondent has not shown any vested right that was impaired by the
application of Article 40 to his case.

Desmoparan vs. People

-With the passage of RA 10951, the penalties of some crimes which are dependent on the value of
the subject matter of the crimes have been greatly affected, and one of these is estafa. The law
being more favorable to the petitioner, the same is given a retroactive effect.
-Both under the RPC and RA 10951, the imposable penalty for estafa is based on the amount of
damage. In this case, the amount defrauded is P40,000, representing the total amount of money
actually released and received by Desmoparan from Cebu CFI Community Cooperative. As such, the
prescribed penalty under RA 10591 is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods..
Meanwhile, under the old provisions of the RPC, the imposable penalty is prision correccional, in
its maximum period, to prision mayor, in its minimum period. Thus, the penalty for estafa under the
new law should be given retroactive effect, being more favorable to the petitioner.
-Penal laws are given retroactive effect if they meet the 2 requisites: (1) the law must be favorable
to the accused (2) and the accused must not be a habitual delinquent. Here, the penalties in the
RPC are lighter than what were provided for in RA 10951.

Pulido vs. People:

-The Court said that the ruling now in this case can be given retroactive application, it being
favorable to the accused who was not able to secure a decree of nullity of marriage before being
charged with the crime of bigamy. It can also be invoked as a prejudicial question.
-Penal statutes in general are construed in favor of the accused and strictly against the state.
-It is submitted that this decision should be given retroactive effect if favorable to the accused,
since such decisions form part of the law and so as not to infringe upon the constitutional right of
the accused to equal protection of the law.

Article 5: Act executed against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void,
except when the law itself authorizes their validity.

*Mandatory laws- uses the word shall, must be complied with for they are expressive of public
policy, and the violation of such laws renders the act void.

*Directory or permissive laws- uses the word may, observance of such law is not necessary to the
validity of an act.

Exceptions:
1. By expressly validating the contract. Perfect example: The RPC punishes bigamy. But if it is
committed under the circumstances in Art 41 of the Family Code (before the celebration of
the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and
the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead), the
subsequent bigamous marriage is considered valid)
2. By making the invalidity to depend on the will of the injured party. Ex: When consent in
marriage is vitiated by violence or intimidation, the marriage is voidable and can be
annulled. But the discretion to annul belongs solely to the victim or the side of the victim.
3. By punishing it criminally but validating the act. Ex: RPC punishes widows for premature
marriages (before the prohibited period of 301 days). Nevertheless, the marriage remains
valid, but without prejudice to her criminal liability.
4. By invalidating the act but recognizing the legal effects as flowing from the invalid act. Ex:
The marriage of a party suffering from psychological incapacity is void. But children born
before the final declaration of nullity of marriage are considered legitimate.
*The second exception refers to annullable contracts (Perfect example is Article 36: Children born
out of a void marriage prior to declaration of nullity are legitimate under, Article 53 of the Family
Code)

Void vs. Voidable:

Void- void contracts are invalid no matter what the parties do.
Voidable- voidable contracts are valid until one of the parties decides to cancel or revoke them for
legal reasons.

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 a law.

*Rights- a legally enforceable claim of one person against another, that the other shall do a given
act, or shall not do a given act. A duty is an obligation which must be performed, while a right may
not be exercised.

*Waiver- the intentional or voluntary relinquishment of a known right.

Requisites for a waiver:

1. The person must be legally capacitated to make the waiver. One must be at least 18 years old.
Otherwise, the waiver is voidable because of a defect in legal capacity of the party waiving.
2. The waiver must be clear. Example: Guy vs. CA
-The waiver was not clear, and it never referred to the waiver of the children with respect to their
share in the estate of their late father.
3. The person waiving must have actually the right which he is renouncing. (Ex.Future support. The
right of the person entitled to receive support is yet to become vested. It cannot be the subject of a
waiver.)
4. The waiver must not be contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs.
5. The waiver must not be prejudicial to a third person recognized by law.
-When formalities are required, the formalities must be complied with.
-A waiver is akin to a donation. If a creditor waives the amount to collect from his debtor, it is
insufficient that the creditor tells the debtor orally. That would be void. The law requires for a
waiver that is in writing. The acceptance of the other party must also be in writing, if the amount in
question is more than P5,000. More so if what is waived is an unmovable or real property—the
waiver and acceptance must be in a public instrument.

Famanila vs. CA:

-There is a valid waiver in this case. The grounds invoked by the petitioner are not those mentioned
in the Civil Code on voidable contracts (incapacity and vitiation of consent). If one is merely
physically disabled or in financial distress, this is not ground for voidable contracts. The waiver is
also valid, it being witnessed by the spouse and another relative of the party signing the waiver.

Otamias vs. Republic:

-There is a valid waiver that refers to the pension benefit to be given to his spouse as well as to the
unemancipated children entitled to support. There is no need for a court order. It was error in part
of the AFP to require the wife to obtain a court order.

Coverage of a waiver:
All rights and privileges to which a person is legally entitled, provided that such rights and
privileges rest in the individual, are intended for his sole benefit, do not infringe on the rights of
others, is not forbidden by law, and does not contravene public policy.

Exceptions (rights that can’t be waived):

-Natural rights (right to life)
-Alleged rights which really do not exist (future inheritance)
-The renunciation of which would infringe upon public policy (ex. the right to be heard in court
cannot be renounced in advance) (ex. if there is a stipulation requiring a scholar to waive his right
to transfer to another school unless he refunds the equivalent of his scholarship in cash, is null and
void being contrary to public policy and good morals)
-The waiver is prejudicial to a third person recognized by law (the heir repudiates the inheritance to
the prejudice of his own creditors)

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.

When the courts declared a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void
and the latter shall govern.

Administrative or executive acts, orders, and regulations shall be valid only when they are not
contrary to the laws or the Constitution.

There is no immediate presumption of an implied repeal. To deem a statute as impliedly repealing

another, we must first:
1. Harmonize the provisions of the old law and the new law.
2. If absolutely inconsistent, then there arises a presumption of an implied repeal.

-When a law is inconsistent with a constitution, the constitution prevails.

-When an Administrative Order is inconsistent with a law where it is derived, the latter prevails.

How laws lose their effectivity:

-When they are repealed
-When they self-cancel (due to the lapse of their period of effectivity) (ex. emergency powers
granted to the President)
-When they are declared null (due to unconstitutionality)

Kinds of repeal:
-Express- when the repealing law provides for a provision or a repealing clause explicitly
-Implied- when there is no repealing clause in the repealing law, but the prior law and the
subsequent law could not reconcile being substantially inconsistent with one another. They are not
looked upon with favor. If both statutes can stand together, there is no repeal.

Rules:
1. If the general law was enacted prior to the special law, the latter is considered the exception to
the general law.
2. If the general law was enacted after the special law, the special law remains, unless there is an
express declaration to the contrary, or there is unreconcilable conflict, or unless the subsequent
general law covers the whole subject and is clearly intended to replace the special law.

Revival of repealed laws:

-If the first law is repealed by IMPLICATION by the second law, and the second law is itself
repealed by the third law, the first law is revived unless otherwise provided in the third law.
-If the first law is repealed EXPRESSLY by the second law, and the second law is repealed by the
third law, the first law is not revived, unless expressly so provided.
-General rule: In case of express repeal, there is no revival.

Article 8: Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form part of
the legal system of the Philippines.

Judicial decisions are not laws. This is to prevent encroachment of powers in the Legislative.

Judicial decisions, though not laws, are evidence of what the law means. This is why they form
part of the legal system of the country. They have the force and effect of laws.
Jurisprudence:
The doctrines formulated by the decisions of the Supreme Court (not by lower courts which are
only persuasive in nature and have no mandatory effect) constitute what we call jurisprudence.

Publication of judicial decisions is not necessary (dispensable) before it will have its force and
effect (since judicial decisions are not laws).

*Stare decisis- a doctrine that refers to adherence to precedents for reasons of stability in law.
Once a case has been decided one way, then another case, involving exactly the same point at
issue, should be decided in the same manner.

It is unethical for lawyers to cite as authorities’ decisions which have already been overruled and
no longer controlling (Code of Professional Ethics).

Reason: Stability in jurisprudence is desirable.

Exception: If a rule which has been followed as a precedent is found contrary to law, it must be
abandoned. the law is higher than a precedent.

Miranda vs. Imperial:

-CA decisions may also attain the status of jurisprudence (exception).

-Court decisions are form part of the legal system more so if they are en banc. En banc court
decisions will be deemed to have abrogated prior decisions of the Supreme Court. (ex. Andal vs.
Andal, Pulido vs. People)
-Court decisions may be abrogated by mere rulings that come after it, as opposed to laws that
should be repealed.

Article 9: No judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity, or
insufficiency of the laws.

Even if a law is obscure, vague, or insufficient in its guidance, the judge is nevertheless enjoined to
give a decision.

Guideposts of judges:
1. Customs which are not contrary to law, public order, and policy.
2. General principles of law affecting the case
3. Decisions of foreign courts
4. Opinions of known authors and professors
5. Applicable rules of statutory construction
6. Principles laid down in similar instances

This law only applies to civil cases and not criminal cases, because the latter follows the rule that
“there is no crime when there is no law condemning the act”. If somebody is accused of a
nonexistent crime, the judge must dismiss the case.

Silverio vs. Republic

-The Court said there is really no law on the matter regarding the change of gender from male to
female by virtue of sex reassignment. It is up to the Congress to enact a law on it. More so, what is
involved in changing one’s gender are substantive rights.

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.
This only applies when there is doubt on the meaning of the law. If there is no doubt, the court
must apply it whether it be wise or not, whether unjust or not.

Dura lex sed lex- The law may be hard but it is still the law.

In case of doubt, the judge should presume that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to
prevail. The interpretation that will achieve the ends desired by the Congress must be adopted.

Article 11: Customs which are contrary to law, public order, or public policy shall not be
countenanced.

The Court is unable to supplant governing law with customs, albeit how widely observed.

Anaban vs. Anaban.

-The habits and customs of a people, the dogmas and doctrines of a religion cannot be superior to
or have precedence of laws relating to public policy, because as state above laws relating to
marriage and its incidents are normal in nature and as such they affect public policy.
-Assuming that the Court assumes the constitutionality of a custom, then said custom has to
comply with the requisites that the Court has laid down. Otherwise, there is failure to prove the
alleged fact as invoked by the parties—in this case, divorce as issued by Ibaloi leaders.

Take note: Divorce is only allowed among Muslims.

Article 12: A custom must be proved as a fact, according to the rules of evidence.

Customs vs. Usage

Customs- a rule of conduct formed by repetition of acts.
Usage- a repetition of acts. The custom arises from such repetition.

Reason: Customs must be proved as a fact because there is no judicial notice of custom.

How:
It must be proved by evidence…
-By testimony of witnesses
-Documents recognizing its existence and its observance for a long period of time.
-If there is already a decision rendered by the same Court recognizing the custom, especially if the
decision is final and executory.

A law is superior to a custom because the Constitution is the basic and paramount law to which all
other laws must conform and to which all persons including the highest officials of the land must
defer.

