MODULE 1: The Philippine Legal System: Nature, Application and Effectivity of Laws (Art 1-18, Civil Code of The Philippines)
MODULE 1: The Philippine Legal System: Nature, Application and Effectivity of Laws (Art 1-18, Civil Code of The Philippines)
Procedural Law;
MODULE 1: The Philippine Legal System: Nature, application Mandatory/Obligatory Law vs.
and effectivity of Laws (Art 1-18, Civil Code of the Philippines) Permissive/Suppletory/Directory Law
1. Define law. What is the purpose of law and legal system?
Human Positive Law is a classification under Positive Laws. It
Law in its most generic sense is an ordinance of reason
is a reasonable rule of action, expressly or directly promulgated
promulgated for the common good by people in charge.(The
by competent human authority for the common good, usually
government)
but not necessarily imposing sanctions in case of disobedience.
The purpose of the legal system is mainly to protect order,
Public Law vs Private Law
resolve disputes and protect the rights of the people.
Public law governs relations of the individual with the state,
community or the government while Private Law regulates the
2. What are the broad classifications of Law? Given the Roman
relationship of individual members of a community with one
law roots of our legal system, what is the difference between
another
Spanish terms “derecho” and “ley”?
Accdg to the book, Civil Code of the Philippines annotated by
Substantive Law vs. Procedural Law
Paras, Laws may be classified according to the manner of its
Substantive Laws establish rights and duties while Remedial or
promulgation.
Procedural laws prescribe the manner of enforcing such legal
a. Natural Law – are promulgated impliedly according to our
rights and claims.
conscience and body. They are laws which are not needed to be
written for us to understand (I.e moral laws and law of nature)
The Civil Code of the Philippines is the law governing private RULE: Exclude the first day, Include the last day
laws, specifically persons and family relations, property rights,
ownership and modifications and the obligations and contracts. Executive Order No 200 modified Article 2 of the Civil code
which allowed publication of laws either in the Official Gazette Interpretative regulations and those merely internal in nature, that is,
or in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines as a regulation only personnel of the administrative agency and NOT THE
requirement for effectivity. PUBLIC, need not to be published. For so-called memorandums
issued by the superiors concerning rules or guidelines to be followed
In Tanada v. Tuvera by their employees in the performance of their duties also need not to
Publication is an indispensable requirement before a law comes be published.
into effect. The effectivity clause of a law is only valid when
the requirement for publication is meant either in the Official Accordingly, even regional, municipal, barangay level ordinances
gazette or a newspaper of general circulation. must be published if it applies to its constituents.
The only exception to the 15-day rule is when the Law In Basa V. Mercado
provides for its own effectivity date. In the case, Tanada v.
Tuvera, the Supreme Court ruled that what is meant by “comes Section 630 of the Code of Civil Procedure is taken form the Code
into effect by (date)” is that the law comes into effect after its of the Civil Procedure of the State of Vermont.
publication.
What is meant by Section 630 of the Code of Civil Procedure on
However, Article 4 of the Civil code prohibits retroactive “three weeks successively” is that the public notice through a
application of the law unless provided. Therefore, as discussed newspaper of general circulation be made on three separate dates not
by the Supreme Court on Tanada v. Tuvera, When the law specifically meaning every week of the three weeks.
meant it comes into effect immediately, it means that it comes
into effect after its publication. RULING: Appeal denied
Section 1 of Executive no. 200 provided for the exception to In National Electrification Administration v. Gonzaga
the 15-day publication rule which allowed shorter or even
longer periods for a law before a specific law takes into effect. Executive Order No 292, Chapter 2, Sections 3, 4 and 18 reinforced
the requirement of publication and provided additional procedure as to
Laws covered under the publication rule how government agencies deal with it accordingly.
a. Penal laws
b. Laws that affect public interest The court emphasized the rule on Publication in the resolution
c. Administrative rules and regulations if their purpose is to on Tanada v. Tuvera:
implement existing law pursuant also to a valid delegation.
All statutes, including those of local and private laws, shall be
published as a condition for their effectivity which shall begin
15 days after publication unless there is a provided effectivity
date by the legislature. RULING: Fortuna spouses was not able to prove ownership of
the land the qrefore, petition denied.
RULING: Deny the petition and affirm IN TOTO the decision
of the Court of Appeals Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig v. Military
Shrine Services
Philsa International Placement and Services Corp. v.
Secretary of Labor et. al The court cannot rely on a handwritten note by the President
Marcos that was not part of Proclamation No. 2476 and was
Administrative Rules and Regulations must be published if not included in the publication.
their purpose is to enforce and implement existing law pursuant
to a valid delegation. The publication must be COMPLETE before a law can take
effect.
