I.

EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS

II.
A. When Law Takes Effect; Publication ( Civil Code, Article 2)

Article 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following

the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette,
unless it is otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect
one year after such publication.

DATES OF EFFECTIVITY
General Rule:
Laws shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following the
completion of its publication either in:
1. Official Gazette, or
2. In a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines.
[Art. 2, New Civil Code, referred hereinafter as NCC, as
amended by E.O. 200]
Exceptions:
1. If the law provides for its own effectivity date;
2. If the law provides that it shall become effective
immediately upon approval

Counting of 15 days, exclude first day and include the last

day
Example
October 1 completed its publication
October 1 plus 15 days
Exclude: 1st day or exclude October 1
Start in October 2
Answer is October 16

Note: If the law provides for its immediate

effectivity upon approval, it must be properly
interpreted as coming into effect immediately
upon its publication. [La Bugal B’laan Tribal
Association, Inc. v. Ramos] The law will take
effect on the 16th day, i.e. the law published
on 30th of March, the effectivity is on the 16th
day of April. [Umali v. Estanislao, G.R. Nos. GR
No. 104037 & 104069 May 29, 1992]
Article 2 of the Civil Code does not preclude the
requirement of publication in the Official Gazette
even if the law itself provides for the date of its
effectivity since the clear object of the law is to
give general public adequate notice of the
various laws which are to regulate their actions
and conduct as citizens. Furthermore, the
publication must be in full or it is no publication
at all since its purpose is to inform the public of
the contents of the laws (Tañada v. Tuvera, 136
SCRA 27).
General Rules
The clause “unless it is otherwise provided”
refers to the date of effectivity (i.e., as to when
a law shall take effect) and not to the
requirement of publication itself, which cannot,
in any event, be omitted. (Tañada v. Tuvera,
136 SCRA 27).

Publication is indispensable in every case,

but the legislature may in its discretion provide
that the usual fifteen-day period shall be
shortened or extended. (same case)
When, on the other hand, the
administrative rule goes beyond merely
providing for the means that can facilitate or
render least cumbersome the implementation
of the law but substantially increases the
burden of those governed, it behooves the
agency to accord at least to those directly
affected a chance to be heard, and thereafter
to be duly informed, before that new issuance
is given the force and effect of law.
( Commissioner vs Hypermix, G.R. 179579
(2012)]
Exception:
Interpretative [Implementing] rules and
regulations and those internal in nature (Tañada
v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27).

Entire Law.
The entire law should be published.
Longer or Shorter Period.
The law may provide for a longer or shorter period.
Laws Covered by Art. 2, NCC
Laws; 2. 3. 4. 5. Presidential Decrees; Executive
Orders; Administrative Rules and Regulations; and
Monetary Board Circulars;

Laws Not Covered by Art. 2, NCC

1. Supreme Court Decisions;
2. 2. Municipal or City Ordinances.

B. Ignorance of the Law; Ignorance of Fact (Civil Code, Art 3)

Article 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from

compliance therewith
Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance
therewith.
Latin maxim: Ignorantia legis non excusat.
General Rule: There is a conclusive presumption of
knowledge of the law

Applicability
1. The provision speaks only of Philippine laws. == All
domestic laws
2. It applies only to mandatory and prohibitory
laws. This may be deduced from the language of the
provision, which, notwithstanding a person’s
ignorance, does not excuse his or her compliance
with the laws. [DM Consunji v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 137873, April 20, 2001]

Not Covered by Art. 3 of the Civil Code

1. Foreign laws; and
2. Doctrine of Processual Presumption - If the foreign law
involved is not properly pleaded and proved, courts will
presume that the foreign law is the same as our local or
domestic or internal law.
CONSEQUENCES
General Rule: Mistake or ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Exceptions:
1. Mistake upon a doubtful or difficult question of law may be
the basis of good faith;
2. Mutual error as to the legal effect of an agreement when
the real purposes of the parties is frustrated may vitiate
consent;
3. Payment by reason of a mistake in the construction or
application of a doubtful or difficult question of law may
come within the scope of solutio indebiti.