Kinds:
-General customs- prevailing throughout the country
-Local customs- prevailing only in some particular district or locality
-Particular customs- affect only the inhabitants of some particular district

Requisites:
1. A custom must be proved as a fact
2. The custom must not be contrary to law, public order, and public policy
3. There must be a number of repeated acts
4. The repeated acts must be practiced by the great mass of a social group
5. The community accepts it as a proper way of acting
 6. There must be a juridical intention to make a rule of social conduct

Article 13: When the laws speak of years, months, days or nights, it shall be understood that years
are 365 days each, month of 30 days, days of 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.

30 days- September, April, June, November

31 days- January, March, May, July, August, October, December
28 or 29 days- February

Ordinary contract
General rule: The act is due even if the last day be a Sunday or a legal holiday.
Reason: Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the contracting parties.

*Force of law- body of rules that have been laid down for determining rights and legal obligations,
which are recognized by the Court.

Exceptions:
When the time refers to a period prescribed or allowed by:
1. The rules of Court
2. By an order of the Court
3. Any other applicable statute…
It is understood that the last day should really be the next day, provided said day is neither a
Sunday nor a legal holiday.

Article 14: Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live
or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to
treaty stipulation.

General rule: Our civil laws do not apply to aliens, who are governed by their national law. But the
Philippines with respect to criminal laws, adhere to the principle of territoriality.

*Principle of territoriality- any offense committed within our territory offends the State. The State
has the power to prosecute and punish the offender, he be a national or alien.

Reason: Aliens owe some sort of allegiance even if it be temporary.

Exceptions:
1. Under principles of public international law: Immunities granted to diplomatic officials,
foreign ambassadors, or visiting heads of states, provided they do not travel incognito*.
(Consul is not , because he is not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an
ambassador)
2. Under treaty stipulations: the Phil-US Military Bases Agreement which exempts certain
members of the armed forces of the US from the jurisdiction of our courts.

*incognito- concealing your true identity

-This Article is only applicable to penal laws but not to personal rights and duties.
Wilsem vs. Wilsem:
-Wilsem was mandated to provide support to his child because he was unable to prove that under
his national law, he has no obligation to give support to his child just because his marriage had
already been dissolved by divorce. Here, because of Wilsem’s failure to prove his national law, the
Court applied the doctrine of processual presumption.

Article 15: Laws relating to family rights and other duties, or to the status, condition, and legal
capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.

The Philippines adheres to the nationality theory.

-No matter where one is a resident of, so long as he is Filipino, he will always be bound by
Philippine law.
-For example, even if divorce is valid in another country, the divorce will not be given due
recognition in the Philippines because of our adherence to the nationality theory.
-Another example is the distribution of one’s estate. It will always be governed by Article 16. One’s
legal capacity respecting the distribution of his estate will be based on Article 16, Paragraph 2.

Reason: People may move to other countries in search of work or improvement, and as the laws of
other countries are varied and diverse, it has been determined by general assent and common
agreement among civilized nations that the laws relating to family rights, obligations, status,
condition, and legal capacity of persons accompany him even when he moves to a foreign country,
because such laws are more suited to his personal affairs.

*Nationality or Citizenship Theory- the national law of the person is applied in matters involving
personal relations.
US and Great Britain follow the domiciliary theory.

-If one seeks to prove the existence of a foreign law (for example, on divorce), he should do the
following:
1. Prove that the foreign law allows divorce as a means of dissolving marriages. Otherwise, the
Court will apply the doctrine of processual presumption.
2. Present a document that is duly certified by the Consular Official of the Republic of the
Philippines of the country where that document is obtained.

Orion Savings Bank vs. Suzuki

-While there was presentation of certification that the Property Regime of South Korea is Conjugal
Partnership of Gains, there was a defect in the certification.
- Orion unfortunately failed to prove the South Korean law on the conjugal ownership of property.
He merely attached a “Certification from the Embassy of the Republic of Korea" to prove the
existence of the South Korean Law. This certification does not qualify as sufficient proof of the
conjugal nature of the property for there is no showing that it was properly authenticated by the
seal of his office, as required under Section 24 of Rule 132.

Van Dorn vs. Romillo

-The ruling of the Court in Van Dorn is by analogy of the Application of Article 15
-If divorce is valid in the country of the foreign national, it will be considered valid in the
Philippines.

Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera

-The ruling here is the same as in Van Dorn.

Quita vs. CA
-If the party who filed for divorce in a foreign country is the foreign spouse, the ruling in Van Dorn
will apply.
-Otherwise, the divorce is void, and in this case, she is still married to her Filipino spouse.

Elmar Perez vs. CA and Lavadia vs. Heirs of Juan Luces Luna
-These cases are on divorce decrees that are null and void, the parties being Filipinos in relation to
Article 15.
-PEREZ: Petitioner does does not possess any legal interest and it was not proper for her to
intervene in the petition seeking to declare her husband’s previous marriage as null and void.
-LAVADIA: In the absence of proof that the paramour contributed to the acquisition of the said
properties, mere allegation of co-ownership, without sufficient and competent evidence, would
warrant no relief in her favor. In such a situation, whoever alleges co-ownership carried the burden
of proof to confirm such fact. To establish co-ownership, therefore, it became imperative for the
petitioner to offer proof of her actual contributions in the acquisition of property.
-In Philippine Law, there must be a stipulation of judicial separation of property prior to marriage.
Without this, the agreement is null and void.

Noveras vs. Noveras

-There was error on the part of the lower court to immediately give judicial recognition on the
decree of divorce, without the petitioner having proved the validity of divorce in accordance with
California law.
-There was also error on the dissolution of properties.
-Supreme court also made mention of Article 16. Here, the husband contested the right of Leticia
over the property situated in the Philippines, on the ground that she should no longer has any share
in the properties since all their properties in California were awarded to Leticia. But the Court said
that it has no jurisdiction over the properties in Calirfornia, because of Article 16 Paragraph 1. It
could not decide on the properties located in California in favor of Leticia.

Keppel vs. Keppel and Ambrose vs. Ambrose

-Distinguish the two.
-KEPPEL: The Court dismissed the petition of Angelita seeking to have her marriage with George
declared void.
-ABROSE: The Court gave due course to the petition filed by Paul under the same ground.
-Difference Number 1: The places where the marriages were celebrated was different.
-Difference number 2: What should Angelita have done assuming still that she is a German citizen?
Angelita should prove that under German law, psychological incapacity is also one of the grounds
to declare the marriage void. This was not alleged by Angelita.
-Note that Philippine law does not allow marriages by proxy. But if the parties are Filipinos who
choose to marry in another country and there, marriages by proxy are allowed, then that same
marriage will be valid here.

Terms referred to in Article 15:

1. Family rights and duties- rights and duties provided in the Family Code and special laws
such as marriage, legal separation, property relations, support, adoption, filiation, etc.
2. Status- circumstances affecting the legal situation of a person in view of his age, nation,
and family membership
3. Condition- mode or state of being
4. Legal capacity- the legal power to enter into binding obligations or to enjoy the privileges of
a legal status

Examples of legal capacity:

-Testamentary capacity- capacity to make a legally effective will
-Contractual capacity- capacity to enter into a legally binding contract
-Marital capacity- capacity to enter into a valid marriage
*Lex Loci Celebrationis- the capacity to enter into an ordinary contract is governed by the national
law of the person, and not by the law of the place where the contract was entered into.
-Note: there are certain marriages, although valid in a foreign country, but void in our country, and
if celebrated in accordance with law of foreign country, it shall still be void here. Because those
marriages are exceptions to the general rule.
Exceptions:
1. Parties to the marriage are below 18
2. Polygamous and bigamous
3. Mistake as to the identity of one of the contracting parties
4. Subsequent marriages void under art 53
5. Art 36, 37, and 38 (relatives by affinity up to the 4th civil degree- first cousin)

Article 16: Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it
is situated.

Philippines follows this:

*Principle of Lex Situs/ Lex Rei Sitae- real or immovable property is exclusively subject to the laws
of the country or state where it is located. All matters concerning the title and disposition of real
property are determined by what is known as the lex situs/ lex rei sitae.

Exception is 2nd paragraph:

1. Intestate (no will) -order of succession and amount of successional rights. If without a will,
there are intestate or legal heirs who will inherit. First are primary and compulsory heirs.
Next are concurring compulsory heirs.
2. If decedent dies with a will- heirs’ names aside from primary, secondary and concurring, are
instituted heirs and voluntary heirs. They will inherit if they are named in the will. (ex.
legatee like private nurse of decedent) or devicee like real or immovable property. Legatee
and devicee do not inherit if the deceased did not leave a will.
-By way of acception, regardless of where the property is situated, these properties shall be
regulated byt the national law of the person who sucession is under consideration. Not the
national law of the parties who will inherit nor the law where the properties are situated.
Thus, a Filipino cannot stipulate in his will that his property in the Philippines will be distributed
under Philippine law, but his property in the US will be distributed under US law. That will be void.
This is also in relation to Article 15: He will always be bound by Philippine law.

Suzuki vs. OSG

-This case is on the recognition of adoption decree obtained by petitioner’s Japanese father from
the Japanese court.
-There was error on the part of the OSG.
-Our courts must not delve on the validity of the adoption. It should only prove that said adoption
decree was in accordance with the national law of the adoptive parent. Not the validity.

Reason: Because of the very nature of the immovable property (immobile).

Personal property can now be separated from the owner thereof (as per the New Civil Code). A
personal property found in the Philippines may be subjected to tax in the Philippines even if the
owner is not a citizen of or domiciled in the country.

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 property and regardless of the country wherein said property may
be found.

Exceptions of Lex Situs:

Incidents of succession whether intestate (laws determine how the property will be allocated) or
testamentary (property is distributed in the will).
These are governed by the national law of the deceased. All issues arising from these exceptions
shall be settled or determined in accordance with the nationality of the decedent.
1. Order of succession- preference of succession.
2. Amount of successional rights- amount which heirs should receive from the inheritance.
3. Intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will- refers to the legality of the will’s provisions.
4. Capacity to succeed- capacity of the heirs to inherit in accordance with the national law of
the deceased.

Reason: The oneness and universality of the inheritance cannot be divided or broken up merely
because of the different countries where properties of the estate are situated.

Extrinsic validity of contracts- refers to the forms and solemnities prescribed by law.
Intrinsic validity of contracts- refers to the legality of the will’s provisions.

*Renvoi doctrine- (literally: referring back) arises where our law refers a case to another country
for solution, but the law of that country refers back to our country for determination.

Christensen VS. Christensen Garcia:

Edward Christensen- Californian national who lived in the Philippines until his death and had an
acknowledged natural daughter (Maria Lucy). When he died, he left a will with Maria Lucy as his
only heir, and left a minimal sum of money for another natural daughter (Helen).

Helen claims that under Article 16, the law of the nationality of his father should govern the will. In
this case, Californian law. But California law states that the law of Edward’s domicile must govern.
Under Philippine law, Helen would inherit more.

