(Adiani) Persons and Family Relations Deck - Cases of Article 3-21 of the Revised Civil Code

What happened in Tañada vs Tuvera?

• Challenged non-publication of several Presidential decrees

• Tañada: former minority floor leader of Senate

• Tuvera: Executive Assistant of President

• Court in 1985 ruled that penalties passed must be published in the Official Gazette

• Petitioners filed for reconsideration/clarification on the details of the ruling

What was the main point of contention in Tañada vs Tuvera?

Article 2 states that laws take effect 15 days following publication, "unless it is otherwise provided." The Supreme Court ruled that this clause refers only to the date of effectivity (the legislature may shorten or lengthen the 15-day period), not to the necessity of publication in the Official Gazette itself.

What was the ruling in Tañada v.s. Tuvera?

• Mandatory Publication: The Court held that publication in the Official Gazette is essential for all laws to take effect.

• Full Publication: The publication must be in full, not just titles or summaries.

• Effectivity: Laws take effect 15 days after publication unless the law provides a different date, but they still require publication.

• Applicability: This applies to all laws, including those of local application and private laws, but not to internal, administrative regulations.

What was the relation between the Tañada and Tuvera case to Article 2-3 of the RCC?

Tañada v. Tuvera (1986) established that publication in the Official Gazette is mandatory for all laws, including presidential decrees, to take effect, and the advocacy of the articles for due process.

What specific issuances were they striving to publish?

Presidential Decrees, Executive Orders, and administrative rules of general application

What was Tañada and Tuvera trying to prevent with this case?

“Secret” or Hidden Laws

What happened in People v.s. Que Po Lay?

Que Po Lay was found guilty by a lower court for violating Central Bank Circular No. 20, which required selling foreign exchange to the Central Bank, for failing to do so regarding $7,000

What was the main point of contestation in Que Po Lay?

The circular was issued in 1949, but only published in the Official Gazette in November 1951, after the alleged offense.

What was the ruling of People v.s. Que Po Lay?

The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and acquitted Lay, holding that an unpublished circular cannot be enforced, as the public must be informed of regulations that impose penalties.

What Maxim did the court apply in People v.s. Que Po Lay?

ignorantia legis non excusat

ignorantia legis non excusat

ignorance of the law excuses no one

What is the relation between the Que Po Lay case to Article 2 and 3 of the RCC?

Established the doctrine that administrative rules and regulations with penal sanctions must be published in the Official Gazette to be binding and effective.

In Que Po Lay, what was the evidence used against the petitioner?

Central Bank Circular No. 20, but it was not force and effect due to its tardiness in publication within the Official Gazette

Lex non scripta non obligat

The principle that unwritten law do not bind parties unless they are made known or published

What happened in DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals? 

Jose Juego, a construction worker for D.M. Consunji, Inc., died after falling 14 floors from the Renaissance Tower in Pasig City. An investigation revealed that the platform he was on collapsed because a bolt connecting it to a chain block became loose due to the absence of a safety lock

What doctrine was used in explaining negligence of DM Consunji?

Res Ipsa Loquitur

Res Ipsa Loquitur

“The thing speaks for itself”, accident would not have happened without negligence

What was the main point of contestation in the case of DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals?

DM Consunji stated that the widow, Maria Juego, waived her right to sue by claiming death benefits from the State Insurance Fund.

The Court argued, however, that she was not informed that her husband died by negligence, thus not being informed of her whole choice and ability in the matter (specifically in being able to sue for damages)

What was the ruling of DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals?

filing for benefits under the Labor Code does not bar a subsequent claim for damages under the Civil Code (based on the Floresca v. Philex Mining Corp. doctrine) if the claimant was unaware of the employer's negligence at the time of the initial claim

How was Ignorance of Fact applied in DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals?

The Court ruled that widow was unaware of the employer’s negligence at the time of her initial claim of waiving her right to sue, making her choice not an "intelligent" one.

What was the relation between the DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals to Article 6 of the RCC?

According to Article 6, for a waiver to be valid under Article 6, it must be "made with a full understanding of its consequences".

Lack of informed choice. The widow was not fully informed of the founded negligence as reason of death regarding her husband while working at DM Consunji

Doctrine of Intelligent Choice

A waiver that is "intelligent" means it is not made through ignorance, mistake, or deception.

What is Floresca Doctrine in context of DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals?

Floresca v. Philex Mining Corp.: Heirs of Philex Mining employees who died in a 1967 mine cave-in sued for damages, alleging the company's gross negligence and failure to take safety precautions.

How did the Floresca Doctrine help reach a ruling in the DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals case?