Ignorance of Law v. Ignorance of Fact

The ignorance of law is no excuse, ignorance of fact may
excuse a party from the legal consequences of his conduct.

C .Retroactivity of Laws (Civil Code, Art 4); Vested Rights

Principle

Article 4. Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the

contrary is provided.

Exceptions
1. When the law itself expressly provides ( or if the law
provides for retroactivity).
Exception to Exceptions ( meaning back sa general rule
which is bawal retroactive and dapat prospective)
1.1 Ex post facto law
1.2 Impairment of contract

What is ex post facto law?

An ex post facto law is one which, among others,

aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it was when
committed or changes the punishment and inflicts a
greater punishment than the law annexed to the crime
when committed. (Nasi-Villar v. People, G.R. No. 176169,
14 November 2008)

An ex post facto law has been defined as one:

1) Which makes an action done before the passing of the

law and which was innocent when done criminal, and
punishes such action; or

2) Which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it

was when committed; or
3) Which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime when it
was committed; or

4) Which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives

less or different testimony than the law required at the
time of the commission of the offense in order to convict
the defendant; or

5) That which assumes to regulate civil rights and

remedies only but in effect imposes a penalty or
deprivation of a right which when done was lawful; or,

6) That which deprives a person accused of a crime of

some lawful protection to which he has become entitled,
such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal,
or a proclamation of amnesty. (Salvador v. Mapa, G.R.
No. 135080, 28 November 2007)

Source of the ex post facto law is the 1987 Philippine

Constitution:
No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
(Section 22, Article III, 1987 Constitution)

2.) In case of remedial statutes

3.) In case of curative statutes
4.) In case of laws interpreting others
5.) In case of laws creating new rights
6.) In case of laws creating new rights [Bona v. Briones,
G.R. No. L-10806 (1918)].

7. )Penal laws favorable to the accused

very important
When the statute is penal in nature, provided it is
favorable to the accused or the convict, and provided
further that the accused or convict is not a habitual
delinquent.

D. Mandatory, Prohibitory and Permissive Laws (Civil Code,

Art.5)

Article 5. Acts executed against the provisions of

mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void, except when
the law itself authorizes their validity.

Exceptions:
1. When the law itself authorized its validity (i.e. lotto,
sweepstakes)
2. When the law makes the act only voidable and not void
(i.e., if consent is vitiated, the contract is voidable and
not void)
3. When the law makes the act valid but punishes the
violator (i.e.,if the marriage is celebrated by someone
without legal authority but the parties are in good faith,
the marriage is valid but the person who married the
parties is liable)
4. When the law makes the act void but recognizes legal
effects flowing therefrom (i.e., Articles 1412 & 1413)

Connect with Article 17 , 3rd paragraph of the NCC

Par. 3, Art. 17, CC. Prohibitive laws concerning persons,

their acts or property, and those which have for their
object public order, public policy and good customs shall
not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed
upon in a foreign country.

D. Waiver of Rights (Civil Code, Art 6)

Article 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is

contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or
good customs, or prejudicial to a third person with a right
recognized by law.
Right - A legally enforceable claim of one person against
another, that the other shall do a given act, or shall not do
a given act.
Kinds of rights
a. Natural Rights – Those which grow out of the nature of
man and depend upon personality. Example: right to life,
liberty, privacy, and good reputation.
b. Political Rights – Consist in the power to participate,
directly or indirectly, in the establishment or
administration of government. Example: right of suffrage,
right to hold public office, right of petition.
c. Civil Rights– Those that pertain to a person by virtue of
his citizenship in a state or community. Example: property
rights, marriage, equal protection of laws, freedom of
contract, trial by jury.
1. Real rights – enforceable against the whole world
(absolute rights)
2. Personal rights – enforceable against a particular
individual (relative rights)

Waiver
Voluntary and intentional relinquishment or abandonment
of a known legal right or privilege. It has been ruled that a
waiver to be valid and effective must be couched in clear
and unequivocal terms which leave no doubt as to the
intention of a party to give up a right or benefit which
legally pertains to him. [RB Michael Press v. Galit, G.R. No.
153510 (2008)]

The waiver should be made in a positive manner [Dona

Adela v. Tidcorp, G.R. No. 201931 (2015)].