Since the California law itself refers back the case to the Philippines, the Philippine Court has no
alternative but to accept the referring back. The Philippine court must apply its own las as directed
by California law.

-Pursuant to Article 16, Paragraph 2, his estate should be distributed in accordance with his
national law. It was referred to California for him being a citizen of California.

*Transmission theory- when the conflicts rule of the forum makes a reference to a foreign law, but
the foreign law is found to contain a conflict rule that refers it to a third country, the law of the
third country shall apply.
-Transmit to the third country.

Heirs of intestate estate and order of succession:

1. Primary compulsory heirs such as legitimate children
2. Secondary compulsory heirs such as parents
3. Concurring secondary heirs such as surviving spouse and illegitimate children

Amount:
-Legitimate- 1
-Illegitimate- 1/2 of the legitimate
-Spouse- 1/2 of the legitimate
-Parents- can only inherit in the absence of the primary compulsory heirs

Voluntary heirs:
1. Legatees- gift of personal property
2. Devisees- receive personal property

Gaspi vs. Pacis-Trinidad

-In probate, what is subject to the court’s scrutiny would be whether one complied to the requisites
laid down by law as to the contract’s authenticity and validity. For example, a will, whether
holographic or notarized, should be executed in accordance to the law of the country where it was
executed, or if one wants it to be executed under Philippine law while he is abroad, then in the
consular or diplomatic office of the Philippines in the country where he is in.
-Here, there was a will executed in accordance with Philippine law.
-There was no basis for lower court to dismiss the petition, because what was involved here is only
the intrinsic validity of the will, and the court should not delve with the intrinsic validity of the will.
-Here the Supreme Court made the distinction between extrinsic (Article 17) and intrinsic (Article
16, Paragraph 2) validity.
-For the execution of the will, it is governed by the law of the country where it was executed.
-For the distribution of estate, it is governed by the national law of the person whose estate is in
question.

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.

-The form here would refer to the legal or technical manner in the preparation of the document, or
its external appearance.
-By merely looking at it, you can see if it complied with the requirement/s set forth by law.
-Example: For a donation of real property to be valid under Philippine law, the law requires that the
donation and acceptance be in a public instrument. This refers to the technical appearance. You do
not need to read what is in the deed of donation. What you just need to see is if there is a donor
and donee, and if the certificates of donation and acceptance are notarized. This will be sufficient.

-However, intrinsic validity is NOT part of Art 17, Paragraph 1.

-If a Filipino resides abroad and executes a deed of donation for his property situated in the
Philippines, the form may be executed in accordance with the law of the country where he is
residing. So, suppose that law of the country does not require that the deed of sale be in a public
instrument, then he need not do it. But in the event that the contract will be questioned as to its
extrinsic validity, he has to prove it is in accordance to the law of the country where it was
executed. Another option is, he can go to the diplomatic office of the PH in that place where he is
residing, so that the execution of his deed will be in conformity with Philippine law. If such is the
case, there is no need for him to prove its validity it because it was executed in accordance with
Philippine law.

As for INTRISINC VALIDITY

-it will be governed by law of the country where the property is situated
-That is under Article 16, Paragraph 1.
-That is an entirely different matter from the form that is observed.

This is also like in a will.

For a holographic will under our law:
1. Handrwtieen by testator
2. Dated by testator
3. Signed by testator
But suppose in another country no need for observance of these requirements.

Exception is article 17, paragraph 2, when the Filipino will go to the Philippine diplomatic office.
Because it has to comply with Philippine law.

If consular official will prepare the deed of donation outside of his office, like in a restaurant, it will
depend on the law of the country. If the consul was authorized by the law of the country to execute
the document, then it will be valid.

Form hre refers only to the legal or technical manner to be observed in the preparation.
It does not refer to the intrinsiv validity of the provisions of the contract.

If contract involves a property, donation of the properry shall be governed by the law of the country
where it is situated.

*Lex Loci Celebrationis- in so far as the extrinsic validity (forms and solemnities) is concerned…
Under this principle, matters bearing upon the execution, interpretation, and validity of a contract
are determined by the law of the country where the contract is made.

3 requisites of a holographic will:

1. It needs to be handwritten by the testator
2. All pages need to be signed by the testator
3. All pages need to be dated by the testator
-If you speak of formalities, you look into all these external requisites. Are all the pages
handwritten, signed, and dated? You will not read into the intrinsic validity of the provisions.
-The rule here is merely to determine whether indeed there has been compliance with requisites
laid down by law on the proper preparation of a holographic will, because if the decedent dies, the
will is forwarded to the Court for the purpose of probate. Probate does not deal with the intrinsic
validity of the will. It will merely determine its extrinsic validity.

The same holds true with contracts. In donations of real property, if the deed of donation is
executed in a foreign country, there is no need for it to be in a public instrument as in the
Philippines. The exception here is when the deed was executed before the consular or diplomatic
office of the Philippines, because the consular or diplomatic office is considered to be an extension
of Philippine territory, pursuant to the Exterritoriality Principle.

Since the law is silent on what law should govern the intrinsic validity of contracts, the following
rules by Manresa and Valverde can be followed in determining the intrinsic validity of contracts:
1. Stipulation- the law stipulated by the parties shall be applied.
2. National Law- in the absence of any stipulation, and if the parties are of the same
nationalities, their national law shall be applied
3. Law of the place of perfection- if the parties are not of the same nationalities, the law of the
place of perfection of the obligation shall govern its essence and nature
4. Law of domicile- if the above are not specified and cannot be deduced from the nature and
circumstances of the obligation, then the law of the domicile of the passive subject shall
govern it.

Extrinsic validity of contracts- refers to the forms and solemnities prescribed by law.
(Examples: witnesses and testator, language should be understood by everybody, each page must
be signed by every person involved, all of those involved must be looking at the person signing the
will)
-Examining extrinsic validity is known as probate.
-During probate proceedings, the court determines whether the will is compliant with formal
requirements of the law, if the testator executed and signed it, with sound mind, on his own free
will.

Intrinsic validity of contracts- refers to the legality of the will’s provisions.

*Forms- external appearance or legal or technical manner to be observed in the preparation of

contract, will or other public instrument.

*Solemnities- those that must be observed for the purpose of validity, enforceability, and
convenience.

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 by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.

-This is like Article 15 on prohibited persons.

-Prohibitive laws shall be governed by Philippine law.

This is more relevant to Article 15.

Tenchavez vs. Escano
-The wife left the husband because her parents were against him. She went to the US and
contracted another marriage after obtaining divorce, but she did not relinquish her citizenship. Her
husband sued her for bigamy.
-But the suit will not prosper, because bigamy is a criminal offense. It will be governed by the law
of the country where it was committed.
-But the Court said that since there is an oath of fidelity between the parties, the wife should be
liable for damages. But she cannot be sued for adultery or bigamy, because of Article 17, Paragraph
3 in relation to Article 15. Divorce is prohibited under our law, but not in the US.

Exception:
This recognizes the principle of exterritoriality (reference to the extension of the territory of a
country in another country which extension is recognized under international law.

*Principle of exterritoriality- acts executed before Philippine diplomatic and consular officials in
their offices abroad are considered done in the Philippines, because said offices although found
abroad are considered extensions of the Philippine territory.

Ex. If a notarial will is executed by a Filipino citizen in China, the laws of China must be followed.
But if the will is executed before the consular officials of Philippines, the laws of Philippines must
be followed.

Article 18: In matters which are governed by the Code of Commerce and special laws, their
deficiency shall be supplied by the provisions of this Code.

The article is of deficiencies and not inconsistencies.

If the Code of Commerce or special laws are deficient or insufficient, the Civil Code shall be applied
to supply the deficiency.
General rule: In case of conflict between the Civil Code and a special law, the latter prevails.

Exception: when the Civil Code expressly declares itself superior to special laws
1. In the law on common carriers, the Code of Commerce supplies the deficiency.
2. In insolvency cases, the insolvency law supplies the deficiency.

CHAPTER 2: Human Relations

Article 19: Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act
with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PROVISION OF THE CIVIL CODE.

*Human relations- refers to the rules needed to govern the interrelationships of human beings in a
society for the purpose of maintaining social order.

Golden rule of the Civil Code- act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and
good faith.

*Principle of abuse of rights- if a person acts with abuse, his right to act ceases, and his act
becomes illicit, giving rise to liability. The exercise of a right ends when the right disappears. And
the right disappears when it is abused, especially to the prejudice of others.

Good faith- honest intention to refrain from taking undue advantage of another
Bad faith- presupposes a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious performance of
a wrong.

*Not all violations of one’s right is an abuse of rights.

For the principle of abuse of rights to arise, (when a person is deemed to have violated Article 19),
the following 3 elements must be proven. This can be found in Far East Bank vs. Pacilan.
1. There is an existence of a legal right or duty
2. Which is exercised in bad faith
3. For the sole purpose of injuring or prejudicing another.

Far East Bank vs. Pacilan

-The Court here gives the best definition of bad faith: “Bad faith does not simply connote bad
judgment or simple negligence, dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and conscious doing of
a wrong, a breach of known duty due to some motives or interest or ill-will that partakes of the
nature of fraud. Malice connotes ill-will or spite and speaks not in response to duty. It implies an
intention to do ulterior and unjustifiable harm. Malice is bad faith or bad motive.”
-Far East bank did not act in bad faith. It exercised its right when it decided to close Pacilan’s
account. There was no bad faith in the closure, and neither was it done for the sole purpose of
injuring or prejudicing Pacilan.
-The 2nd and 3rd elements for violating Article 19 are not present. Therefore, there is no basis for
Pacilan to seek damages under either Articles 20 or 21.
-It was Pacilan who abused his rights as depositor of Far East Bank as he has overwithdrawn from
his account many times, and he would sign in different signatures from his signature that was on
file at the bank.
-All these taken together, it cannot be said that the Far East bank abused its rights as debtor or
Pacilan.
-Note: The relationship between bank and client is a debtor-creditor relationship.

Uypitching vs. Quiamco

-There was bad faith on the part of Uypitching.
-As a lawyer, he is well aware of the remedies available to him instead of going to the
establishment of Quiamco with members of the police, and ordering the police to take Quiamco’s
motorcycle, claiming that it was taken by him. He also performed other acts of harassment, like
muttering that Quiamco is a thief, and criminally suing Quiamco for violating the anti-fencing law.
-He should have filed to claim his money in accordance to civil law on damages.
-He should have filed for a writ of replevin (a customary and equitable civil remedy that a person
can utilize when personal property, also called a movable (as opposed to real property or
immovables), belonging to the applicant is unlawfully taken from him or her).
-Uypitching acted in bad faith. He did not exercise his right as an unpaid seller. He also did not
secure a search warrant even if there were members of the police who actively participated in the
seizure of Quiamco’s motorcycle.
-The Supreme Court tripled the damages awarded to Quiamco because Uypitching was lawyer.

