PART I - HUMAN RELATIONS; PERSONALITY; DOMICILE (1-51 NCC)

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

RULING / NOTES

EFFECTIVITY

When do laws take effect?

15 days after publication in the OG/ Gen. Circulation

REFERENCE

EFFECTIVITY OF LAWS
NCC 2

OCC = AUG 30 50
NCC =
FC = AUG 3 88
LC 5

INTERNAL RULES

NLRC Internal Rules Regulations made?

Effective 15 days after announcement of their adoption in newspaper

BP 799

RATE OF INTEREST

No stipulation on rate of interest?

6% per annum
PUB/FIL = 6/28/13
EFFECT = 7/1/13

NLRC res (19-11)

ILLEGAL COLLECTION;
NON-PUBLICATION

Admin Issuance > Not filed w/ ONAR UPLC

not until 2y4m later = INVALID?

RAC 3 & 4

UPLC FILING,
EFFECTIVITY

Agency adopts rules, mandatory filing to

UPLC; Published but not filed

3 Copies in 3 Months. In ADDITION to the OTHER rule making requirements provided by law, each
rule effective 15 days from filing unless otherwise. LEGALLY INVALID, DEFECTIVE,
UNENFORCEABLE

Pasei v. SoL, Torres

Stare Decisis Et Quieta
Non Movere

NMSMI v DND

PUBLICATION

[PD423] Reserve land for Fort Bonifcacio

INVALID. [A2 NCC]

1 Publication is indispensable.
2 Unless otherwise provided refers to the effectivity date
3 No publication = deny public knowledge of its governance

Tanada v Tuvera

Marcoss Handwritten Addendum to

reclassify Western Bicutan as alienable not
included in OG [PD 2476]
COJUANCO v RP

SEC v GMA

PUBLICATION

PUBLICATION

Pasei v. SoL, Torres

[PD755] Ill gotten wealth benefiting from

Coconut Levy Funds
Cojuanco Agreement was made reference
for the compensation of shares in Section 1
of the PD
[PD6260]Coconut Investment Fund

Publication must be in full or it is not a publication at all.

Publications purpose is to inform the public in relation to NCC 3

But did not reproduce the exact contents,

nor was a copy attached thereto

martial law saw the need to develop coconut industry

Application to amend various AOI

Disagreement with Filing Fees

Rate-fixing is a legislative function which concededly has been delegated to the SEC by R.A. No.
3531, the courts may intervene by virtue of due process

Memorandum Circular 1:
Filing fees for articles of incorporation

In such case, MC 2 was not published in Official Gazette or NGC nor filed in the UPLC

Cojuanco Agreement did not have the effect of law

Shall be treated as an ordinary transaction

RETROACTIVITY and VESTED

RIGHTS
NCC 3

IGNORANCE

Ignorance excuses no one from

compliance

NCC 4

NON-RETROACTIVITY

Laws shall not retroact unless provided

FC 40

SUBSEQUENT MAR;
JUDICIAL DECLARATION

Subsequent MAR requires judicial

declaration

PN423
PD 2476

RA 3531

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

FC 105

RETROACTIVITY;
REGIME

CPG, FC provisions shall supplement,

even under OCC. XPN: vested rights

FC 256

RETROACTIVITY

Civil Code shall take effect retroactively

XPN impair vested rights of other laws

AM 02-11-10

PARTIES DECLARATION
OF NULLITY

Who may file?

RULING / NOTES

Covers marriages under the FC

Covers proceedings filed after 3/15/03
PETITION: DAN
VOID - collaterally attacked anytime
VOIDABLE - direct attack only XPN: during the lifetime
Court may pass upon the validity of marriage EVEN in a suit not directly instituted to question the
same so long as ESSENTIAL to the DETERMINATION of the case.

FC 147

COHABITATION BY
CAPACITATED PERSONS

1) Capacitated to marry, without the benefit

of marriage OR under void marriage?

1) Wages + salaries = EQUAL shares

2) Governed by CO-OWNERSHIP

2) Acquired through work/ industry?

3) PRESUMED joint efforts
3) Presumption?

FC 148

COHABITATION BY
INCAPACITATED
PERSONS

4) Did not participate in the acquisition?

4) DEEMED contributed = effort is care & maintenance of the home

NOT contributed = not

5) Disposition?

5) CANNOT dispose intervivos owned in common without CONSENT

6) In case of BAD FAITH?

6) Bad partys share is forfeited in this order to: (upon termination)

a) COMMON children
b) Descendants
c) Innocent party

2) Bad faith actor is validly married to

another?

1) PRESUMED equal shares and contributions

2) Accrue to such marriages ACP/CPG

3) Bad faith actor is not validly married?

3&4) Forfeiture Rules in 147
4) In case of BOTH BAD FAITH?
FC 149

FAMILY

Social Institution
Foundation of nation

Governed by LAW, not customs

FC 172

LEGIT FILIATION;
PROOF

1) How proven?
2) IF absent?

1)
a.Record of birth in civil registrar
b.Final judgement
2)
a. Open continuous possession of the status of legitimate child
b. Any other means allowed by RoC and Special Laws

FC 173

PERIOD TO FILE

When must the action to claim be filed?

