PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE

Here is a one-paragraph summary for each of the seven (7) landmark cases on divorce. These cases were decided prior to Republic v. Manalo (2018) . Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera[1] (Pilapil). Divorce obtained in Germany by German spouse. German spouse filed two (2) complaints charging Filipino spouse with adultery. HELD:  The divorce decree is binding on the German spouse pursuant to the nationality principle. Accordingly, the German spouse lacks standing to file the complaints as "offended spouse", having obtained the divorce decree prior to the filing of said complaints. Republic v. Iyoy[2] (Iyoy).  Divorce obtained in the United States by Filipino wife prior to her naturalization as an American citizen. Filipino husband invokes the divorce decree secured by his Filipino wife as additional ground to grant his petition for declaration of nullity. HELD:  The divorce decree cannot be recognized in the Philippines since the Filipino wife obtained the same while still a Filipino c

Both Dacasin v. Dacasin  (625 Phil. 494, 2010)  and Van Dorn  (223 Phil. 357, 1985)  already recognized a  foreign divorce decree that was initiated and obtained by the Filipino spouse and extended its legal effects on the issues of child custody and property relation , respectively. In Dacasin, post-divorce, the former spouses executed an Agreement for the joint custody of their minor daughter. Later on, the husband, who is a US citizen, sued his Filipino wife to enforce the Agreement, alleging that it was only the latter who exercised sole custody of their child. The trial court dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction, on the ground, among others, that the divorce decree is binding following the "nationality rule" prevailing in this jurisdiction. The husband moved to reconsider, arguing that the divorce decree obtained by his former wife is void, but it was denied. In ruling that the trial court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit but not to enforce the Agreement

Divorce, the legal dissolution of a lawful union for a cause arising after marriage, are of two types: (1) absolute divorce or a vinculo matrimonii, which terminates the marriage, and (2) limited divorce or a mensa et thoro, which suspends it and leaves the bond in full force.[1] In this jurisdiction, the following rules exist: 1. Philippine law does not provide for absolute divorce; hence, our courts cannot grant it.[2] 2. Consistent with Articles 15[3] and 17[4] of the New Civil Code, the marital bond between two Filipinos cannot be dissolved even by an absolute divorce obtained abroad.[5] 3. An absolute divorce obtained abroad by a couple, who are both aliens, may be recognized in the Philippines, provided it is consistent with their respective national laws.[6] 4. In mixed marriages involving a Filipino and a foreigner, the former is allowed to contract a subsequent marriage in case the absolute divorce is validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to

Oposa v. Factoran (296 Phil. 694, G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993) is a case filed by minors against the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Secretary Factoran, to mandate the latter to cancel all existing timber license agreements and to stop their further issuance. The first question is whether or not these minors have legal standing to sue by representing their generation and the generation yet unborn. The Supreme Court (SC) said yes because this is based on the concept of intergenerational responsibility in environmental law. A subset of the first question is whether or not there is a valid class suit. Again, the SC said yes because the petitioners are so numerous that it is impracticable to join all parties in the case. Also, the petitioners have a common and general interest not just to several, but to all citizens of the Philippines. Finally, the number of parties present is representative enough to ensure the full protection of all concer

Under Article 9 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines, "No judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws." On the other hand, Article 10 says: "In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail." The above provisions speak of the duty of courts. Simply because the laws are silent, obscure or insufficient does not mean that courts can dismiss the case and refuse to issue a decision. Courts must, if the complaint or petition is sufficient in form and substance, give it due course and arrive at a conclusion even though there is no applicable law and even though the law is not clear. This is because this is precisely the job of courts -- to interpret the law and render a decision. If courts have to depend on clear laws and decide only when they are sufficient, the cogs of justice will not grind smoothly. Exp

Under Article 8 of the New Civil Code, "Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines." The above provision addresses the age-old issue as to whether the President is mandated by the Constitution to follow the decisions of the Supreme Court or of the lower courts. After the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Dred Scott v. Standford which held, among others, that freeing slaves would be deprivation of the property of slaveowners without due process of law, then President Abraham Lincoln interposed a strong opposition emphasizing on his being a "co-equal branch of the government" and that there are three elements of a judicial decision to be mandatory for the President to follow: The decision must be constitutional; The holding must have been repeated in other cases so it can be considered a doctrine; and The principle laid down must be consistent with other br