Cebu Country Club vs. Elizagaque

-Cebu Country Club exercised its right in bad faith when it denied Elizagaque’s membership and
never informed him of the reason for their denial of the same.
-Elizagaque had written Cebu Countr Club thrice.
-He was not informed that there should be a unanimous vote so that he would be accepted.
-Elizagaque’s letters remained unanswered and he was not even made aware of the club’s new
rules. In defense of the failure to print a new application form with the amendments added, CCCI
said that it was not able to print the updated form because of economic reasons. Being an
exclusive golf club, it is unbelievable that the club would not be able to pay for printing costs of the
updated application forms. The Court found that CCCI violated the rules governing human relations
and is thus liable for damages pursuant to Article 19 in relation to Article 21 of the Civil Code.

Calatagan Golf Club vs. Celemente

-Calatagan insisted on sending demand letters when it already knew that the PO box address of
Clemente is already closed. It could have accessed his personal file with the club, called him up, or
sent the demand letter to his residential address.
- Calatagan’s bad faith and failure to observe its own by-Laws had resulted not merely in the loss of
Clemente’s privilege to play golf at its golf course and avail of its amenities, but also in significant
pecuniary damage to him.

Ardiente vs. Javier

-There was bad faith on the part not only of Ardiente, but also CDOWD when it cut off the water
services of the seller’s former house that was now occupied by Pastorfide.
-CDOWD informed the former owner and told him of his delinquent account.
-The former owner immediately told the employee of CDOWD to cut off the water services of his
previous house, without informing first the current occupant of the house.
-This is considered to be in bad faith.
-Basis of the award for damages for Pastorfide would be Article 21.

Saladaga vs. Astorga

-The lawyer is responsible for the execution of a deed, when he could have just executed a deed of
mortgage, not of sale. This is because he knew all along that the property was already mortgaged
to a rural bank.
-His defense was that it was also a subsequent mortgage.
-Supreme Court did not buy the defense raised by lawyer, because he is knowledgeable of the
proper form to be prepared.
-If it were indeed mortgage, it should be a deed of mortgage and not a deed of sale.

Coca Cola Bottlers vs. Bernardo

-Coca Cola violated Article 19 and was deemed liable for damages not only under either Article 20
or 21, but BOTH. It also violated Article 28 on unfair competition.
-Coca Cola convinced another store to sell its products for lower prices.
-This could not be considered competition, but is deemed as intended to drive the Bernardo
spouses out from their business. It is a wanton wrong.

Lomarda vs. Fudalan

-Lomarda was found to be violating Article 19 in relation to Article 20.
-The act of Lomarda and Raso in demanding an amount more than what Fudalan is supposed to pay
for the connection of electricity in his farmhouse is too much.
-Fudalan was subjected to libelous acts.
-Lomarda brought with him certain policemen when he confronted Fudalan. And there was intention
on Lomarda and Raso to make money out of their refusal to issue the necessary certificate for
Fudalan to avail of the services of the BUHECO.
-This was further aggravated by the fact that Raso told Fudalan “sabot sabota lang ni nato”.
-By those words, they agree to comply with the request of Fudalan, but there must be an additional
payment of money not within the range that is supposed to be paid to the cooperative.

Banaria vs. Banaria

-The second wife was held liable for damages.
-She knew of the celebration a year before, and promised to bring her husband who is already 90
years old to attend.
-However, she did not. She said that she does not want her husband to be subject to humiliation, as
he was already very frail and old, and unable to control his body functions (urinating and defecating
at will).
-Another reason she gave was that her husband does not want to attend said party.
-Third, she said that she was not able to call those who were present in the venue because her
phone was destroyed by her husband.
-But these were not taken into consideration by the Court for the following reasons:
1. She was already aware of the event a year before
2. While she had the authority not to bring her husband to the venue, she could have informed the
guests instead of merely hiding. They were found to be in another house.

THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF BAD FAITH IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:

Sesbreno vs. CA
-The act of VECO was what was stipulated in the contract, that they could enter their client’s
house in reasonable hours and the same could not be considered as trespassing.
-Unlike in Uypitching, there was no need for the inspectors in this case to arm themselves with a
search warrant, because they merely acted as escort. They never participated in the inspection of
Sesbreno’s residence, unlike in the Uypitching case where the police actively participated.
-Here, the inspectors replaced the non-working meter and entered the house and took inventory of
household appliances. There was never any mention that the Constabulary participated in doing so.
-There was no need for a search warrant on the part of the inspectors, as the inspection was
conducted by a private business establishment.
-Another issue here is the absence of a search warrant, which the Court said that there is no
necessity of, because the search was conducted by a private business establishment. The
presence of a member of the Constabulary was just to escort. He did not actively participate in the
inspection that was conducted.

St. Martin Polyclinic vs. LWV Construction

-There was no basis for damages here because there is no contract between St. Martin and LWV.
-There was an absence of contractual relationship.
Cabasal vs. BPI Family Savings Bank
-There was no basis for Cabasal to sue BPI for damages.
-The refusal of the officer of BPI to allow Eloisa to assume the mortgage indebtedness of Nestor is
based on the rules and regulations of the bank. While Nestor claimed that there was a prior
incident to that, the officer said that that was an exception because the third person was also a
client of the bank. In the case at bar, Eloisa is not a client of the bank. That would be violative of
the bank’s rules and regulations.
-This resulted to the foreclosure of the real properties mortgaged by Nestor. But the Court said
there is no basis for claim for damages because:
1. The bank had properly informed him of the rule that they cannot allow a third person who is not a
client of the bank to assume mortgage indebtedness.
2. The was failure on the part of Nestor to pay his indebtedness with the bank that resulted to the
foreclosure of his real estate that was used as security for his loan.

Mercado vs. Ongpin

-There was no bad faith on the part of Ongpin when he filed a petition to declare void his marriage
to Mercado.
-Mercado said that she is seeking for damages because the purpose of Ongpin was to seek relief
from their prior disagreement as to separation of their properties. She said Ongpin did not agree to
this and subsequently filed the petition.
-The Court said that when Ongpin knew that the first divorce decree was null and void, he filed that
petition to declare his own marriage null and void.

*Award of damages is not based on Article 19. If the act committed by a person is contrary to law,
it will be based on either Articles 20 and 21.

*Common to Articles 20 and 21 is that the act committed by the party is violating Article 19, and
that the act was WILLFULLY done.

Article 20: Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damage to another,
shall indemnify the latter for the same.

Indemnification (compensation) for damages- covers situations when the law does not provide its
own sanctions, as well as all legal wrongs not constitutive of breach of contract. It covers:
1. torts based on malice
2. torts based on negligence
Before someone has the right to be indemnified, it is essential that some right of his be impaired.

Negligence- the failure to observe for the protection of the interests of another person that degree
of care, precaution, and vigilance which the circumstances greatly demand.

Article 21: Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to
morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.

Article 20 Article 21

Act is contrary to law. Act is contrary to morals, good customs,

or public policy.

Act is done either willfully or negligently. Act is done willfully.

Damages that can be prayed from the court:

1. Moral damages- ex. humiliation, sleepless nights, mental anguish, etc.
2. Exemplary- to serve as an example
 3. Nominal- vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded; not for the purpose of
indemnifying the petitioner for any loss suffered by him.
4. Temperate- refers to quantifiable damages when the amount of damage cannot be proven
5. Actual- actual expenses incurred. The party who suffered must be able to prove that he
suffered (presentation of official receipts)
6. Liquidated- damages agreed upon by the parties in case of breach.

Breach of promise to marry

-Generally an inactionable wrong
-There can be no recovery of moral damages for a breach of promise to marry.

Exceptions:
1. Except when there is criminal or moral seduction.*
-Requirements: (1) deception (2) enticement (3) superior power (4) abuse of confidence… on the
part of the seducer to which the one who was seduced yielded.
-If there is moral or criminal seduction, moral damages may be recovered under Article 21

3. Actual damages may be recoverable (ex. expenses for the wedding preparations)
3. When there has been a deliberate desire to inflict loss or injury, or when there has been an
evident abuse of a right
4. If it resulted in the birth of the child, the man is under obligation to support the child

Note: In cases of rape where the rapist is a married man, he cannot be compelled to recognize the
offspring, but he could be compelled to support the child.

Lomarda vs. Fudalan

-The Court pointed out that Article 21 refers to acts contra bonos mores and had the following
elements:
(1) An act which is legal (2) but which is contrary to morals, good customs, public order or public
policy (3) and done with intent to injure.

Article 22: Every person who through an act of performance by another, or any other means,
acquires or comes into possession of something at the expense of the latter without just or legal
ground, shall return the same to him.

*Principle of unjust enrichment- no one shall unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another.

2 elements:
1. One is enriched at the expense of another
2. There is obligation to return what he had received from the said person. Otherwise, there
would be unjust enrichment

Filinvest vs. Ngilay

-Even if the parties are both in pari delicto, the party who had rendered the service is still entitled
for the payments for the services rendered. Otherwise, the other party although also at fault, will
be enriched at the expense of the first party.
-There is an exception with respect to parties who are equally guilty, based on public policy.
-Ternate is entitled to the payment of what he had accomplished, but not for damages as they were
both at fault.

Bliss Development vs. Diaz

-Bliss Development was not an innocent party, because it was aware that there are 2 parties
claiming the right.
-All taken together would show that Bliss Development acted in bad faith.
-Thus, Bliss development would be unjustly enriched at the expense of Diaz.

Yon Mitori International Industries vs. Union Bank

-This refers to a check that was found to be not sufficiently funded, but was encashed by an
account holder of Union Bank.
-He refused to return said amount, claiming that it should be Angli Lumber who should be
responsible for it.
-There will be unjust enrichment if he will not to Union Bank the amount he paid to the person he
presented the check to for encashment.

Application:
1. If someone acquires or comes into possession of something
2. The acquisition is undue and at the expense of another, without any just or legal ground

Requisites for unjust enrichment to prosper:

1. The defendant has been enriched.
2. The plaintiff has suffered a loss.
3. The enrichment of the defendant is without just legal ground.
4. The plaintiff has no other action based on contract, quasi-contract, crime, or quasi-delict.

*Quasi-delict- acts that cause damage or harm to another person or to his goods

Examples:
-When A owes C some money, A paid to C through B without receipt. C collected from A again and
to avoid any argument, A paid C again. There is voluntariness but there is unjust enrichment.
-Overpricing, when a store charges for P50 more, you can ask for the return of the money.
(demanding exorbitant payment)
-When one paid for future transactions that did not materialize.

Article 23: Even when an act or event causing damage to another’s property was not due to the
fault or negligence of the defendant, the latter shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or
event, he was benefited.

This is based on equity. If the author is enriched at expense of the other, there is obligation to
indemnify the other.

Illustration 1: Without A’s knowledge, a flood drives his cattle to the cultivated highland of B. A’s
cattle are saved but B’s crop is destroyed. True, A was not at fault but he was benefited. It is right
and equitable that he should indemnify B.

Illustration 2: The house of A is one fire. C destroyed the house of B to save his property from
burning. C clearly benefitted from it. Therefore, C is liable for damages to B.

Article 24: In all contractual, property or other relations, when one of the parties is at a
disadvantage on account of his moral dependence, ignorance, indigence, mental weakness, tender
age, or other handicap, the courts must be vigilant for his protection.