Requisites of a Valid Waiver

Existence of a right
Knowledge of the existence thereof
An intention to relinquish the right. [Herrera v. Borromeo,
G.R. No. L-41171, (1987)]

General Rule: Rights may be waived.

Exceptions
If the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy,
morals or good customs
If the waiver prejudices a third person
If the alleged rights do not yet exist
If the right is a natural right
No compromise upon the following questions shall be
valid [Art. 2035, CC]:
The civil status of persons;
The validity of a marriage or a legal separation;
Any ground for legal separation;
Future support;
The jurisdiction of courts;
Future legitime.

F. Repeal of Laws (Civil Code, Art 7)

Article 7. Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and

their violation or non-observance shall not be excused by
disuse, or custom or practice to the contrary. ( ways how
to repeal a law)

When the courts declared a law to be inconsistent with the

Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall
govern.
Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall be
valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the
Constitution.
Requisites of Implied repeal;
1. Both laws cover the same subject matter.
2. The latter law is repugnant to the earlier law.

Notes: always put the Constitution above everything

Remember: the river does not rise above its falls
The constitution is the water falls
Other laws are just rivers
Therefore, Congress cannot make laws higher than the
Constitution.

TWO KINDS OF REPEAL [Tolentino]

Express or Declared: contained in a special provision of a
subsequent law; names the law repealed.
Implied or Tacit: takes place when the provisions of the
subsequent law are incompatible or inconsistent with those of
an earlier law.

The fundamental rule is that the legislature should be

presumed to have known the existing laws on the subject and
not have enacted conflicting statutes. Hence, all doubts must
be resolved against any implied repeal, and all efforts should be
exerted in order to harmonize and give effect to all laws on the
subject. [Republic v. Marcopper Mining, G.R. No. 137174
(2000)]

G. Judicial Decision (Civil Code, Art. 8)

Article 8. Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the

laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal
system of the Philippines.

Q: Whose Judicial decisions?

A: Only the Supreme Court
Take note judicial legislation is not allowed.
Here the Supreme Court is only interpreting if the law is
constitutional.
What the Supreme Court decides are not laws but are just
evidence of what the law is.
Separation of powers between legislature and the
Judiciary
It is the legislature that makes law and not the Judiciary
The Judiciary interprets what the law is whether or not it is
constitutional.

Decisions of the Supreme Court assume the same

authority as statutes (Floresca v. Philex Mining
Corporation, 136 SCRA 141 [1985]).
It was further explained in Fermin v. People13 as
follows:
The doctrine of stare decisis enjoins adherence to judicial
precedents. It requires courts in a country to follow the
rule established in a decision of the Supreme Court
thereof. That decision becomes a judicial precedent to be
followed in subsequent cases by all courts in the land. The
doctrine of stare decisis is based on the principle that once
a question of law has been examined and decided, it
should be deemed settled and closed to further argument
(LAZATIN vs. HON. ANIANO A. DESIERTO )

Article 8 does not include obiter dictum

obiter dictum, Latin phrase meaning “that which is said in
passing,” an incidental statement. Specifically, in law, it
refers to a passage in a judicial opinion which is not
necessary for the decision of the case before the court.
H. Duty to Render Judgment ( Civil Code, Art.9)

Article 9. No judge or court shall decline to render

judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity or
insufficiency of the laws.

