GR: Laws take effect 15 days following the completion of its publication in Official Gazette or news paper of general circulation.
EXCEPTION: Unless otherwise provided by the law. This refers to the 15 day period and NOT to the requirement of publication. (Tanada vs. Tuvera)
Publication is mandatory (even if the law provides for its own weffectivity) Publication must be in full (otherwise it is not deemed published at all) since its PURPOSE is to inform the public of its contents. Effect of publication: The people are deemed to have conclusively been notifed of the law if they have not read them.
COVERED BY PUBLICATION REQUIREMENT: Presidential Decrees and Executive Orders Adminidtrative rules and regualtions, if their purpose is to enforce or implement existing law pursuant to a valid legislation
NOT COVERED BY THE REQUIREMENT OF PUBLICATION: Interpretative regualtion and this administrative regualtions internal in nature Letter of Instructions Municipal ordinances
Ignorance of the law excuses no one considered a CONCLUSIVE presumption and applies only to mandatory and prohibitory laws. (Consunji vs. CA)
Non-retroactivity of laws GR: Laws have no retroactive effect.
EXCEPTIONS: 1. Unless the law otherwise provides 2. Curative statutes 3. Interpretative statutes 4. Procedural/remedial 5. Emergency laws 6. Laws creating new rights 7. Tax laws
EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXCEPTIONS: 1. Ex post facto laws 2. Laws that impair obligation of contracts
ACTS CONTRARY TO THE LAW GR: Acts which are contrary to mandatory or prohibitory laws are void.
EXCEPTIONS: 1. When the law itself authorized its validity (ex. lotto, sweepstakes) 2. When the law makes the act only voidable and not void (ex. voidable contracts where consent is vitiated) 3. When the law makes the act valid but punishes the violator (ex. marriage solemnized by a person without legal authority)
Waiver of rights Requisites: 1. Existence of a right 2. Knowledge of the existence of a right 3. Intention to relinquish the right
GR: Rights can be waived.
EXCEPTIONS: 1. If the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals or good customs (LPPMG) 2. If the waiver is prejudicial to a third party with a right recognized by law.
Laws applicable 1. Penal laws and laws of public security territoriality rule governs
laws of the Philippines will govern upon ALL those who live or sojourn in it 2. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons nationality rule applies laws of the Philippines will govern its citizens, regardless of their residence
EXCEPTION: When a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry under Philippine law. (Article 26(2) Family Code)
NOTE: domiciliary rule supplants the nationality rule in cases involving stateless persons
3. Laws on property lex rei sitae applies real property, as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated 4. Laws on forms and solemnities lex loci celebrationis applies
Rules on Personal Law DOMICILIARY RULE NATIONALITY RULE Basis for determining personal law of an individual is his domicile Basis for determining personal law of an individual is his citizenship
LEX NATIO- NALII LEX REI SITAE LEX LOCI CELEBRA- TIONIS Art. 15, CC Art. 16, CC Art. 17, CC Citizenship is the basis for determining the personal law applicable Law of the place where the property is situated is the basis for determining law applicable Law of the place where the contract was executed is the basis for determining law applicable Covers family rights & duties, status, condition & legal capacity Covers both real & personal property Covers only the forms & solemnities (extrinsic validity) Exception: Art. 26, par. 2 of Family Code Exceptions: 1. Capacity to succeed 2. Intrinsic validity of the will 3. Amount of successional rights 4. Order of succession Exceptions: 1. Art. 26, par. 1 of Family Code (marriage involving Filipinos solemnized abroad, when such are void in the Philippines) 2. Intrinsic validity of contracts
Doctrine of Processual Presumption The foreign law, whenever applicable, should be proved by the proponent thereof; otherwise, such law shall be presumed to be exactly the same as the law of the forum.
Rule on Prohibitive Laws GR: Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property and laws which have for their object public order, public policy or good customs are not rendered ineffective by laws, judgments promulgated or conventions agreed upon in foreign country.
EXCEPTION: Art. 26, par. 2 Family Code Example: Divorce law
Human Relations 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. (Art. 19 of NCC)
NOTE: The elements of an abuse of right under Art. 19 are: 1. There is a legal right; 2. Which is exercised in bad faith; 3. For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another. (Albenson Ent. Corp. vs. CA)
The SC in Velayo vs. Shell held the defendant liable under Art. 19 for disposing of its property (a perfectly legal act) in order to escape the reach of a creditor. Likewise, in Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp. vs. CA, the employer corporation was held liable for damages for an abusive manner in dismissing an employee, as well as for the inhuman treatment the latter got from them.
Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same. (Art. 20 of NCC) 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. (ART. 21 of NCC)
NOTE: Art. 21 deals with acts contra bonus mores, and has the following elements: 1. There is an act which is legal; 2. But which is contrary to morals, customs, public order; 3. and it is done with intent to injure. Arts. 19, 20 and 21 are related to each other and, under these articles, an act which causes injury to another may be made the basis for an award of damages.
There is a common element under Arts. 19 and 21, and that is, the act must be done intentional. However, Art. 20 does not distinguish, the act may be done either willfully or negligently. (Albenson Ent. Corp. vs. CA)
The SC in Pe vs. Pe, applying Art. 21 ruled that a married man had seduced a girl through an ingenious and tricky scheme, i.e. on the pretext of teaching her how to pray the rosary, to the extent of making her fall in love with him. Verily, he has committed an injury to the girls family in a manner contrary to morals, good customs and public policy.
However, in Tanjanco vs. CA, the SC denied the award of moral damages based on the fact that for one year, from 1958-1959, the plaintiff, a woman of adult age, maintained intimate sexual relations with defendant, with repeated acts of intercourse. Such conduct is incompatible with the idea of seduction. Plainly, there is here voluntariness and mutual passion; for had the plaintiff been deceived, had she surrendered exclusively because of the deceit, artful persuasions and wiles of defendant, she would not have again yielded to his embraces, much less for one year without exacting early fulfillment of the alleged promises of marriage and would have cut short all sexual relations upon finding that defendant did not intend to fulfill his promises. Hence, no case is made under Art. 21 of Civil Code.
While a breach of promise to marry is not actionable, it has been held that to formally set a wedding and go through and spend for all the wedding preparation and publicity, only to walk out of it when the matrimony was about to be solemnized is a different matter. This palpably and unjustifiably contrary to good customs for which the defendant must be held answerable for damages in accordance with Art. 21 of the Civil Code. (Wassmer vs. Velez)
The obligation of cohabitation of husband and wife is not enforceable by contempt proceedings. In private relations, physical coercion is barred under the the old maxim Nemo potest preciso cogi ad factum. However, the refusal of the wife to perform her wifely duties, her denial of consortium and her desertion of her husband would certainly constitute a willful infliction of injury upon her husbands feelings in a manner which is contrary to morals, good customs and public policy for which Arts. 21 and 2210 (10) of the CC authorize an award for moral damages. (Tenchavez vs. Escano)
Prejudicial Question If both criminal and civil cases are filed in court, the criminal case takes precedence. When there is a prejudicial question or a question that arises in a case, the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved herein, and the cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal. Requisites (Sec. 7, Rule 111, Rules of Court) a. Previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action, and b. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed
NOTE: The Civil Code has suppletory application in matters governed by special laws
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF LABOR, Et Al., Petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION (5th Division), Et Al., Respondents. G.R. No. 127718 March 2, 2000