Reason: Anchored on the doctrine of parens patriae.

*Parens patriae- the State has the sovereign power of guardianship over persons under disability.
The State is considered parens patriae of minors. It is the inherent power of the state to protect
the unemancipated.

Who are unemancipated?

Moral dependence- teacher-pupil, parent-child
Ignorance- want of knowledge
Indigence- poverty
Mental weakness- insane, morons, imbeciles, idiot, mentally challenged
Tender age- children
Other handicap- physical disabilities

*Vigilant for his protection- in case of doubt, the doubt must be in favor of the underdog.

*Non sui julis- means “not capacitated” ex. minority, mental incapacity

Article 25: Thoughtless extravagance in expenses for pleasure or display during a period of acute
public want or emergency may be stopped by order of the courts at the instance of any government
or private charitable institution.

This only applies when there is acute public want (the absence of basic commodities), and not
mere scarcity.

The only parties who can invoke Article 25 may be an employee of a government institution (ex.
DSWD) or an employee or official of a private charitable institution.

Reason: Thoughtless extravagance during emergencies may incite the passions of those who
cannot afford to spend.

Requisites for filing of actions to stop extravagance:

1. There is thoughtless extravagance of expenses.
2. The extravagance is for pleasure or display.
3. There is a period of acute public want or emergency.
4. The case is filed in court by a governmental institution or private charitable institution.

Article 26: Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy, and peace of mind of his
neighbors and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a
criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief:

(1) Prying into the privacy of another’s residence

(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station on life, place of
birth, physical defect, or other personal condition

These acts are not considered to be crimes by themselves, but the party subjected to any of these
may go to court and seek for payment of damages, prevention, and other relief: permanent
injunction, enjoining the other party from further committing the acts.

Castro vs. People

-There was error on the part of the lower court to find Castro criminally liable, because at most, he
could just be simply liable for damages under Article 26, Paragragh 3. The reason is that Mr. Castro
is an educator who is supposed to be a role model for the youth. He should act with justice, give
everyone his due, and act with justice and good faith, which he did not.

Remedies:
1. Action for damages
2. Action for prevention or any other relief
Scope:
1. Prying- includes any act of intrusion into, peeping or peering inquisitively into the residence
of another without the consent of the latter.
2. Meddling- includes the alienation of the affections of the husband or the wife.
3. Intriguing- includes gossiping and reliance on hearsay.
4. Vexing- includes criticism on one’s health or features without justifiable legal cause.

Article 27: Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or employee
refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for damages
and other relief against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that
may be taken.

Nonfeasance- omission of an act which a person ought to do.

(ex. A civil registrar sat on the application of a couple for marriage license. He refused or neglected
to issue the license applied for.)

Misfeasance- the improper doing of an act which a person might lawfully do.
(ex. The registrar issued the license applied for within 24 hours after the filing of the applications,
instead of 10 days, which is an improper issuance of the license.)

Malfeasance- the doing of an act which a person ought not to do at all.

(ex. The registrar issued license to applicants who are not of legal age.)

This article only applies to nonfeasance which means non-performance of some acts which a
person is obliged or has the responsibility to perform. Good faith is not a defense here.

For a public servant to be held liable under this article, the duty which he refused or failed to
perform, must be MINISTERIAL in character. Which means, the law absolutely requires him to
perform it.

Exception:
If the duty is discretionary, he is not liable for his refusal or neglect to perform it, unless he acted
in a notoriously arbitrary manner or he acted willfully, maliciously, or with gross neglect.

*Discretionary duty- Discretionary function or duty means a function or duty requiring a state
officer or employee to exercise his or her policy judgment in choosing among alternate courses of
action based upon a consideration of social, political, or economic factors.

Reason: To end the bribery system. (To eliminate corruption in the government service. The law
will serve as a deterrent to public officials and employees from delaying or refusing to perform
official duties on flimsy reasons or excuses. To facilitate action when there is scheming delay, an
ordinary citizen is constrained to give bribe to avoid inconvenience and damages.)

Requisites for filing of action:

1. A public servant or employee refuses or neglects to perform his official duty.
2. There is no valid reason for the refusal or neglect to perform official duty.
3. That injury or damage is suffered by the petitioner.

Campugan vs. Tolentino

-The registrar of deeds did not violate Article 27.
-There is no need for a court order, because pursuant to the property registration law, the latter is
sufficient on the part of the register of deed to give due course to what is stated in the request
referring to the cancellation of adverse claim.
Ledesma vs. CA and Delmo
-While Ledesma’s initial decision to deprive Delmo of the honors was discretionary on his part, the
decision had been overturned by the director of the Bureau of Public Schools. It therefore ceases to
be discretionary, and now becomes a ministerial duty. Despite the order, he still failed to comply.
Thus, he was found liable for damages.

Article 28: Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or industrial enterprises or in labor

through the use of force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any other unjust, oppressive or high-
handed method shall give rise to a right of action by the person who thereby suffers damage.

*Unfair competition- employing deception or any other means contrary to good faith by which any
person engaging in business committed through the use of either:
a. force
b. intimidation
c. deceit
d. machination
e. any unjust, oppressive, or high-handed method

The true test of unfair competition is whether certain goods have been intentionally clothed with
an appearance which is likely to deceive the ordinary purchases exercising ordinary care, and not
whether a certain limited class of purchaser could avoid mistake by the exercise of this special
knowledge.

Reason: The Code Commission justifies this inclusion stating that it is necessary in a system of
free enterprise. Democracy becomes a visible mockery if any person or group of persons by any
unjust or high-handed method may deprive others of a fair chance to engage in business or earn a
living.

Coca Cola Bottlers vs. Bernardo

Article 29: When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has
not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission
may be instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence. Upon motion of the
defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case the
complaint should be found to be malicious.

If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so
declare. In the absence of any declaration to that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the
decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that ground.

Remember: In cases of violation of any penal statute, the construction or interpretation thereof
should be liberally in favor of the accused and strictly against the state. Any doubt should be in
favor of the accused, in favor of his acquittal. He needs to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
-When there is active participation of the offended party during the trial, it is required of him to
present proof as to the damages he has suffered. If none, there is no application of Article 29.

Reason: To draw a clear line of demarcation between criminal liability and civil responsibility. The
two liabilities are separate and distinct from each other. One affects the social order and the other,
private rights. One is for the punishment or correction of the offender while the other is for
reparation of damages suffered by the aggrieved party. The thinking that the acquittal of the
accused in a criminal case also release him from civil liability has given rise to numberless
instances of miscarriage of justice.
A person criminally liable is also civilly liable. In criminal cases, what is required is guilt beyond
reasonable doubt of the accused. In civil cases, what is required is only preponderance of
evidence.

*Guilty beyond reasonable doubt

-There is moral certainty on the part of the judge that the accused is indeed the author of the
crime.
-It should not include any possibility of error and must be free from all biases.
-This does not mean absolute certainty.

*Preponderance of evidence
-The evidence as a whole adduced (identified) by one side is superior over that of the other.

Article 29 is based on Article 100 of the RPC, which provides that every person criminally liable for
a felony is also civilly liable.

Civil liabilities:
1. Restitution- to restore the thing (ex. in theft, the culprit is duty-bound to return the stolen
property)
2. Reparation of damage caused- ex. in case of inability to return the stolen property, the
culprit must pay the value of the stolen property
3. Indemnification (compensation) for consequential damages- the loss of the victim’s salary
or earning

Exceptions where no civil liability shall arise:

1. The fact from which the civil action may arise did not exist.
2. The accused did not commit the crime.
3. No crime existed (but the dismissal of a criminal case based on prescription* will not bar
the filing of a civil action based on the same act or omission specially if based on the
principle of unjust enrichment)

*Prescription of the crime

-Termination of the right or power to prosecute and to punish the offender, after the lapse of a
definite period from the commission of the offense, or if this is not known, from the day of its
discovery and the beginning of the judicial proceedings for investigation and punishment.

Criminal Action vs. Civil Action

Criminal Action Civil Action
As to Nature Affects social order Affects private rights
As to Purpose Punishment or Reparation of damages
correction of the suffered by the aggrieved
offender party
As to Degree of Proof beyond reasonable Preponderance of evidence
proof required doubt

Acquittal could be based on either of the following:

1. The guilt of the accused has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt- does not bar a
subsequent action for damages based on the same act or omission.
2. The accused is not the author of the crime- bars a subsequent action for damages based on
the same act or omission.
3. The crime complained of did not exist- bars a subsequent action for damages based on the
same act or omission.
What is contemplated in Article 29 is an acquittal where the guilt of the accused is based on
reasonable doubt.

*Independent Civil Action

-can be pursued independently of the criminal action and regardless of the outcome of the criminal
case

*Dependent Civil Action:

-must be suspender (whether it was filed ahead but overtaken by the criminal action, or filed after
the criminal action), and should await the outcome of the criminal case.
Reason: There is a possibility that it may be barred if there is acquittal that completely exonerates
the accused from the crime, including civil liability.

All civil actions are dependent except those falling under:

a. Article 31 (civil action not based on the act or omission complained of as a felony)
b. Article 32 (violation of one’s civil liberties, whether direct or indirect, committed by a public
employee or official, or any private individual)
c. Article 33 (fraud, defamation, pr physical injuries intentionally committed and used in its
generic signification)
d. Article 34 (refusal of any member of the municipal or city police force to render aid or
assistance in times of danger to life or property without just cause)
e. Article 2176 (quasi-delict: a negligent act or omission which results in harm or danger to an
individual)

General Rule:
A civil action (civil liability) is deemed impliedly instituted in a criminal action.

Exceptions: (When a separate civil action could be filed)

1. The right to institute separate civil action is reserved**
2. There is a waiver to institute civil action
3. Civil action is instituted prior to the criminal action- when the criminal action commences,
the pending civil action shall be suspended, whatever stage before final judgment it may be
found, until final judgment in the criminal action has been rendered.

**When should reservation be made?

At any time before the prosecution starts to present its evidence and under circumstances
affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation.

**Exception: There can be no reservation if it involves cases under BP 22 (anti-bouncing checks

law).

**What is the effect of reservation?

Whether it is filed ahead or after the filing of the criminal action, the civil action has to be
suspended until the termination of the criminal action because it is dependent on the ruling of the
criminal case.

Dependent civil actions for recovery of damages can either be:

1. Instituted with the criminal action
-The prosecution in the criminal case need to prove the damages o the offended party since
the civil aspect is included in the criminal case. This happens when the offended party
failed to make a reservation to pursue a separate civil action.

2. Separate civil action

-This could be prosecuted during the pendency of the criminal action subject only to the
 limitation that there shall be no double recovery of damages. This happens when the
offended party made a reservation to institute the civil action separately before the
prosecution starts to present its evidence. However, a subsequent civil action may be
barred by the accused if it is found to be malicious.

Article 30: When a separate civil action is brought to demand civil liability arising from a criminal
offense, and no criminal proceedings are instituted during the pendency of the civil case, a
preponderance of evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained of.