Court ruled that filing for benefits under the Labor Code does not bar a subsequent claim for damages under the Civil Code (based on the Floresca v. Philex Mining Corp. doctrine) if the claimant was unaware of the employer's negligence at the time of the initial claim

What happened in Cui v.s. Arellano?

Emeterio Cui, a law student, held scholarships at Arellano University but transferred to another school for his final semester. Arellano University withheld Cui's transcripts, refusing to release them until he repaid P1,033.87 in scholarship tuition fees, citing a signed waiver.

What did Arellano University in Cui v. Arellano withhold from the plaintiff?

Transcript of Records to Transfer Schools

Is the freedom of contract absolute?

No. It must yield to public policy

What is the legal basis of declaring the waiver contract void in Cui v. Arellano?

Memorandum No. 38, it declared wavier contract void + prohibited schools from making scholars pay tuition fee as retaliation for transferring schools

What is the relevance of Article 6 in Cui v.s. Arellano?

Cui’s waiver was void because it violates public policy. Scholarships must encourage student mobility and merit-based education rather than commercializing scholarships.

When can you not waive your rights?

Unless the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs

What was the ruling of Cui v.s. Arellano?

he Court ordered Arellano University to refund the money collected from Emeterio Cui, declaring scholarships are merit-based, not business tools for student retention.

What is the case of Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera? 

Imelda Pilapil (Filipino) married Erich Geiling (German) in Germany. They separated, and a German court granted a divorce in 1986. Months after the divorce, Geiling filed adultery charges in the Philippines against Pilapil for alleged affairs during their marriage.

Was German court’s decision on divorce applicable to Philippine courts in Pilapil v. Ibay Somera?

Since Erich Geiling was a German national and the divorce was valid under German law, the Philippines recognized the decree as having successfully severed his marital bond.

What was the criminal accusation of the German in Pilapil v. Ibay Somera?

Pilapil, the Filipina, had committed adultery while married to the German.

Did the criminal accusation of the German against the Filipina in Pilapil v. Ibay Somera hold weight?

No. The German filed the adultery complaints 5 months after the official divorce with Pilapil. This removes his claim of being the “offended spouse” because they were no longer married.

What is the relevance of Article 15 of the RCC to Pilapil v. ibay-Somera? 

Under Article 15 of the Civil Code, laws relating to family rights, status, and legal capacity bind Philippine citizens even if they live abroad. Conversely, the status of an alien is governed by their own national law.

Therefore, if the German successfully gets a divorce with a Filipino under German law, it nullifies the marriage as the German law governs the German.

Likewise, if the Philippine law states that you can only be charged by adultery from a complaint of an “offended spouse” the courts require evidence of marriage—which was severed by divorce.

What is the case of Roehr v. Rodriquez? 

German citizen Wolfgang Roehr obtained a divorce decree in Germany against his Filipina wife, Maria Carmen D. Rodriguez, which included custody of their children awarded to the German. Rodriguez had already filed a nullity of marriage case in the Philippines.

res judicata

“A matter judged”
—legal doctrine preventing parties from re-litigating claims or issues that have already received a final judgment on the merits by a competent court.

What is the relevance of Article 15 of the RCC to Roehr v. Rodriguez?

Although the divorce filed in the German court by Roehr was valid in Philippine law, matters of family and children (i.e., custody) will remain subject to Philippine court determination.

audi alteram partem

“right to be heard”
—a fundamental legal principle ensuring that no person is judged without a fair, impartial hearing where they can present their case before an adverse decision is made

How is audi alteram partem applied in the case of Roehr v.s. Rodriquez?

For a foreign judgment (like a custody award) to have the effect of in the Philippines, the opposing party must have been given an ample opportunity to challenge it.

The Court found that Rodriguez was not given such an opportunity in the summary German proceedings.

What is the ruling of Roehr v.s. Rodriquez?

The Supreme Court allowed the trial court to proceed with the child custody hearing but noted that it could not resolve property relations because both parties had previously admitted they owned no conjugal property.

What is the case of Garcia v. Recio?

Rederick married Editha Samson (an Australian) in the Philippines in 1987. In 1989, an Australian court issued a divorce decree for Rederick and Editha.

Rederick became an Australian citizen in 1992. Rederick married Grace in the Philippines in 1994, declaring himself "single" and "Filipino" in the license application. Grace filed for nullity of marriage in 1998, alleging bigamy because Rederick's first marriage was supposedly still subsisting.

What was the criminal accusation against the accused in Garcia v. Recio?

Bigamy.