What if there is no law and there is a controversy, how to

resolve it ?
SC said the Judge can apply in rule as long as the rule
chosen is in harmony with general interest , order, morals
and good customs, and among such rules may be the
following :
First, customs which are not contrary to law, public order
and public policy, decisions of foreign local courts of
similar cases, opinions of highly qualified teachers and
professors, the rule on statutory constructions and the
principles laid down in analogous instances but we have to
remember that this circumstances apply if there is no law.

Supreme Court case, year 1916, still using old civil code
but similar to or equivalent of Article 9.

Case of CHU JAN vs. LUCIO BERNAS.

Issue is about Cockfighting but the Judge did not
decide the case because he does know about
cockfighting.
Decision of the Supreme Court:
The ignorance of the court or his lack of knowledge
regarding the law applicable to a case submitted to him
for decision, the fact that the court does not know the
rules applicable to a certain matter that is the subject of
an appeal which must be decided by him and his not
knowing where to find the law relative to the case, are not
reasons that can serve to excuse the court for terminating
the proceedings by dismissing them without deciding the
issues. Such an excuse is the less acceptable because,
foreseeing that a case might arise to which no law would
be exactly applicable, the Civil Code, in the second
paragraph of article 6, provides that the customs of the
place shall be observed, and, in the absence thereof, the
general principles of law.

It's been said, that the law may be harsh but it is still the
law; hence, the first duty of the judge is to apply the law
whether it maybe wise or unjust provided that the law is
clear and there is no doubt.
We cannot subscribe to that proposition. It is the sworn
duty of the judge to apply the law without fear or favor, to
follow its mandate—not to tamper The court cannot
adopt a policy different from that of the law. What the law
grants, the court cannot deny (In the matter of the
petition for naturalization of JOSE GO
vs. ANTI-CHINESE LEAGUE OF THE PHILIPPINE).

J. Custom ( Civil Code, Arts. 11-12)

Article 11. Customs which are contrary to law, public order

or public policy shall not be countenanced. (n)

Jurisprudence definition of custom

Not so in this jurisdiction where there is no local custom

that sanctions the practice. Custom has been defined as a
rule of conduct formed by repetition of acts, uniformly
observed (practiced) as a social rule, legally binding and
obligatory. 19 Courts take no judicial notice of custom. A
custom must be proved as a fact, according to the rules of
evidence ( PETITION FOR AUTHORITY TO
CONTINUE USE OF THE FIRM NAME "SYCIP).
REQUISITES before the Courts can consider Customs
1. A custom must be proved as fact, according to the rules
of evidence.
2. The custom must not be contrary to law, public order,
or public policy.
3. There must be a number of repeated acts.
4. The repeated acts must have been uniformly
performed.
5. There must be a juridical intention to make rule of
social conduct.
6. There must be a sufficient lapse of time.
Article 12. A custom must be proved as a fact, according
to the rules of evidence.

Meaning Courts do not take judicial notice of

customs, it must be proven through evidence.

If something exist it doesn’t mean it is true, it needs

to be proven too.
K. Legal Periods ( Civil Code, Art 13, as amended by Book I, Sec.
31 of Administrative Code of 1987( E.). 292)

Article 13. When the laws speak of years, months, days

or nights, it shall be understood that years are of three
hundred sixty-five days each; months, of thirty days;
days, of twenty-four hours; and nights from sunset to
sunrise.
If months are designated by their name, they shall be
computed by the number of days which they
respectively have.

In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded,

and the last day included.

Article 13 speaks of the period and how to count

Revised
contradicts
Book 1 chapter 8 section 31 of the Revised
Administrative Code

BOOK I
SOVEREIGNTY AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 8
LEGAL WEIGHTS MEASURES AND PERIOD
Section 31. Legal Periods. - "Year" shall be understood to
be twelve calendar months; "month" of thirty days, unless
it refers to a specific calendar month in which case it shall
be computed according to the number of days the specific
month contains; "day," to a day of twenty-four hours; and
"night," from sunset to sunrise.
CIR v. PRIMETOWN PROPERTY GROUP, GR NO. 162155,
2007-08-28. By CJ Corona

Section 27, Book VII (Final

Provisions) of the Administrative Code of 1987 states:

Sec. 27. Repealing clause. - All laws, decrees, orders,

rules and regulation, or portions thereof, inconsistent
with this Code are hereby repealed or modified
accordingly.