Under Article 7 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines, "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." This is the first paragraph of Article 7. The second paragraph says: "When the courts declared a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall govern." The third paragraph says: "Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution." Therefore, Article 7 has four parts: (1) repeal of laws; (2) disuse of laws; (3) void laws; and (4) invalid regulations. The first clause prevents irrepealable laws and upholds the force and effect of laws regardless of disuse, custom or practice to the contrary. Simply, Congress cannot enact a law that future Congresses are not allowed to repeal or amend. For example, if the law says

Section 1, Article XVII of the Philippine Constitution provides two ways to amend the Constitution: By: (1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or (2) A constitutional convention.” This provision does not specify whether Congress is to vote jointly or separately. At the celebration by Philconsa of the Constitution Day on Feb. 12, Solicitor General Jose Calida spoke on the nuances and ramifications of this provision, and whether voting should be jointly with the Senate as a single body, or separately, with the Senate voting by itself. The SolGen came to Philconsa with considerable gravitas. He has never lost a Supreme Court case, he told his jampacked audience. He sent Senator Leila de Lima to jail. He got SC approval to extend martial law until the end of 2018. He got 100 in Criminal Law, 90 in two other subjects. He would have landed in the Top Ten but he was very sick during the bar exams. The Senate insists on separate voting. The House o

In a sale, the relationship is between the buyer and the seller and this ends upon payment of the purchase price and delivery of the thing sold, unless warranties have been breached. In a loan agreement, the relationship is between the debtor and the creditor and this ends upon full payment of the amount loaned and the interest agreed upon in writing or imposed by law. It must be pointed out, at this juncture, that loan has two kinds: mutuum and commodatum. Simple loan (mutuum) is where one borrows money or any consumable thing. In commodatum, the main purpose of the loan is not consumption. Both in sale and in loan, ownership over the thing sold or loaned is transferred. However, in sale, there is no obligation to return while there is an obligation to return the same kind and quality in mutuum or the same thing in commodatum. Paras (2008) said: In a loan, the amount is substantially smaller than the value of the security given. (Facundo, et al., CA-GR 833-R, Nov. 13, 194

Cession is the assignment of the debtor's property in favor of creditors. Sale and cession are different the same way sale differs from dation in payment. In cession the assignee (creditor) does not acquire ownership over the things assigned, but only the right to sell said things. From the proceeds of such sale, the creditors are to be paid what is due them. Article 1255 of the Civil Code provides that "the debtor may cede or assign his property to his creditors in payment of his debts. This cession, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary, shall only release the debtor from responsibility of the net proceeds of the thing assigned. The agreements which, on the effect of the cession, are made between the debtor and his creditors shall be governed by special laws." Manresa, as cited by Paras, defines cession as "the abandonment of all the property of the debtor for the benefit of his creditors in order that the latter may apply the proceeds thereof to

Quite recently, in Añonuevo v. Intestate Estate of Rodolfo G. Jalandoni,[1] the Supreme Court said, citing precedents, that: While a marriage certificate is considered the primary evidence of a marital union, it is not regarded as the sole and exclusive evidence of marriage . Jurisprudence teaches that the fact of marriage may be proven by relevant evidence other than the marriage certificate. Hence, even a person’s birth certificate may be recognized as competent evidence of the marriage between his parents. The error of the trial court in ruling that without the marriage certificate, no other proof of the fact can be accepted, has been aptly delineated in Vda de Jacob v. Court of Appeals.[2] Thus: It should be stressed that the due execution and the loss of the marriage contract, both constituting the conditio sine qua non for the introduction of secondary evidence of its contents, were shown by the very evidence they have disregarded. They have thus confused the evidence to sho

X sold to Y a desktop computer for Php50,000. In this contract of sale, which is the object, and which is the cause? There are two views on this. The first view is that the object or the cause depends on whether the viewpoint considered is that of the seller or the buyer. Insofar as the seller is concerned, the object is the desktop computer while the cause is the Php50,000 payment (or the giving of the money). On the other hand, regarding the buyer, the object is the Php50,000 payment (or the giving thereof) while the cause is the desktop computer (because he parted with his money for the computer). The second view, which has been tagged as better by experts in civil law such as Paras, insofar as both the seller and the buyer are concerned, there is only one subject matter -- the desktop computer. The cause or consideration for the seller is the Php50,000 payment (or the giving thereof). Whereas, for the buyer, it is the delivery to him of the desktop computer.

Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette [or in any newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines], unless it is otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect one year after such publication. (Article 2 of the New Civil Code) When does a law take effect? What does publication mean? When did the New Civil Code take effect? What is the Official Gazette? Does "unless it is other provided" mean that the publication requirement is dispensable? Is the 15-day period absolute? What if the law says that it shall take effect "immediately after approval"? What if the law says that it shall take effect "immediately?" What is a "newspaper of general circulation"? Is publication online sufficient compliance with the publication requirement? Should decisions of the Supreme Court be published? Should administrative rules and regulations be published? Should legislative r

Does the Labor Code of the Philippines (Presidential Decree No. [PD] 442) have bias in favor of labor (workers) and one-sided against capital (employers)? Below is Azucena's (2013) answer in his 2013 book on labor standards (pg. 19). The Labor Code is not one-sided. It is not meant to protect a sector to oppress another. All throughout the Code, the rights and responsibilities not only of employees but also of employers are recognized. Indeed, the Labor Code has to protect the interests of both employees and employers, for if it does not, it would be unconstitutional . The very first article of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights refers to all persons — rich or poor, aliens or citizens, artificial or natural — when it states: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws." It is unjustified to view the Labor Code as a law of and for workers only , if this term refers

Decisions of the Supreme Court, although in themselves not laws, are nevertheless evidence of what the laws mean, and this is the reason why under Article 8 of the New Civil Code, "Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system." (G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993) The interpretation upon a law by the High Court constitutes, in a way, a part of the law as of the date that law was originally passed, since this Court's construction merely establishes the contemporaneous legislative intent that the law thus construed intends to effectuate. The settled rule supported by numerous authorities is a restatement of the legal maxim "legis interpretation legis vim obtinet" — the interpretation placed upon the written law by a competent court has the force of law. (G.R. No. 100776, October 28, 1993) When a doctrine is overruled and a different view is adopted, the new doctrine should be applied prospectivel

When a statute has been adopted from some other state of country and such statute has previously been construed by the courts of such state or country, the statute is usually deemed to have been adopted with the construction so given it. The Employers’ Liability Act having been adopted from the Massachusetts act, which in turn (as well as similar statutes in some other States of United States) was adopted from the English act, decisions of the high courts in those jurisdictions construing and interpreting the Act should receive the careful attention of the Supreme Court in the application of our own law. (G.R. No. 10107, February 4, 1916) Republic Act No. 875 is patterned after the labor relations legislation in the United States of America, particularly, the Federal Labor Relations Act, including the labor relations acts of the different States. Naturally, American authorities interpreting said American labor legislation are applicable and may be considered by us with profit . (G

An unmarried woman has a liberty interest under the due process clause to engage in consensual sexual relations with an unmarried man and bear a child with him as a result of said relations. I submit this Opinion to show that (I) considering jurisprudential precedents and Filipino tradition, it is high time this Court recognize this liberty interest as a fundamental right entitled to State protection. Thus, pregnancy of an employee out of wedlock cannot constitute just cause for termination from employment absent any showing that the pregnancy was contracted under grossly immoral circumstances; and (II) a contrary ruling would violate the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the law and result in an unwarranted difference in treatment of men and women under like circumstances. (Written by Justice Jardeleza in his separate concurring opinion in the case of Union School International v. Dagdag, G.R. No. 234186, November 21, 2018). Our Constitution guarantees that no person s

A conventional constitution is enacted, formally struck off at a definite time and place following a conscious or deliberate effort taken by a constituent body or ruler; while a cumulative constitution is the result of political evolution, not inaugurated at any specific time but changing by accretion rather than by any systematic method (Cruz, Constitutional Law, p. 5)

A written constitution is one whose precepts are embodied in one document or set of documents; while an unwritten constitution consists of rules which have not been integrated into a single, concrete form but are scattered in various sources, such as statutes of a fundamental character, judicial decisions, commentaries of publicists, customs and traditions, and certain common law principles. (Cruz, Constitutional Law, pp. 4-5)

Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith. (Article 3 of the New Civil Code) In other words, no one can validly interpose the defense of ignorance when a law is violated. Everyone is presumed to know the law. According to Paras (2008): Article 3 applies to all kinds of domestic laws, whether civil or penal (Luna v. Linatoc, 74 Phil. 15; Delgado v. Alonzo, 44 Phil. 739), and whether substantive or remedial (Zulueta v. Zulueta, 1 Phil. 258) on grounds of expediency, policy, and necessity, i.e., to prevent evasion of the law. However, the maxim refers only to mandatory or prohibitive laws, not to permissive or suppletory laws. (See 1 Manresa 56) The majority view is that ignorance of foreign law is not ignorance of the law; it is ignorance of the fact. The existence and contents of  foreign law are a factual question because foreign laws must be alleged and proved as matters of fact, there being no judicial notice of said foreign laws. (Adong v. Cheong Seng Gee

" Ignorantia legis non excusat ," meaning " ignorance of the law excuses no one ." Paras (2008), in his book Civil Code Volume I (Persons and Family Relations), said the following: It would seem that this maxim is a bit unfair today. Before the compliance is required, there must be due promulgation of the law; now then, the present method of promulgation — publication in the Official Gazette — is clearly inadequate. Firstly, the Official Gazette generally comes out several years late; secondly, how many of our citizens can get hold of a copy thereof, much less, read the same? Moreover, in a very real sense, law was made for evil men . The good hardly need law when they do good acts, this is not because they are deliberately complying with the law, but because they are simply good men. Upon the other hand, without the maxim, the corrupt will make social existence unbearable, abuses will increase, and ignorance will be rewarded.

In a CONTRACT OF SALE, the non-payment of price is a resolutory condition, i.e., the contract of sale may by such occurrence put an end to a transaction that once upon a time existed. In a CONTRACT TO SELL, the payment in full of the price is a positive suspensive condition. Hence, if the price is not paid, it is as if the obligation of the seller to deliver and to transfer ownership never became effective and binding. In a CONTRACT OF SALE, title over the property generally passes to the buyer upon delivery. In the a CONTRACT TO SELL, ownership is retained by the seller, regardless of delivery and is not to pass until full payment of the price. In a CONTRACT OF SALE, after delivery, the seller loses ownership and cannot recover it unless the contract is resolved or rescinded. In a CONTRACT TO SELL, since the seller retains ownership despite delivery, ousting the buyer for failure to pay is an act of enforcing the contract, not rescinding it. (Manuel v. Rodriguez, L-13435, Jul.

Marriage is a legally-governed special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman. (Article 1 of Executive Order [EO] No. 209 or the Family Code of the Philippines) Marriage has requisites not required of other contracts. Article 2 says: No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present: (1) LEGAL CAPACITY of the contracting parties who must be a MALE and a FEMALE ; and (2) CONSENT  freely given in the presence of the SOLEMNIZING OFFICER . The formal requisites of marriage are: (1) AUTHORITY of the solemnizing officer; (2) A valid MARRIAGE LICENSE ; and (3) A marriage CEREMONY which takes place with the APPEARANCE  of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and their PERSONAL DECLARATION that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less than TWO WITNESSES of legal age. (Article 3) Therefore, based on the above, there are ten (10) requisites of a valid marriage. They are: Legal capacity of the contr

It is essential that the vendors be the owners of the property sold; otherwise they cannot dispose of that which does not belong to them. Nemo dat quod non habet. No one can give more than what he has. (Heirs of Ingjugtiro, et al. v. Spouses Casals, et al. G.R. No. 134718, August 20, 2001) Article 1458 of the New Civil Code provides: "By the contract of sale one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of and to deliver a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its equivalent." It is essential that the vendors be the owners of the property sold otherwise they cannot dispose [of] that which does not belong to them. As the Romans put it: "Nemo dat quod non habet." No one can give more than what he has. The sale of the realty to respondents is null and void insofar as it prejudiced petitioners’ interests and participation therein. At best, only the ownership of the shares of Luisa, Maria and Guillerm

A deed of sale is absolute in nature although denominated a "conditional sale" absent such stipulations. In such cases, ownership of the thing sold passes to the vendee upon the constructive or actual delivery thereof. (Sps. Babasa v. CA, et al. G.R. No. 124045, May 21, 1993) According to the Supreme Court: Although denominated "Conditional Sale of Registered Lands," we hold, as did respondent court, that the 11 April 1981 between petitioners and respondent TABANGAO is one of absolute sale. Aside from the terms and stipulations used therein indicating such kind of sale, there is absolutely no proviso reserving title in the BABASAS until full payment of the purchase price, nor any stipulation giving them the right to unilaterally rescind the contract in case of non-payment. A deed of sale is absolute in nature although denominated a "conditional sale" absent such stipulations. In such cases, ownership of the thing s