Judicial Notice

In Philippine law, "judicial notice" refers to facts that a judge can accept as true without any evidence because they are common knowledge

Is Recio’s previous divorce decree under judicial notice from Garcia v. Recio?

No. Philippine courts cannot assume a foreign divorce is valid. The party claiming the divorce (Rederick) must prove both the divorce decree itself and the foreign law that allows it and defines its legal effects.

Why can’t the court assume foreign divorce means immediate ability to remarry?

Some divorces don’t grant ability to remarry.

A Vinculo Matrimonii

Absolute divorce; cuts the "legal tie" completely, leaving both parties legally single and free to remarry.

A Mensa Et Thoro

Limited divorce; more like a legal separation; marriage bond remains enforced; cannot remarry

Burden of Proof for Divorce in Garcia v. Recio?

Because the divorce was a defense raised by Rederick to prove his capacity to remarry, the burden was on him to prove Australian law supported his claim.

What did the court find out about Recio’s divorce? (Garcia v. Recio)

The Court noted that Rederick’s Australian divorce was a Decree Nisi, failing to establish evidence of absolute divorce from previous marriage

Steps of Divorce when Partial Divorces Happen (Garcia v. Recio)

1. Decree Nisi: A provisional or "interlocutory" order. It states that the court is satisfied with the grounds for divorce, but the marriage is not yet officially over. There is usually a waiting period (often one month) before it can be finalized.

2. Decree Absolute: This is the final order that actually dissolves the marriage. Only after this decree is issued are you legally "divorced" and free to remarry.

Ruling of Garcia v. Recio

• Recio failed to prove he was capacitated to remarry

• Since the first marriage might still have existed legally when he married Grace, his second marriage could be considered bigamous and void under Philippine law.

What is the relevance of Garcia v. Recio to Article 15?

National laws govern their citizens even abroad (within the defining limitations of Art. 15. Therefore, Recio, who is bound by Australian law has to, according to the premise of his divorce decree, reach legal status of "absolute divorce" to remarry.

Philippine courts cannot simply just assume absolution without proper evidence of foriegn law and procedure.

What is the case of Miciano v. Brimo?

Joseph G. Brimo, a Turkish citizen residing in the Philippines had died. Brimo’s will explicitly stated that his estate should be distributed according to Philippine law rather than Turkish law.

What was the Forfeiture Clause in Brimo’s Will? (Miciano v. Brimo)

(Also known as no-contest clause) Because Brimo required distribution of estate under the PH law, any legatee who failed to comply with his request to apply Philippine law would lose their inheritance

Point of contestation in Miciano v. Brimo

His brother, Andre Brimo, opposed the administrator’s (Juan Miciano) scheme of partition, arguing that as a Turkish national, Joseph's estate must be governed by Turkish law.

“Unwritten” Conditions

Under Article 873 of the Civil Code, impossible or illegal conditions in a will are considered unwritten, particularly when a requirement or restriction placed on a beneficiary's inheritance that violates public policy, statutory law, or is impossible to perform.

Illegal Condition in Miciano v. Brimo

The forfeiture clause was illegal because it goes against Article 16 of the Civil Code. Under the PH Civil Code, the national law of the deceased (Turkish Law) was supposed to govern the inheritance, however, Joseph Brimo's will explicitly ordered that Philippine Law be used instead

Failure of Proof in Miciano v. Brimo

Andre Brimo (the brother of deceased) argued that the Will violated Turkish law. However, he did not present any competent evidence—such as a certified copy of the Turkish statutes or expert testimony—to prove what those laws were

Doctrine of Processual Presumption

When foreign law is not properly pleaded or proved in a domestic court, it is presumed to be identical to the local (Philippine) law.

Can a Philippine court take judicial notice of foreign laws?

No. The foreign law is not established as a fact in the Philippines nor the Philippine judicial system, the court will apply the law of the forum or accredited evidence presented

Processual Presumption in Miciano v. Brimo?

Because Andre failed to prove the foreign law, the Supreme Court assumed it is exactly the same as the local law (Philippine law). Court ignored any differences until proven regarding laws of inheritance

What changed in the Will of Brimo? (Miciano v. Brimo)

• Philippine law was not applied in the ways demanded in the Will because it is an illegal condition against Art. 16

• However, Philippine law ended up being applied anyway because no one contested differences between the Turkish law v.s. the Philippine law with ample evidence

• Inheritance was still given to heirs (even to his brother despite opposing this in the Will)

testamentary succession

a will

What is the relevance of Article 16 to the case of Miciano v. Brimo?

