FAVOR OF THE LAW

Jomy Thottiyan Jose

1. MEANING AND SCOPE OF THE LAW FAVOR

The term favor of the law ( favor iuris) appears three times in the Code: in c.1060 referred
to marriage; in c.1150, applied to the privilege of faith (Vid III, 3.); and in c.1608, 4, which
prescribes that the judge was unable to get proper moral certainty has not sentencing the
applicant's right and exonerate the defendant "unless it be a cause that enjoys the favor of right
(iuris favore fruente), "in which case they should pronounce in favor of it. In the CIC / 17 it was
said: "Unless it be a favored cause" (c.1869 4). Under this provision, in cases enjoyed the favor
of law, if the judge fails to achieve proper moral certainty should rule in favor of the cause,
regardless of the position of the Parties concerned. According to the common doctrine, among
them criminal cases (cc.1717-1728), causes related to the privilege of faith (c.1150), the grounds
for invalidity (cc.1160 are included; 1171-1691) and marital separation (cc.1692-1696) of time and
not consummated (cc.1697-1700) of presumed death of spouse (c.1707) and the grounds for
invalidity of sacred ordination (cc.1708- 1712).
Favor of the right means positive by the law deal. Clearly, any rule, any legal entity,
institution of order, require a certain favor and protection to be operational. However, when
discussing the favor of law, alluded to a special privileged preferential treatment, which tends
to favor the cause in question.

2. THE LAW IN FAVOR OF CRIMINALS CAUSES

In criminal cases, favor the right background is verified on the general trend of the right
to protect the defendant potential before it becomes legally in such deli mitando accurately
settings crimes and favor exonerating causes and attenuating imputability in case of external
violation of the law protected penalties. In this regard, it should be noted first the general rule
that laws establishing a penalty are subject to strict interpretation (c.18), extremely favorable to
the offender norm. Then the accused is to apply the most favorable law; Moreover, if a later
law removes criminal law or at least the penalty, it ceases immediately (c.1313). Moreover, the
violation of the law by omission of due diligence is not punishable unless the law provides
otherwise (c.1321 82). In addition, seven grounds for exoneration (c.1323) and ten mitigating
causes of lists penalties (c.1324).
At any stage of the process, if it is established that the crime was not committed by the
accused, the judge must declare a judgment and acquit the accused and even though

1
contemporaneously record the extinction of the criminal action (c.1726). The defendant is not
obliged to confess to the crime and is liable to the oath (c.1728 82). Finally, the defendant may
file appeal even if the sentence had condemned not only because the penalty was facultative
or because the judge had exercised discretionary powers under the Act to mitigate penalties
(c.1727)

3. "MARRIAGE ENJOYS THE FAVOR OF LAW’

The complex institution of marriage is a privileged sector, where for the right exerts a
particularly significant role. In fact, c.1060 (CIC c.1014 / 17) states with particular emphasis favor
of law regarding marriage in both pair is in which is structured canon.

a) Background
Favor of the antecedent law as tendency of the right to promote the exercise of the ius
nubendi is common to all legal systems, albeit with different accents that depend on the
ideological and sociological context thereof. The Church promotes and protects specific ethical
and spiritual values which, for the most part, are acting privileged place in the family. Therefore,
the general principle is valid according to c everyone can marry if the law is not prohibited (c.
1058). Being an institution that has important public implications, it is evident that before the
marriage must be lawful proof that nothing opposes its valid and licit celebration (c.1066).
However, contrary to what happens when it comes to the declaration of nullity, it is left to the
jurisdiction of the episcopal conferences with the rules on the means to verify the free status of
the contracting parties: examination of spouses, warnings or other means (c.1067).
In danger of death, may be sufficient pa said verification assertion parts (c.1068). The
lack of catechetical preparation or spiritual provisions to receive the sacrament fruitfully
(cc.1065-1067) are never enough not to admit a faithful marriage motive. If nothing has
legitimately oppose the marriage valid and licit celebration, the faithful have the right to be
admitted to the marriage, but, in turn, satisfied that the requirements are not met for a fruitful
reception of the sacrament. As seen impediments, if accepted which presuppose a free choice
of life by the interested sacred religious--order and vows no law of church disables absolute
way to marriage.
The age impediment sets a limit (14 years for women and 16 for males) that exceeds
some natural puberty required by natural law (c.1083). Collateral consanguinity existing law
extends only to the fourth degree (c.1091 S2). The impediment of public honesty is I saw people
only in first grade straight (c.1093). Everyone else can be dispensed under ordinary
circumstances by the Ordinary (c.1078) while in danger of death (c.1079) and in case of