During his lifetime and

What if the child dies?

transmitted to heirs IF
a) DEAD DURING MINORITY
b) INSANE

REFERENCE

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

RULING / NOTES

FC 174

RIGHTS OF LEGITIMATE

What rights do LCs have?

1. Surnames of Father & Mother

2. Support from Parents > Ascendants > (in cases) Brothers/Sisters
3. Legitime and other successional rights granted

FC 175

ILLEGITIMATE;
PROOF OF FILIATION

How may ICs prove?

Same way/evidence as LC

What period?

Same as LC
XPN: During lifetime of alleged parent
Open & continuous possession of status
Other means allowed by RoC and Special Laws

FC 256

CODE RETROACTIVITY

Does the Family Code have retro effects?

YES, insofar as it does not prejudice vested rights

R 72

SUBJECTS OF SPEC PRO

In absence of special provisions?

Ordinary rules apply

Estate/ Guardianship/ Escheat/ Trustees/ Adoption/ Recission/ Hospitalization/ Habeas Corpus/
Names/ V. Dissolution/ Recognition/ Home/ Absence or Death/ Entries

Quiao v ~

VESTED RIGHTS

MAR = OCC1977

Yes, the OCC provides for the appropriate rule for his Conjugal share to be forfeited in favor of the
common children

Legal Separation
Custody and delivery of presumptive
legitimes

The argument of Net Earned Profits applicable in the ACP provisions is untenable

REFERENCE

FC 102
FC 129
FC 256

Can a vested right defeat forfeiture?

Castillo v ~

PP v Ancajas

RETROACTIVE;
OLD CIVIL CODE;
VESTED RIGHTS

1st MAR = 1972, no license no consent

2nd MAR = 1979 valid in form, questioned
as subsequent, in subsisting 1st MAR

Validity must be ruled in accordance with the governing law at the celebration

RETROACTIVE;

RAPE, 2 guys, 17y/o, guilty, reclusion

perpetua to death

He was below 18 at the time of the conviction of the offense

People v Sarcia, the court did not distinguish the nature of the offense
34 y/o even if children in conflict maxes at 21, the spirit of the law extends to such age

VOID v VOIDABLE
OCC = No JD needed to be VOID
NCC = JD needed to be VOID

Mendoza/Aragon/Amante
Domingo
Apiag/TY, NCC =/= old
marriages
RA 9344

5 20 06 - Juvenile Justice Welfare Act

The shall retroact to the age of the offender when the crime was committed

SEC v Laigo

NATURE OF LAW;

SRC - Pre-Need Code requires making

trust funds, for planholders

Carolino v Senga

VESTED RIGHT,
DEFINITION
NOT RETROACTIVE

Retired AFP Colonel in 1976 under RA 340, Due process prohibits annihilation of vested rights except in a legitimate exercise of police power
withheld benefits in 05, struck of retire list
Vested Right is the concept of present fixed interest in right reason and natural justice be protected
Does PD 1638 infringe on Ps Retirement
against arbitrary state action
benefits? [Loss of FIL citizenship
terminates retirement benefits]
Vested rights = legal/equitable title, exemption from new obligations after the right vests
Definition of Vested Right?

The nature of the PNC was curative, hence it may retroactively be applied
If it takes or gives rights, it is substantive

S33 & S35 recognizes vested rights, nothing shall construe the reduction of benefits received under
existing law; xxx to preserve the rights granted at the time of its passage

RA 340
PD 1638, sgd. 1979

Rotairo v Alcantara

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

RULING / NOTES

REFERENCE

RETROACTIVE INTENT

Recover land foreclosed and subsequently

sold

PD 957 is intently RETROACTIVE

PD 957, sgd. 1976

Subdv and Condo
Protective Degree

1968 - Mortgaged land

1970 - Sold to R, constructed land thereon
1974 - Foreclosed
1975 - Sold to daughter
PD 957

Duenas v Santos

NOT RETROACTIVE

S21 says: Condos sold before effectivity, MUST complete its obligations w/in 2 years shall be
punished in 38/39 of this degree
INTENT = BAD FAITH

Eugenio v Drilon (nondevelopment of

subdivision)

An express provision must be made in order to retroact, there is none here

PD 1216

Eugenio, non-development of the subdivision is not present in this case, nor any allegation of nonpayment of amortizations

Eugenio v Drilon (N/A)

1949 - MAR, no license

1950 - license issued
Filing for dead brother, heir

OCC & NCC contain no provision on who can file a petition to declare the nullity of a marriage

AM 2-11-10 (N/A)

>>>Children allowed to file after fathers death

Real party in interest? Filed out of time?

Spouse should have been impleaded, Wife = indispensable party, substantial rights in this action will
definitely affect.