Article 16’s general rule revolves around things like buying, selling, or mortgaging property. However, exceptions exhibited in the case made in Article 16 such as Succession Law must follow Lex Nationalii instead of Lex Rei Sitae.

In Miciano v. Brimo, the court wasn't dealing with a simple sale of land; it was dealing with testamentary succession (a will). Because the dispute was about who had the right to inherit, the "National Law" rule overrode the "Location of Property" rule

What happened in the case of Orion Savings Bank v. Shigekane Suzuki?

In August 2003, Suzuki (a Japanese national) purchased the properties from Kang for ₱2.8 million. He paid the full price, executed a notarized Deed of Absolute Sale, took possession, and began renovations. Orion Savings Bank asserted it already owned the property via a Dacion en Pago (payment in kind) allegedly executed by Kang in February 2003 to settle an ₱1.8 million loan.
The dispute escalated because the physical titles remained with Orion, while Suzuki held the actual property and a notarized deed of sale.

Affidavit of Adverse Claim

A sworn legal document filed with the Registry of Deeds to protect an interest in real property that conflicts with the registered owner's title.

Dacion en Pago

“Dation in Payment”

— legal mechanism where a debtor settles an outstanding debt by transferring ownership of a property or asset to the creditor, who accepts it as a full or partial equivalent of the payment.

requires a voluntary, subsequent agreement after the debt has become due

Badge of Fraud

Circumstantial, suspicious indicators used in legal proceedings to infer a debtor’s intent to defraud, delay, or hinder creditors during a transfer of assets.

Badge of Fraud in the case of Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki

• Orion never tried to take possession of the unit or collect rent, which the Court noted is a "badge of fraud" for simulated or fake sales.

• Orion tried to use the “Spousal Consent” Tactic

  • South Korean law

  • Needs consent from both parties to buy property

• Orion’s reliance on dacion en pago despite no evidence of it v.s. Suzuki who paid the total upfront

What was the ruling of Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki?

The Court ruled in favor of Suzuki, affirming he was a buyer in good faith.

Lex Loci Rei Sitae

Real property is governed by the law of the country where it is located. Since the properties were in the Philippines, Philippine law governed the transfer of title.

Processual Presumption in Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki

Orion failed to properly prove the specific provisions of South Korean family law in court. Under the doctrine of processual presumption, if a foreign law is not pleaded or proved, it is presumed to be the same as Philippine law.

How is the case of Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki relevant to aArt. 16?

Article 16 states that the law that is applied to a particular property is where that law is situated (If selling property in Makati, the estate laws of the Philippines should be complied, etc.)

Although Orion’s claims of the South Korean laws on conjugal property, Article 16 clearly states that since the property was in Metro Manila, the laws of estate applied with only be of the PH.

In Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki, does the the nationality of Kang (Korean owner) or Suzuki (Japanese buyer) play a role in the property sale and exchange under the law?

NO! Article 16 dictated that Philippine law—not the national law of the buyer (Japanese) or the seller (Korean)—governed all matters concerning the title, alienation, and transfer of those properties.

Under Article 16, is the legal capacity to transfer land based on lex nationalii or lex locii?

Lex locii! The legal capacity of a person to transfer land is determined by the law of the place where the land is located.

In the case of Orion Savings Bank v. Suzuki, did Suzuki need his wife’s signature to purchase real property in the Philippines?

No. The Philippines does not require consent of other spouse to purchase real property under Philippine law.

What happened in the case of Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebescencio 

The case involved four Filipino flight attendants who were compelled to resign after their maternity leave requests were denied. Saudia's employment contract had a clause stating that pregnancy would void the employment of a cabin attendant due to "lack of medical fitness". The Court found that the employees did not resign willingly but were forced to choose between resigning or being terminated without benefits. The Supreme Court also asserted that Philippine courts had jurisdiction as Saudia operated in the Philippines.

What were the main points of contestation in the case of Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio? 

Whether the Labor Arbiter and the National Labor Relations Commission have jurisdiction over Saudi Arabian Airlines (a foreign corp.) and apply Philippine law in appeasing the present dispute? And If the women who filed for maternity leave were voluntarily resigned or illegally terminated 

What is forum non conveniens

“Inconvenient forum”

—legal doctrine that allows a court to decline to exercise its jurisdiction over a case even if it has the legal power to hear it

How did Saudi Airlines make the four Filipina airline hostesses terminate their contracts in Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio? 

They forced them to terminate their employment due to the airline’s policy to void employment upon pregnancy and not being “physically fit”   

What was Saudi’s defense in the case of Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio?