This article contemplates a situation where no criminal case has been filed during the pendency of
the civil case. However, the action will be suspended if in the meantime, the criminal case is filed.

-There is need to await for decision of the criminal case, because the result of the same is
determinative of whether the offended party is entitled to damages or not.

Article 31: When the civil action is based on an obligation not arising from the act or omission
complained of as a felony, such civil action may proceed independently of the criminal proceedings
and regardless of the result of the latter.

*Independent Civil Action

-One that is brought distinctly and separately from a criminal case allowed for considerations of
public policy, because the proof needed for civil cases is less than that required for criminal cases
-But with the injunction in general that success in financially recovering in once case should
prevent a recovery of damages in another.
-The bringing of independent civil action is permissive, not compulsory.

In independent civil actions, the civil action is no longer deemed impliedly instituted with the
criminal action. Here, the civil action proceeds simultaneously and separately from the criminal
action, provided that the offended party may not recover twice the damages for the same act or
omission. It may be instituted before or after the institution of the criminal action and shall proceed
independently and separately from the criminal proceedings regardless of the result of the latter.

Scope:
1. Article 31- where civil action is based on an obligation not arising from the act or omission
complained of as felony.
2. Where the law expressly grants to the injured party the right to institute an independent
civil action:
a. Article 32- breach of constitutional and other rights
b. Article 33- defamation, fraud, physical injuries
c. Article 34- refusal or failure of the city or municipal police to give protection
d. Article 2176- quasi-delicts

Sources of obligation:
1. Law
2. Contracts
3. Quasi-contracts
4. Delict/crime
5. Quasi-delict

Article 31 contemplates a case where the obligation does not arise from a crime, but from some
other act- like a contract or legal duty. Hence, if the obligation arises from law, contracts, quasi-
contract and quasi-delict, an independent civil action may be filed. Here, the civil action, not being
based on the crime for which the defendant is being prosecuted, it can proceed independently of
the criminal proceedings and regardless of the result of the latter.
Is reservation to institute independent civil action required?
According the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the independent civil action may be filed separately by
the offended party even without reservation. The “no reservation” requirement has retroactive
effect, the same being a rule of procedure.

Is there a suspension of civil action?

The commencement of the criminal action does not suspend the prosecution of the independent
civil action under these articles. The suspension refers only to the civil action arising from the
crime, if the civil action is reserved or filed before the commencement of the criminal action.

Article 32: Any public officer or employee, or any private individual, who directly or indirectly
obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the following rights and
liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter for damages:

(1) Freedom of religion

(2) Freedom of speech
(3) Freedom to write for the press of to maintain a periodical publication
(4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention
(5) Freedom of suffrage
(6) The right against deprivation of property without due process of law
(7) The right to a just compensation when private property is taken for public use
(8) The right to the equal protection of the laws
(9) The right to be secure in one’s person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures
(10) The liberty or abode and of changing the same
(11) The privacy of communication and correspondence
(12) The right to become a member of associations or societies for purposes not contrary
to law
(13) The right to take part in a peaceable assembly to petition the government for
redress of grievances
(14) The right to be free from involuntary servitude in any form
(15) The right of the accused against excessive bail
(16) The right of the accused to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy and public trial, to meet
the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of
witness in his behalf
(17) Freedom from being compelled to be a witness against one's self, or from being forced
to confess guilt, or from being induced by a promise of immunity or reward to make such
confession, except when the person confessing becomes a State witness
(18) Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment, unless the same is
imposed or inflicted in accordance with a statute which has not been judicially declared
unconstitutional; and
(19) Freedom of access to the courts.

In any of the cases referred to in this article, whether or not the defendant's act or omission
constitutes a criminal offense, the aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely separate
and distinct civil action for damages, and for other relief. Such civil action shall proceed
independently of any criminal prosecution (if the latter be instituted), and mat be proved by a
preponderance of evidence.

The indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated.

The responsibility herein set forth is not demandable from a judge unless his act or omission
constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or other penal statute

Reason: To provide a sanction to the deeply cherished rights and freedoms enshrined in the
Constitution. No man ma y seek to violate those sacred rights with impunity.

Article 32 provides for the imposition of damages upon any public officer or public employee or any
private person, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates, or in any manner impairs the
19 constitutional rights and liberties under the article.

A private person may be an offender under several paragraphs of the Article even if he acted in
good faith.

General Rule:
Good faith is not a defense for the impairment or violation of the fundamental rights listed under
the article. Otherwise, the main reason for the Article would be lost.

Exception:
Judges are expressly exempted from damages, if by performing their duties in good faith, they
happen to violate or impair the rights or liberties under the article. Judges are “immune” because
one cannot question the judge’s decision. It is presumed that one is given due process of law
although one can file a motion for reconsideration.

Exception to the exception:

If the judge’s act or omission constitutes a violation of the RPC or other penal statute, the judge is
liable for damages aside from criminal liability. Hence, if the judge’s act would constitute any of
the following acts punishable under the RPC, he would be liable for damages:
1. Article 204- Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment
2. Article 205- Rendering a manifestly unjust judgment through inexcusable negligence or
ignorance
3. Article 206- Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory order or decree
4. Article 207- Maliciously delaying the administration of justice

Article 33: In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a civil action for damages, entirely
separate and distinct from the criminal action, may be brought by the injured party. Such civil
action shall proceed independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall require only a
preponderance of evidence.

Article 33 speaks of:

1. Defamation (libel/slander/intrigue against honor)
2. Fraud (estafa/swindling)
3. Physical injuries- covers all kinds of physical injuries, including attempted, frustrated, or
consummated homicide. However, it does not apply to injuries which arose from criminal
negligence. It is applicable only to injuries intentionally committed.

Effects of intervention in the criminal case:

-The offended party cannot intervene in the criminal case, either personally or through a private
prosecutor, if he had filed a separate civil case.
-If the offended party intervened in the criminal case, he cannot later file a civil action to recover
moral and exemplary damages. The judgement in the criminal case bars the civil action under
Article 33.

*Intervention is a proceeding in a suit or action by which a third person is permitted by the court to
make himself a party, either joining plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint, or uniting
with defendant in resisting the claims of plaintiff, or demanding something adversely to both of
them

Article 34: When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses or fails to render aid or
protection to any person in case of danger to life or property, such peace officer shall be primarily
liable for damages, and the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. The civil
action herein recognized shall be independent of any criminal proceedings, and a preponderance of
evidence shall suffice to support such action.

The liability of the police officer for damages is primary. If he is insolvent (unable to pay the debts
owed), the city or municipality is subsidiary liable.

The defense of having observed the diligence of a good father of a family is not available to the City
or Municipality. This article does not grant to the government the defense of due diligence in the
selection and supervision of the policemen.

Article 35: When a person, claiming to be injured by a criminal offense, charges another with the
same, for which no independent civil action is granted in this Code or any special law, but the
justice of the peace finds no reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been committed, or
the prosecuting attorney refuses or fails to institute criminal proceedings, the complaint may bring
a civil action for damages against the alleged offender. Such civil action may be supported by a
preponderance of evidence. Upon the defendant's motion, the court may require the plaintiff to file
a bond to indemnify the defendant in case the complaint should be found to be malicious.

If during the pendency of the civil action, an information should be presented by the prosecuting
attorney, the civil action shall be suspended until the termination of the criminal proceedings.

Article 35 covers a situation where the act or acts committed constitute a criminal offense but
there is no independent civil action authorized by the Civil Code or any special law.

The Article covers situations:

a. Where a municipal judge who is authorized to conduct preliminary investigation dismisses a
criminal case for lack of reasonable ground to hold the accused for trial, or
b. When the public public prosecutor fails to institute any criminal case against the alleged
offender

Justification for the requirement of a bond:

Note that the criminal case was either already dismissed by the inferior court or by the public
prosecutor for lack of prima facie case, or for other reasons. It is therefore highly probable that the
civil case is only pursued for purpose of malicious harassment. The imposition of bond would
discourage the filing of malicious complaints.

People vs. Bayotas

People vs. Calomia
-General rule: Extinction of criminal liability does not carry with it the extinction of civil liability.
-Here, the death of the accused carries with it extinction of civil liability, because civil liability is
based on the very act or omission arising from the felony.
-This is not based on provisions where the law grants an independent civil action.

Daluraya vs. Olivia

-There was acquittal of the accused, because there was failure to identify him as author of the
crime.

Dy vs. People
-Gloria Dy was accused of estafa, but the second element of estafa was not established. So the
acquittal is not based on the fact that her guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, but
because she did not commit the crime of estafa. At most, she should only be liable to pay the
unpaid amount.

Article 36: Pre-judicial questions which must be decided before any criminal prosecution may be
instituted or may proceed, shall be governed by rules of court which the Supreme Court shall
promulgate and which shall not be in conflict with the provisions of this Code.

*Prejudicial question
-one based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately connected with it that
determines the guilt or innocence of the accused, and for it to suspend the criminal action, it must
appear not only that said case involves fact intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based but also that in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil
case, the guilt or innocence of the accused would be necessarily determined.
-that which arises in a case, the resolution of which question is a logical antecedent of the issue
involved in said case, the cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal.

An issue within the competency of the criminal courts cannot be resolved by the civil courts and
vice versa. Consequently, if an issue is raised in a criminal case and which issue is civil in nature
and falling within the competency of the civil court, an even if the determination of the said issue is
determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused in the criminal case, the criminal action
must be suspended to await the resolution of the issue by the civil court.

The Principle of Prejudicial Question

-Applicable even if only one court is involved before which the civil action and the criminal action
are to be litigated. In such case, the court when exercising jurisdiction over the civil action is
considered distinct and different from itself when trying the criminal action.
2 Essential Elements:
1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
criminal action.
2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed.

Where are when to file petition for suspension of criminal action if there is prejudicial question:
1. Before the Office of the Prosecutor or Municipal Judge during the pendency of the
preliminary investigation.
2. Before the trial court but before the prosecution has rested its case.
-If the respondent raised the question before the prosecutor/municipal judge but the latter denied
the petition, respondent may still raise the matter before the trial court. There is no prohibition.

-Generally, it is the defendant who can invoke or seek the suspension of the criminal case due to
the existence of a prejudicial question and not the prosecutor, especially after he had presented
the evidence for the prosecution.
Reason: Suspension of the criminal action would violate the right to speedy trial of the accused.

Independent civil actions are not prejudicial questions to criminal cases to which they are related
because they can proceed independently of criminal cases.

Examples:
1. A is married to B. During the existence of this marriage, A married C. B filed a bigamy case
against A. However, A filed a case for annulment with C on the ground that he was merely
forced by C to marry her. There exists a prejudicial question in the civil action for
annulment. If the annulment case succeeds. A has no second marriage under which he
could be charged with bigamy.
2. A civil action for the annulment of the marriage filed by a woman against her abductor-
 rapist is prejudicial to a criminal action for abduction and rape which she filed against the
man, as the dismissal of the civil action and the consequent declaration of the validity of
the said marriage will constitute a extinction of the criminal case.
3. A charged B with the crime of malicious mischief for destroying a car which A claims to be
his. However, in a separate civil action, B is claiming ownership of the car. There exists a
prejudicial question. If B is declared the owner of the car, he cannot be liable for malicious
mischief. An owner has the right to destroy his own property (jus abutendi).