Carlos v Sandoval
(petitioner must stand to
benefit)

PD 1216 amended PD 957 requiring subd

devs to provide sidewalks, reserve open
space, alleys
1966 - HLURB approved land -> Subd
1998 - Tenant didnt want to provide reqs.
in PD 1216

Ablaza v RP

OLD CIVIL CODE

Did not implead widower and daughter

Nial v Bayadog MAR1986

OCC: NO MARRIAGE LICENSE NEEDED
72 Articulo Mortis/50km+ remotely away
74 Articulo Mortis during voyage
75 Celebrated Abroad before consul/vice
76 Valid Cohabitation
77 Religious Ratification
78 & 79 - Involving Mohammedans/Pagans

NCC 1001
NCC 1003

REINSTATED CASE w/ spouse and daughter

Guy v CA

WAIVER

P for Letters of Administration, no need

daw

WAIVER IS VOID for lack of intention to relinquish a known right

At this stage they have yet to determine their successional rights

failed to prove their filiation during the

lifetime of Sima Wei

OCC: 285
Illegitimate Minors whose putative parent died during their are given the right to seek recognition for
a period of up to four years from attaining majority age. This vested right was not impaired or taken
Release and Waiver Claim for financial and away
educational assistance, will THIS bar them
from claiming successional rights?
FC:
prescription depends on the type of evidence to be adduced

1992 - Sima Wei died intestate

R 74
OCC 285 - Action to
recognize may be
brought during the
lifetime of the parents
only
(1) 4 yrs from majority
(2) recognize child

Ty v CA

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

RULING / NOTES

REFERENCE

OLD CIVIL CODE

2 Wedding Ceremonies, CIVIL 3mos

CHRCH

FC shall not retroact for it shall impair vested rights of the petitioner and children

People v. Mendoza
People v. Aragon
VOID FROM
PERFORMANCE

1st MAR = 1977 married twice, license

2nd MAR = 1979 before declaring void 1st
1st MAR = 1980 declared void, consent
2nd MAR = 1982 married church

2nd marriage of private respondent was entered into in 1979, before Wiegel. At that time, the
prevailing rule was found in Odayat, Mendoza and Aragon. The first marriage of private respondent
being void for lack of license and consent

Mercado v Tan
Bobis v Bobis
Gomez v. Lipana
Consuegra v. Consuegra,

recycled marriage license = does not

detract its ceremonial use

OCC 83
DEAD 7
RP v Miller

VESTED RIGHTS;
ADOPTION
DEFINITION

1998 SPS, both American, adopted a

Filipino boy under CYWC

Vested Rights = Fixed Interest, whose existence, effectivity and does not depend on events foreign to (Child Youth Welfare
the will of the holder
Code)

SolGen opposed

The right has become vested at the time of filing of the petition for adoption

Atienza v Brillantes

RETROACTIVE;

Gross IMMOR, IMPROP case with Judge B FC 40 applies regardless when 1st MAR celebrated
FC 40 is procedural = no vested rights
FC 40 can retroact?
Subsequent MAR is VOID
1st MAR = OCC1965, no license
2nd MAR = FC 1991 in CALI

NCC 8

LEGAL SYSTEM

What forms part of the legal system of the

PH?

Jurisprudence,

FC 36

PSYCHOLOGICAL
INCAPACITY

When do you consider one to be

Psychologically Incapacitated?

A marriage contracted
Psychologically Incapacitated
To Comply with
ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS
= VOID

Weigel v Sempio-Diy

OLD CIVIL CODE

OLD CIVIL CODE MAR - 1986 ONWARDS

THERE IS A NEED FOR JD

UNFAIR COMPETITION

When is there a right of action under NCC

28?

In AGRI/COMR/INDS/LABR:

FC 40

Failure to perform
ESSENTIAL MARITAL
OBLIGATIONS

STARE DECISIS; CASE LAW

NCC 28

through:
FORCE/INTIMIDATION
DECEIT/MACHINATION/
OTHER UNJUST, HIGH HANDED METHOD
FBDC v CIR

PLDT v Alvarez

ET NON QUIETA MOVERE

PENDING CASES

Converting Fort Boni lots

Issues already passed twice finality

Claim for refund or input tax credit

Goods part of transitional input tax

Cannot depart from such pronouncements

International Simple Resale (ISR) which

amounts to theft under the RPC

Stare decisis only applies to FINAL decisions, in such other case, may still be MRd
Judicial decisions form part of the legal system of the Philippines

PLDT v Laurel is pending finality, where it

ruled similarly that

PD401
Ting v Ting

Ting v Velez Ting

TOPIC

PARTICULARS

RULING / NOTES

REFERENCE

RULINGS &
RETROACTIVITY

PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY
MAR 1975
Alcoholism/ Violence/ Gambling/ NonSupport
Presented Expert Witnesses

The interpretation/construction of a law constitutes as part of the law from when the statute was
enacted

Santos v CA

STARE DECISIS DEFINED

Should Santos and Molina Doctrines be

applied retroactively?

Molina v CA
BUT
When a prior ruling is overruled, and a different view is adopted that the new doctrine shall apply
prospectively in favor of parties who relied on the old doctrine in good faith LEX PROSPICIT, NON
RESPICIT
HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL, CONSTITUTIONAL/STATUTORY

Planned PArenthood v
Casey - Practical, Undue
Hardship