A repealing clause like Sec. 27 above is not an express

repealing clause because it fails to identify or designate
the laws to be abolished. Thus, the provision above
only impliedly repealed all laws inconsistent with the
Administrative Code of

Implied repeals, however, are not favored. An implied

repeal must have been clearly and unmistakably
intended by the legislature. The test is whether the
subsequent law encompasses entirely the subject
matter of the former law and they cannot be logically or
reasonably... reconciled.
In this case in the computation of days in a year, we
follow the Revised Administrative Code because it
impliedly repealed Article 13 of the New Civil Code

Decision

There obviously exists a manifest incompatibility in the

manner of computing legal periods under the Civil Code
and the Administrative Code of 1987. For this reason, we
hold that Section 31, Chapter VIII, Book I of the
Administrative Code of 1987, being the more recent law,
governs the computation of legal periods. Lex posteriori
derogat priori.
Applying Section 31, Chapter VIII, Book I of the
Administrative Code of 1987 to this case, the two-year
prescriptive period (reckoned from the time respondent
filed its final adjusted return34 on April 14, 1998) consisted
of 24 calendar months, computed as follows:

Year 1st calendar April 15, to May 14,

1 month 1998 1998
2nd calendar May 15, to June 14,
month 1998 1998
3rd calendar June 15, to July 14,
month 1998 1998
4th calendar July 15, to August 14,
month 1998 1998
5th calendar August 15, to September
month 1998 14, 1998
6th calendar September to October
month 15, 1998 14, 1998
7th calendar October to November
month 15, 1998 14, 1998
8th calendar November to December
month 15, 1998 14, 1998
9th calendar December to January
month 15, 1998 14, 1999
10th calendar January to February
month 15, 1999 14, 1999
11th calendar February to March 14,
month 15, 1999 1999
12th calendar March 15, to April 14,
month 1999 1999
Year 13th calendar April 15, to May 14,
2 month 1999 1999
14th calendar May 15, to June 14,
month 1999 1999
15th calendar June 15, to July 14,
month 1999 1999
16th calendar July 15, to August 14,
month 1999 1999
17th calendar August 15, to September
month 1999 14, 1999
18th calendar September to October
month 15, 1999 14, 1999
19th calendar October to November
month 15, 1999 14, 1999
20th calendar November to December
month 15, 1999 14, 1999
21st calendar December to January
month 15, 1999 14, 2000
22nd calendar January to February
month 15, 2000 14, 2000
23rd calendar February to March 14,
month 15, 2000 2000
24th calendar March 15, to April 14,
month 2000 2000

We therefore hold that respondent's petition (filed on April

14, 2000) was filed on the last day of the 24th calendar
month from the day respondent filed its final adjusted
return. Hence, it was filed within the reglementary period.
Accordingly, the petition is hereby DENIED. The case
is REMANDED to the Court of Tax Appeals which is
ordered to expeditiously proceed to hear C.T.A. Case No.
6113 entitled Primetown Property Group, Inc. v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue and Arturo V. Parcero.
No costs.
SO ORDERED.
Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety
shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine
territory, subject to the principles of public international law
and to treaty stipulations.

Characteristic of our Criminal laws which is territorial.

Resident or aliens who commits a crime in the Philippines is
liable due to the territoriality principle.
Generality principle of criminal law applies to all to residents
and non residents
This applies to residents and aliens (transients or sojourners)

Example: American commits jaywalking, he is still liable for

violating our law against jaywalking.