The only exception to the requirement of publication is those of
internal in nature. In this case, the questioned administrative RULING: Petition denied
circular was argued by the Solicitor General that is addressed
only to a specific group of persons not the general public. Cojuanco Jr. v. Republic
The court cited its decision on Phil. Association of Service The questioned Section 1 of P.D No. 755 bears no effect as
Exporters v. Torres which even concerned a small group. The there is no evidence of publication. In Tanada v. Tuvera it was
questioned administrative circular was ruled by court as not emphasized that Presidential decrees are included on those
internal In nature, not an interpretative regulation and not even laws that needs to be published before it takes effect.
a letter of their superiors concerning the internal rules and
guidelines to be followed by their employees on their duties. RULING: Petition denied
RULING: The court ruled that the circular be not considered in Municipality of Tupi v. Faustino
deciding the case
Section 59 of the Local Government Code of 1991; Paragraph
Fortuna v. Republic of the Philippines (c) mentioned the need to publish the GIST of the ordinance on
a newspaper of general circulation within the province on local
While the argument using Tanada v. Tuvera was recognized, ordinances or resolutions. In the absence of any newspaper of
Fortuna was not able to prove ownership in accordance with general circulation, posting of such ordinances shall be made in
the requirements of Public Land Act Section 48(b). The said all municipalities and cities of the province where the
issue with publication does not merit the case sanggunian of origin is situated.
not be excused by disuse or custom or practice to the contrary.
Respondent called for declaratory relief of the said petition but However, in cases where nullification of the efforts will result
the court held that it was the wrong way to go. in inequity and injustice, the operative doctrine may apply.
Declaratory Relief under Sec 1, Rule 63, Rules of Court & The Operative Fact doctrine does not apply on the case because
(Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, et al) can be filed 1. The doctrine was not raised.
by a person on which his/her rights is affected by a statute, 2. There was no reliance by the public in good faith on the
executive order, or regulation BEFORE breach of violation, ordinance. In fact, there were no public beneficiaries of the
thereof, bring an action to the appropriate. ordinance
Faustino already violated the Tupi’s ordinance prior to his RULING: Petition denied. Order for refund of all fines
filing of declaratory relief which makes him disqualifies him to collected other than the respondent is deleted.
file under the rules of court.
7. To fix the effectivity date of a law, and to ascertain when
The Court held that the ordinance be void ab initio as it rights and obligations begin or end, you need to know how to
contradicts Sections 35, 36 and 38 of RA No. 4136. compute legal periods.
However, the Rules of Court explicitly provides that those Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Primetown
affected on a certain case must be properly enjoined on the title Property Group Inc.
of the case and shall be deemed to be the real part in interest.
Since only the respondent’s name was present on the title of Art. 13 of the Civil code provides computation of legal periods.
the case, others cannot be entitled to the benefits or avails of Article 13 states that:
this suit. 1 year = 365 days
1 month = 30 days
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. San Roque Power 1 day = 24 hours
Corporation 1 night = sunset to sunrise
The doctrine of Operative Fact If the months are designated by their name, they shall be
The doctrine of Operative fact is an exception to the general computed by the number of days which they respectively have.
rule such that judicial declaration of invalidity may not However, Section 1, Chapter VIII, Book 1 of the
necessarily obliterate all the effects and consequences of a void Administrative Code of 1987 deals with the same matter.
act prior to such declaration. Under the administrative code of 1987,
1 year = 12 calendar months, the number of days is
Article 7 of the Civil Code states that laws are repealed only by irrelevant. There exists obvious disparity as to how legal
subsequent ones, and their violation and non-observance shall periods are computed. In this matter, the administrative code of
1987 being the more recent law. Lex posteriori derogate Needless to say, foreign laws there being no judicial notice of
priori (A later law repeals an earlier one) said laws is an exception. (Adong v. Cheon Seng Gee)
RULING: Order of Dismissal Appealed. Case is reinstated. Mandatorism as used to characterized laws
Under Article 5 of the CCP, acts executed against the
8. Once a Law has complied with the indispensable prior provisions of mandatory and prohibitory laws shall be void
requistes for effectivity, study the following legal principles: except when the law itself authorizes its validity.
Ignorantia legis non excusat
Lex Prospicit, non respicit Mandatory laws must be followed unless the law authorizes
Mandatorism, as used to characterize laws such act otherwise it must be void.
Inherent Natural rights are those rights you are born with and
you cannot take from a person such as right to life, liberty and
property.
1.