Chapter 5

Case law and Precedent

doctrine of the Court is overruled and

the Court adopts a different view, or
Court Decisions as Law when there is a reversal of the doctrine,
the new doctrine applies prospectively
Court Decisions Rulings of the lower
courts and should not apply to parties who
These decisions are These are rulings relied on the old doctrine and acted in
“laws” by their own which bind the parties good faith.3
right because they to specific case
interpret what the law alone. Notes:
says or mean.
Supreme Court A ruling of a division  All lower courts are bound by supreme
decisions are of the Court of Court decisions.
“universal in their Appeals cannot bind
scope and or prejudice a ruling  The judiciary has to speak with one
application, and of another division voice to assure stability in legal relations
equally mandatory in and to avoid confusion.
character. 1  It speaks with finality, logically and
rightly, through the highest judicial
organ, which is the Supreme Court.
When does an application or
 Supreme Court rulings “should be
interpretation become a part of the
definitive and authoritative, binding on
law? those occupying the lower ranks in the
judicial hierarchy.”4
1. The application or interpretation placed
by the Court upon a law is part of the  The Supreme Court has the last word on
law “as of the date of the enactment of what the law is, and its decisions
the said law since the Court’s applying or interpreting the Constitution
application or interpretation merely and laws form part of this country’s legal
establishes the contemporaneous system.
legislative intent that the construed law  All other courts should then be guided
purports to carry into effect”.2 by the decisions of the Supreme Court.5
2. A judicial interpretation becomes a part  There is only one Supreme Court from
of the law as of the date that the law whose decisions should take their
was originally passed. However, when bearings.6

1 Philippine Veterans Affairs Office v. Segundo, G.R. No. 5 Conducto v. Monzon, Administrative
51570, August 15, 1988.
2 People v. Licera, G.R No. L- 39990, July 22, 1975. See
Matter No. MTJ-98-1147, July 2, 1998
6 Tugade v. CA, G.R. No. L-47772, August 31,
also National Amnesty Commission v. Commission on
Audit, G.R. No. 156982, September 08, 2004. 1978
3 De Jesus v. Aquino, G.R No. 164662, February 18, 2013.

Supreme Court decisions are also subject to Article 4 of

the Civil Code which provides that “laws shall have no
retroactive effect unless the contrary is provided.” See
also Spouses Gauvain v. CA, G.R No. 97973, January 27,
1992.
4Barrera v. Barrera, G.R No. L-31589, July 31,
1970.
 Chapter 5
Case law and Precedent
Stare Decisis, Res Judicata, and Law
of the Case
The Doctrine of Law of the Case vs. Stare
Decisis
It operates only in the The ruling adhered to
particular case and in the particular case
only as a rule of under the doctrine of
policy and not as one the law of the case
of law. need not be followed
as a precedent in a
subsequent litigation
between other
parties, neither by the
appellate court which
made the decision
followed on a
subsequent appeal in
the same case, nor
by any court.
The ruling covered by Once a point of law
the doctrine of the has been established
law of the case is by the court, that of
adhered to in a single point of law will,
case when it arises, generally, be followed
but is not carried into by the same court
other cases as a and by all courts of
precedent. lower rank in
subsequent cases
where the same legal
issue is raised.7
Stare Decisis
Means that like cases should be decided alike.8
Reasoning under the principle of stare
decisis is reasoning by analogy. As explained by
the Supreme Court,
7Ayala Corporation v. Rosa – Diana Realty and
Development Corporation, G.R No. 134284, December
1, 2000
Stare decisis simply means that a
judgment reached in one case
should be applied to successive
ones in which the facts are
substantially identical even though
the parties may be different. Like
cases ought to be decided alike. We
stress that when a court has laid
down a principle of law as applicable
to a certain state of facts, it will
adhere to that principle and apply it
to all future cases in which the facts
are substantially the same. Stare
Decisis et non quieta movere. Stand
by the decisions and disturb not
what is settled. Stare decisis simply
means that for the sake of certainty,
a conclusion reached in one case
should be applied to those that
follow if the facts are substantially
the same, even though the parties
may be different. It proceeds from
the first principle of justice that,
absent any powerful countervailing
considerations, like cases ought to
be decided alike.9
8See Steven L. Burton, An introduction to
Law and Legal Reasoning and Legal
Method 46-47 (1981).
9Villena v. Spouses Chavez, G.R. No. 148126,
November 10, 2003