Because the employment contracts were executed and performed in a foreign context (Saudi Arabia), and because of the "Unified Employment Contract", the legal validity of their actions should be judged by Saudi standards

What is the Unified Employment Contract? 

a standardized, legally binding agreement used for overseas employment to synchronize employment terms between the Philippines and the host country to prevent "contract substitution" (where a worker signs one contract at home but is forced to follow a less favorable one abroad) and to ensure that rights are easily enforceable.

How did the Court respond to the Saudi Arabia Airlines policy to terminate pregnant women’s contracts in Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio?

The Court affirmed that the airline’s policy—which voided the employment of cabin attendants upon pregnancy—was discriminatory, violated Philippine public policy on gender equality, and constituted illegal constructive dismissal.  

Who ultimately had jurisdiction over the Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio case? 

The Philippine Court. The Supreme Court asserted jurisdiction because the employees were hired in the Philippines, and the airline maintains a local office.

Did the airline hostesses resign voluntarily in Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio case?

No. The Court found that the employees did not resign voluntarily but were forced to resign under threat of termination and forfeiture of benefits.

How is the Saudi Arabia Airlines v. Rebesencio case relevant to Article 17 of the Civil Code?

While Article 17 respects the parties choice of law, this case proves the exception that it is not always absolute. Because the policy of the Saudi Arabia Airlines was discriminatory to the labor laws of the Philippines, the Court held that it could not recognize a foreign law or contract clause that is contrary to the fundamental morals and public policy of the Philippines. 

Lex loci intentionis

“The law of the place intended”

—legal principle in Conflict of Laws stating that the intrinsic validity of a contract is governed by the law that the parties intended to apply

What is the case of University of the East v. Jader? 

• Romeo Jader, a law student at the University of the East (UE), received an "Incomplete" (INC) grade in Practice Court I.

• He took a removal exam but failed with a grade of 5.0.

• Despite his failure, UE included his name in the tentative list of graduates, allowed him to participate in graduation ceremonies, and presented him with a symbolic diploma.

• Relying on his graduation status, Jader took a leave of absence from work and enrolled in a bar review course.

• He only discovered his deficiency later, which prevented him from taking the 1988 Bar Examinations.

What was the main point of contestation in University of the East v. Jader?

Jader argued that the university acted in bad faith and negligence by allowing him to participate in commencement rites and handing him a symbolic diploma despite knowing he had failed. UE argued it was not liable because the graduation list was clearly marked as "tentative". They contended that Jader’s own negligence—specifically his failure to check the result of his removal exam with his professor

Acts Contra Bonos Mores

The act, while potentially legal, is against good morals or public policy.

Did Jader in the case of University of the East v. Jader receive moral damages?

No. Although Court found that the University of the East was negligent for “belated communication”, Jader lacked the diligence to check if his grades met the standards for graduation

What was the ruling of University of the East v. Jader?

• The Court found UE negligent and in bad faith.

• While the Court upheld awards for actual damages (for expenses and lost income) and attorney's fees, it removed moral damages, noting Jader's responsibility as a law student to verify his records.

What is the contract of education between a student and school, accord. to University of the East v. Jader?

The relationship between a school and student is a contract, obligating the school to inform students of their academic standing in a timely manner. A professor's failure to submit grades promptly is attributed to the school.

What is the relevance of the case of University of the East v. Jader to Article 21 of the Civil Code?

Article 21 governs acts that are legal but are performed in a manner contrary to morals or public policy. The Court found that while UE had a legal right to fail a student, exercising that right by allowing the student to participate in graduation ceremonies and receive a symbolic diploma—only to inform him of the failure months later—was contrary to the standard of "good customs" and fairness expected of an educational institution.

Damnum Absque Injuria

“Damage without injury”

—a party suffers actual loss or harm, but no legal right was violated

Can Article 19 also be applied in University of the East v. Jader?

Yes. The court ruled that the university, as an educational institution, must act with honesty and good faith, as enshrined in Article 19, when performing its duties. The university's failure to inform the student of his actual academic status while letting him graduate constituted negligence, which breached the duty of good faith.

What is the case of Nikko Hotel Manila v. Reyes?

Roberto Reyes attended a private birthday party at the hotel. Ruby Lim, the organizer, asked him to leave as he wasn't on the guest list. Reyes claimed Lim publicly humiliated him by shouting. Lim stated she approached him discreetly and asked him to quietly leave after finishing his food. Reyes sued for damages under the Civil Code's provisions on abuse of rights and acts contrary to morals.

Volenti non fit injuria 

“to a willing person, injury is not done”

—A person who consents to a risk cannot later claim compensation for injuries resulting from that risk.