The mere fact that there are actions to annul the marriage/s entered into by the accused does not
necessarily mean that there is already a prejudicial question. It depends upon who filed the
annulment case and on what ground it is based.

PJQ
?
A is married to B. A was forced to A filed for annulment C sued for bigamy. YES
marry C. with C.
A is married to B. A forced C to marry C filed for annulment B sued for bigamy. NO*
him. with A.
A is married to B. A filed for A married C before B sued for bigamy. NO
annulment. decision.
A was forced to A married C. B sued for bigamy. A filed for annulment NO*
marry B. with B.
A is married to B. C forced A to marry A filed for annulment B sued for bigamy. NO
C. with C.
*Reason: One who comes to court must come with clean hands.

Instances where Prejudicial Question is not considered:

1. Where one case is administrative and the other is civil.
2. When the question could be used as a defense in the criminal case (ex. forgery)
3. When the civil action is an independent civil action.

Pimentel vs. Pimentel

-The requisites here have already been abandoned in the cased of Pulido vs. People. Civil action
need not be filed ahead of the criminal case.

Beltran vs. people

-Requisites here are abandoned also in the case of Pulido vs. People.

Tuanda vs. Sandiganbayan

-Both elements of prejudicial question exist.

Pasi vs. Lichauco

-Prejudicial question exists.

TITLE 1: CIVIL PERSONALITY

*Person- this term refers to any being, whether natural or artificial, susceptible of legal rights and
obligations.

2 Kinds of Persons:
a. Natural person- refers to human beings
b. Juridical person- refers to entities created by law or by a group or association of men for
certain lawful purposes (corporations, cities)

*Personality- the embodiment of a collection of qualities in a person. The quality of being a person.
3 Kinds of Personalities:
a. Presumptive or Provisional- while in the womb of the mother.
b. Actual Personality- after becoming a person.
c. Artificial Personality- after death.
-Estates of deceased persons are considered artificial persons.

*Status- the position of an individual in relation to another or others; a state or condition of affairs;
the standing of a person before the law.

Characteristics of status:
1. It cannot be the subject of commerce.
2. It is imprescriptible.
3. It is not subject of compromise.
4. Right to claim it cannot be renounced.
5. Right arising from it cannot be exercised by creditors.

CHAPTER 1: General Provisions

Article 37: Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations, is inherent in
every natural person and is lost only through death. Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts
with legal effect, is acquired and may be lost.

*Juridical Capacity vs. Capacity to Act

Juridical Capacity Capacity to Act
(1 Inherent in every human being (not artificial Not inherent. Merely acquired upon fulfillment of
) persons). certain conditions or requisites fixed by law.
(2 Capacity to be the subject of legal relations. Capacity to do acts with binding or legal effect.
)
(3 Can exist without capacity to act. Cannot exist without juridical capacity.
)
(4 Lost only through death. May be lost through grounds other than death.
)

Examples:
1. An unborn child has no capacity to enter into a legal contract because it lacks capacity to
act. However, it can be the subject of legal relations such as donations, provided it be born
later to become a person. It can be the subject of voluntary recognition by its father, even
before it is actually born. This is juridical capacity on the part of the child.
2. A minor cannot make a will until he reaches the age of 18 for lack of capacity to act. But he
can be an heir, devisee, or legatee for even such, he has juridical capacity.

-Presumption is in favor of capacity to act: A person’s capacity to ac is presumed if he had not been
previously declared incapacitated and the presumption continues until the contrary is proven.
-A person is considered to have full civil capacity (plena capacidad civil) if he has both juridical
capacity and capacity to act.

Article 38: Minority, insanity, or imbecility, the state of being a deaf-mute, prodigality and civil
interdiction are mere restrictions on capacity to act, and do not exempt the incapacitated person
from certain obligations, as when the latter arise from his acts or from property relations, such as
easements.

-While a person may have capacity to act, he may have some restrictions:

1. Minority- those below 18 years old.

a. He cannot enter into a valid contract of marriage.
b. He cannot adopt.
c. He cannot make wills or be a witness to a will.
d. He cannot give consent to a contract.
e. He cannot act as executor or administrator of an estate.

2. Insanity- legal term for mental disorder, characterized by perversion, inhibition, or disordered
function of the sensory or of the intellectual faculties, or by impaired or disordered volition.
a. He cannot make a valid will or testament.
b. He cannot validly give consent to contracts.
c. He cannot act as an executor or administrator of an estate.

3. Imbecility- a manifestation of mental deficiency or mental retardation.

-In medical science, the general term is feeble-mindedness.
-MORONS have IQs below 70.
-IMBECILES have IQs below 50.
-IDIOTS have IQs below 20 and their menta age does not advance past the age of 3. They are
usually infantile.
-It is presumed that every person is of sound mind in the absence of proof to the contrary.

4. Deaf-mutism- a person who can neither hear or speak, or is deaf and dumb.
-Such person is held capable of entering into contracts if shown to have sufficient mental capacity.
a. He cannot give consent to contracts if he does not know how to read and write.
b. He cannot personally accept or repudiate inheritance if he does not know how to read and write.
Through his guardian, he can.
c. He cannot be a witness to a notarial will if he does not know how to read and write. He can
make a will under conditions set forth by law.
d. He cannot be naturalized.

5. Prodigality- a prodigal or spendthrift is a squanderer of his money and property without regard to
the needs and future of his family which he is bound to protect and support under the law.
-The act of prodigality must show a morbid mind and disposition to spend or waste his estate so as
to expose his family to want or to deprive his heirs of their inheritances.
-A prodigal’s capacity to act will only be restricted if he is placed on guardianship, because then he
could only act with binding effect through his guardian.

6. Civil interdiction- a mandatory accessory penalty deemed imposed whenever the sentence
rendered is within the range of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
a. Parental authority or guardianship over the person or property of his children or ward
b. Marital rights or authority
c. Management of his property
d. Disposition of his property by act of conveyance inter vivos (while alive)
e. Cannot enter into marriage settlement, without the assistance of a competent guardian
appointed by the court. He may, however, enter into a valid contract of marriage.

-While minors, insane, and imbeciles may be exempted from criminal liability, they may still be
made liable with their own property to compensate for the civil damages they have caused.
-Article 2182: If the minor or insane has no parents or guardians, he shall be answerable with his
own property in an action against him.

Article 39: The following circumstances, among others, modify or limit capacity to act: age,
insanity, imbecility, the state of being a deaf-mute, penalty, prodigality, family relations, alienage,
absence, insolvency and trusteeship. The consequences of these circumstances are governed in
this Code, other codes, the Rules of Court, and in special laws. Capacity to act is not limited on
account of religious belief or political opinion.

A married woman, eighteen years of age or over, is qualified for all acts of civil life, except in cases
specified by civil law.

-If a party is already 18 yet below 21, he could not validly marry without parental consent.
-Impotence limits a person’s capacity to marry. It is a ground for annulment of marriage.

Limitations of Capacity to Act:

1. Penalty- there are penalties imposable in crimes which restrict or modify a person’s
capacity to act. For example, a penalty of prision correccional carries with it suspension
from public office and from the right to follow a profession or calling.
2. Family Relations
a. Between husband and wife- (1) cannot donate properties to each other except only
moderate gifts during family rejoicing (2) cannot sell or lease properties to one another
unless the sale or lease is excepted under the law (3) cannot testify against each other
b. Between parents and children- (1) could not marry each other (2) cannot testify against
each other
c. Among other ascendant and descendants
d. Among brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half-blood
3. Alienage- this is a state of being an alien or foreigner
a. Cannot exercise political rights
b. Cannot acquire lands except through succession
c. Cannot operate public utilities
d. Cannot engage in coastwise trade (carriage or transport of persons or merchandise)
e. Cannot practice some professions like law and medicine
f. Cannot own and manage mass media
g. Cannot engage in Retail Trade
4. Absence- when a person’s whereabouts are unknown for a certain number of years.
-If a person is absent for at least 7 years (or at least 4 years under certain dangerous
circumstances), he can be presumed dead for all purposes except that of opening his succession.
-If a person became absent at age 75 for at least 5 years, he can be presumed dead for all purposes
including that of opening his succession.
a. If the absentee is declared presumptively dead and his spouse remarried, the subsequent
marriage supersedes the previous marriage. The absentee could no longer exercise his/her
marital rights unless the subsequent marriage is first set aside.
b. If absentee is absent for at least 10 years, his estate could be divided among his heirs.
c. The absentee can be deprived of his right to co-administer the community or conjugal
property.
d. If the absentee reappears, he is allowed to recover his property in the condition which it
may be found, but he cannot claim either fruits or rent.
e. Absence of the spouse will justify the filing of a petition for receivership, judicial
separation of property for sole administration of conjugal partnership by the spouse present.
-The absentee’s capacity to enter into a contract is not affected. What is affected is the absentee’s
property which will be placed under administration. Even though absent, he can validly transfer or
alienate his property even without the knowledge of the administrator of his property.
5. Insolvency- the condition whereby a man’s assets, if all made immediately available,
would not be sufficient to discharge his obligations or liabilities. His obligations are more
than his assets.
a. Cannot dispose his property once an assignee has been appointed by the court since the
latter takes over the management and control over the property as representative of the
creditors to whom the proceeds shall be distributed.
6. Trusteeship- the legal relationship concerning property which obliges the person holding
it to deal with the property for the benefit of another.
 a. A trustee cannot acquire by prescription the property he holds under express trust for
another unless he repudiates the trust/
b. A trustee cannot appropriate for himself the property under trust which he merely holds
for the benefit of another.
c. A trustee is not allowed to become the buyer of the trust property.
d. If the trust is express, the trustee is restricted by the provisions of the trust agreement
and the law.

*Religious beliefs and political opinion: There is separation of Church and State as upheld and
recognized by the Constitution. Capacity to act is not limited on account of religious belief or
political opinion.

*Status of married women under present law: A woman to be capacitated to marry must at least be
18 (reduced from 21). When she contracts a marriage, she is already emancipated, and qualified
and responsible for all acts of civil life. A married woman can sell, dispose, or alienate her
exclusive property, make a will, dispose of her share in the conjugal partnership by will, repudiate
her inheritance, engage in any legitimate profession, occupation, business, or activity, insure her
life or that of her children, without the consent of her husband.

CHAPTER 2: Natural Persons

Article 40: Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for all
purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the conditions specific in the
following article.

Source: Article 29, Old Civil Code

Personality springs from birth

-To be considered born, a fetus must be completely delivered from the mother’s womb which
delivery could either be natural (through the mother’s vaginal opening) or artificial (through another
opening, like a Caesarian operation).
-A fetus is not a person before it is actually born. A still-born baby—one born dead—is not
considered a person.
-Nevertheless, because of the expectancy that it be born, the law grants it certain rights
conditioned to its being born alive.