2
emergency (c.1080) the powers to dispense are still much wider both as it regards persons
enjoying such power as regards the impediments that may be dispensed.
As regards natural disabilities (cf. c. 1095) it is clear that the Church cannot supply what
nature given. The canonical form, which was introduced in canon law by the Council of Trent,
undoubtedly marks a significant restriction of individual freedom to marry in favor of the public
dimension of matrimonial institution. But the Code, even trying to maintain the effectiveness of
the institution of canonical form and not empty it of s purposes originating, seeks to avoid, with
various instruments, the risk that this will lead to a multiplication of void marriages. Finally, we
must mention the recognition of marriage as a typical institution of ordering co CANONI for
marriage. Such recognition can make is, if certain assumptions are met, both the renewal of the
consent of one party (cc.1158-1159), and through the healing root, which is carried out without
the renewal of consent neither spouse (cc.1161-1165).
From all this the favor of an apparent right tecedente, i.e. trend as the right to favor-
Recer the marriage, without prejudice to the normal Mativa sufficiently ensuring the public
dimension of the institution of marriage.

b) Consequent
Favor of the law states that the tendency of the right to benefit both people living
together in marriage or born of marriage as stability and legal certainty of the marriage
institution. As directly concerning spouses, for the right found few concrete expressions in
canon law, precisely because the Church, not being competent concerning the merely civil
effects of marriage, has a fairly limited area in which to express this favor. As regards children
born of the marriage, the most significant expression of the law is therefore in favor of the
Institute of legitimacy birth. In the current law, contrary to what happened in the CIC / 17, it is
just as legitimate or illegitimate children and legi scammed. In addition, currently, as canonical
effects, there is no treatment difference between legitimate, legitimate and illegitimate (c.1140).
Without any exception regarding incestuous children, adulterous, sacrilegious, contrary to the
prescriptions of the CIC / 17 (c.1116), collecting a long tradition.
In canon law, the favor of law finds particular relevance in the trend of the right to
protect the stability of marriage, once held. Among the most sensitive manifestations favor
consequent right, first mentioned in some presumptions that the law provides for marriage,
which place the burden of proof on who argues the opposite. The favor of the law finds a
particularly sensitive application in the process for the declaration of nullity, which has a peculiar
structure that tends to ensure as much as possible that the declaration of nullity by the court
corresponds to the objective nullity of the marriage. Clearly, as in any judgment it is required
in the mind of the judge moral certainty that everything must decide.

3
 This application of the general principle of favor iuris has been answered in recent
decades. It seems that, in case of doubt insoluble, should prevail freedom of the parties to
contract a new marriage. However, if c is applied. 1060, gives the impression that most favors
the institution of marriage that people involved in it.
First of all, keep in mind that this is a general principle applied quod factum est,
praesumitur recte factum (in law, what has been done, it is presumed that has been righteously).
In addition, there is the presumption established by c.1101 81: "The internal consent of the mind
is presumed to conform to the words or signs used in celebrating the marriage."
Favor of right also applies in the case of a second marriage celebrated doubt based on
the first and the first marriage enjoys the favor of law, the second must be declared void. In this
sense the true statement of the Pontifical Commission for the Interpretation of CIC of 26 June
1947 (AAS 39 [1947) 374) ruled.

c) Prevalence of privilege of faith

Favor of the right enjoyed by marriage, according to c.1060, yields to the favor of the
right of enjoying the privilege of faith according to c.1150 in case of doubt, the privilege of the
faith enjoys the favor of law ". In the CIC / 17 express mention of this fact, which was presented
as an exception to the general principle stated in the canon it was made. Instead, in c.1060 no
mention of such an exception is made as it is not necessary, since the c.l150 sets out the principle
unequivocally. The privilege of faith taken in a totally general sense, namely as comprising all
cases of non-times marriages, and therefore soluble, regardless of the method by which, in the
law in force, can obtain the dissolution of link: the Pauline privilege (cc.1143-1147) other cases
are resolved locally (cc.1148-1149) and cases requiring recourse to the Holy See.