*Conception- this means the beginning of pregnancy. The 1987 Constitution which is pro-life and
pro-family recognizes and protects the life of conceived children.

*Provisional personality- the presumptive and presumed personality accorded to an unborn child
that is conditional and for limited purposes only.
-It is conditional because:
1. The presumed personality will be perfect only if the fetus is born alive; if not, the fetus would not
attain the status of a person at any moment.
2. The presumption is only for purposes favorable to the fetus. If unfavorable, the child, even if born
alive, is not bound for acts done without its consent, which it obviously could not give.
-For what purposes? A conceived unborn child:
a. is entitled to inherit by will or by intestacy
b. can be a recipient of donations that are not burdensome
c. its filiation can be recognized by its parents even before its birth

-A fetus which was aborted by a doctor is not a person under the law, and the doctor may be held
liable for moral damages and exemplary damages suffered by the parents, but not for actual
damages for the death of the fetus.
Reason: The unborn fetus had not been endowed with personality. Award for death of a person
does not cover an unborn fetus.

Is it required for juridical capacity and capacity to act to co-exist? No. Because juridical capacity
is inherent.

Article 41: For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it Is alive at the time it is completely
delivered from the mother’s womb. However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of less than seven
months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty four hours after its complete delivery from the
maternal womb.

When to consider a child born

-A child is considered born from the moment of is total separation from the mother’s womb and is
alive.
-A still-born child, one who has not breathed or shown any sign of life after completely separated
from the mother’s womb, cannot be considered born.

Intra-uterine life Hours survived Considered born?

Less than 7 months Less than 24 hours No
Less than 7 months At least 24 hours Yes
At least 7 months A few minutes Yes

-The burden of proof lies on the person who alleges that the child was alive when born since the
law makes it a condition that the child be alive when separated from the mother’s womb before it
could be considered a person. However, when the newborn child is found dead, the presumption is,
the child was born dead. And he, who alleges otherwise, has the burden of proof.

Proofs of live-birth:
1. Presence of heart action and circulation
2. Movement of the child and crying
3. Presence of respiration
a.. There is aching of the chest
b. Fall of the level of the diaphragm
c. Expansion of the lungs

Commencement of Civil Personality

-The civil personality of the child shall commence from the time of his conception, for all purposes
favorable to him, subject to the requirements of Article 41.

Article 42: Civil personality is extinguished by death. The effect of death upon the rights and
obligations of the deceased is determined by law, by contract and by will.

-As birth brings forth civil personality, death extinguishes it.

-However, though personality has been extinguished, the rights and obligations of the deceased are
not necessarily extinguished by his death.
-The law, the contracts he entered into, and the will he made, if any, will determine the
consequences of his death on his rights and obligations.
-Civil interdiction (civil death) merely restricts, not extinguishes, capacity to act.

Status of the Estate of a deceased person

-The estate of a person has a personality distinct and independent of the heirs.
-The estate of the deceased person is considered as a continuity of his personality. The said estate
can sue and be sued.
-Rights and obligations which survive after death have to be exercised and fulfilled only by the
estate of the deceased.

Instant effects of death:

1. Death dissolves a marriage.
2. Successional rights are transmitted from the moment of death of the decedent.
3. Death of a parent permanently terminates parental authority.
4. Death of a partner dissolves a partnership.
5. Death of a spouse terminates community or conjugal partnership of gains.
6. Death of a principal or agent terminates a contract of agency.
7. Death terminates criminal liability.
8. A summons and complaint addressed to a dead person and decision rendered thereafter is
void beause summons could not be validly served on him.

Article 43: If there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each
other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall
prove the same; in the absence of proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time and there
shall be no transmission of rights from on to the other.

Article 43 provides for a presumption on survivorship.

-The presumptions are rebuttable. Preponderance of evidence is the rule. If there are facts or
evidence from which a contrary conclusion could be safely inferred, the evidence controls.

What are the presumptions on survivorship?

 If there is no proof as to who died first, the presumption operates. The presumption is that
the parties died at the same time, and so there is no transmission of rights from on to the
other. There is no succession between the two of them. But their respective heirs will
inherit from them.

When do these presumptions apply?

The above presumption applies only if the following conditions are present:
1. The parties are heirs to one another— such as a father and a son (without issue).
2. There is no proof that one died ahead of the other— such as when an airplane where the
parties are passengers exploded in the sky with no survivors.

*Disputable Presumption
-The Revised Rules of Court provides for a rule of disputable presumption on survivorship.
-Section 3: The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted
and overcome by other evidence:
 That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same calamity,
such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and there are no
particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determine from
the probabilities resulting from the strength and age of the sexes, according to the
following rules:
1. If both were under the age of 15, the older is deemed to have survived.
2. If both were above the age of 60, the younger is deemed to have survived.
3. If one is under 15 and the other above 60, the former is deemed to have survived.
4. If both be over 15 and under 60, and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have
survived. If the sex be the same, the older.
5. If one be under 15 or over 60, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed to
have survived.
-The provision of the Rules of Court above applies when THE PARTIES WHO DIED ARE NOT CALLED
TO SUCCEED EACH OTHER.
-Otherwise, Article 43 applies when THE PARTIES ARE HEIRS TO ONE ANOTHER.
-If there are available facts as to who died first, the provisions on survivorship under both the Civil
Code and Rules of Court cannot be applied.

Example: Vincent and his son Gary climbed Mt. Apo. Both of them died. Vincent’s wife claims that
Gary died first. Whoever alleges the death of the other, the former shall prove the same. Whoever
dies last claims the estate of those who died first. If the death cannot be proven, then there shall
be no transmission of rights.

CHAPTER 3: Juridical Persons

Article 44: The following are juridical persons:

(1) The State and its political subdivisions

(2) Other corporations, institutions, and entities for public interest or purpose, created by law;
their personality begins as soon as they have been constituted according to law
(3) Corporations, partnerships, and associations for private interest or purpose to which the
law grants a juridical personality, separate and distinct from that of each shareholder,
partner, or member.

Article 45: Juridical persons mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2 of the preceding article are governed by the
laws creating or recognizing them.

Private corporations are regulated by laws of general application on the subject.

Partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose are governed by the provisions of this
Code concerning partnerships.

*Juridical person
-a “being of legal existence, susceptible of rights and obligations, or of being subject of juridical
relations.”
-an abstract being, formed for the realization of collective purposes, to which the law has granted
capacity for rights and obligations.
-not all associations of persons for a collective purpose are juridical persons, only those which are
recognized by law and granted with capacity for rights and obligations are considered juridical
persons.

Classification of Juridical Persons

1. The State and its political subdivisions (provinces, cities and municipalities, and barangays)
2. Juridical persons for public purposes
3. Juridical persons for private purposes

How Juridical Persons come into existence

State When all the essential elements (persons, territory, government, sovereignty) have
concurred.
Public As soon as they have been constituted according to law. Their specific date of
purposes operation shall be provided by the law of creation.
Private In accordance with their articles of association or formation.
purposes

What governs Juridical Persons

State The State is governed by the Constitution; its political subdivisions by the Local
Government Code, Revised Administrative Code, and special laws.
Public If created by a special charter— by such charter.
purposes
Private Corporation Code, together with its Articles of Incorporation and by-laws
 purposes

*Corporate legal fiction- a private corporation which may be constituted by 5 or more persons, not
exceeding 15, and a majority of whom are residents of the Philippines, enjoys a legal personality
distinct and independent of the personality of the persons constituting it. Generally, the liability of
the corporation is not the liability of the incorporators. The veil of corporate personality, however,
could be pierced under certain circumstances.
a. Has the right of succession
b. Can own properties and rights
c. Can sue and be sued
d. Included within the meaning of “person” protected under the due process clause of the
Constitution

-A partnership (2 or more persons who enter into a contract binding themselves to contribute
money, property, or industry to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits among
themselves), has juridical personality separate and distinct from that of each of the partners.
-However, a conjugal partnership of gains in the law on marriage does not have any juridical
capacity. Suits should be by the spouses or against the spouses themselves.

*Private Corporations- all corporations which are not for public purposes or interests are private
corporations. If the State happens to be a shareholder in a private corporation, this does not make
it a public corporation. Thus, the National Coal Company, where the Government is a shareholder,
is not rendered a public corporation.

What is the nationality of a Private Corporation?

It is determined by the character or citizenship of its controlling stockholders. A corporation which
was organized here and is controlled by American stockholders is an American corporation.

Mayor vs. Tiu

-The death of the stockholder does not mean the death of the corporation. It has its own life, based
on the license issued to it by the SEC.

Article 46: Juridical persons may acquire and possess property of all kinds, as well as incur
obligations and bring civil or criminal actions, in conformity with the laws and regulations of their
organization.

Natural persons have more rights than juridical persons. Nonetheless, juridical persons are allowed
to:
1. Acquire and possess property of all kinds
2. Incur obligations
3. Sue and be sued
4. File civil actions and certain criminal cases for the protection of their rights and interest
However, they cannot be held criminally liable or be defendants in criminal actions.

Corporations vs. Partnerships

Who governs it? Possession of Property
Corporati Corporation Code Not essential to their corporate existence.
on
Partners Civil Code governs There is contribution of money, property, or industry to a
hip partners common fund.

*A group of persons who claim to be a corporation cannot be considered as such if it has no

articles of incorporation registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The mere
formation of the group does not give corporate life to it.
*If a partnership does not exist in law and therefore has no legal personality, it cannot sue,
although it may be sued. Otherwise, third persons might be prejudiced. This is anchored on the
equitable principle of estoppel.

*The doctrine of estoppel- based upon the grounds of public policy, fair dealing, good faith and
justice, and its purpose is to forbid one to speak against its own act, representations, or
commitments to the injury of one to whom they were directed and who reasonably relied thereon.

-Aliens are not allowed to acquire lands in the Philippine except through succession.
-Foreign corporations are absolutely prohibited from acquiring lands in the Philippines, even
temporarily.
Reason: to maintain the territorial integrity of the country.

Article 47: Upon the dissolution of corporations, institutions, and other entities for public interest
or purpose mentioned in No. 2 of Article 44, their property and other assets shall be disposed of in
pursuance of law or the charter creating them. If nothing has been specified on this point, the
property and other assets shall be applied to similar purposes for the benefit of the region,
province, city, or municipality which during the existence of the institution derived the principal
benefits from the same.

Article 47 is applicable only to juridical persons created by law for public interest.

While natural persons lose their personality by death, juridical persons lose their personality by
dissolution.

Causes for dissolution:

1. Voluntary dissolution
a. Where no creditors are affected
b. Where creditors are affected
c. By shortening corporate term
2. Involuntary dissolution- dissolved by the Securities and Exchange Commission

-A dissolved corporation could not be sued.

-Upon dissolution, the property and assets of juridical persons shall be disposed of in accordance
with the law or charter creating them. If nothing is specified, the property and assets shall be
applied for the public purposes for which they were created, for the benefit of the region, province,
city, or municipality where the entities derived their principal benefits during their existence.