PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES to amend, modify or alter the judgment.

Even
As complied by Atty. Alvin Claridades after the judgment has become final, the court
1. Doctrine of absolute privilege. Doctrine retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it
that protects persons from claims alleging [Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, 301 SCRA 96].
defamation where the alleged defamatory Also called Doctrine of continuity of
statements were made by members of jurisdiction.
legislative assemblies while on the floor of the 5. Doctrine of adherence to judicial
assembly or communications made in the precedents. Also called the Doctrine of stare
context of judicial proceedings, as part of decisis. [The] doctrine [that] enjoins adherence
a trial. to judicial precedents. It requires courts in a
2. Doctrine of absorption of common country to follow the rule established in a
crimes. Also called Hernandez doctrine. The decision of its Sup. Court. That decision
rule enunciated in People v. Hernandez [99 becomes a judicial precedent to be followed in
Phil. Rep 515 (1956)] that the ingredients of a subsequent cases by all courts in the land. [Phil.
crime form part and parcel thereof, and hence, Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) v.
are absorbed by the same and cannot be Comelec, GR 190529, Apr. 29, 2010].
punished either separately therefrom or by the 6. Doctrine of agency by estoppel. Also known
application of Art. 48 of the Rev. Penal Code. as the Doctrine of holding out. The doctrine
[Enrile v. Amin, GR 93335, Sept. 13, 1990]. It where the principal will be estopped from
held that the crime of rebellion under the Penal denying the grant of authority if 3rd parties
Code of the Phils. is charged as a single offense, have changed their positions to their detriment
and that it cannot be made into a complex in reliance on the representations made.
crime. 7. Doctrine of alter ego. A doctrine based upon
3. Doctrine of actio personalis moritur cum the misuse of a corporation by an individual for
persona. Lat. [The doctrine that] personal wrongful or inequitable purposes, and in such
action terminates or dies with the person. case the court merely disregards the corporate
[Santos v. Sec. of Labor, L-21624, 27 1968]. entity and holds the individual responsible for
4. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction. Rem. acts knowingly and intentionally done in the
Law. 1. The principle that once a court has name of the corporation. The doctrine imposes
acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues upon the individual who uses a corporation
until the court has done all that it can do in the merely as an instrumentality to conduct his own
exercise of that jurisdiction. 2. The doctrine business liability as a consequence of fraud or
holding that [e]ven the finality of the judgment injustice perpetuated not on the corporation, but
does not totally deprive the court of jurisdiction on third persons dealing with the corporation.
over the case. What the court loses is the power
 [Cited Sulo ng Bayan, Inc. v. Araneta, Inc., GR Liability could be placed on the people owning
L-31061 Aug. 17, 1976]. or controlling the premises even when the child
8. Doctrine of apparent authority. [T]he was a trespasser who sneaked on the property.
doctrine [under which] acts and contracts of the See Attractive nuisance doctrine.
agent, as are within the apparent scope of the 11. Doctrine of bar by prior judgment. Rem.
authority conferred on him, although no actual Law. [A concept of res judicata holding that]
authority to do such acts or to make such When, as between the first case where the
contracts has been conferred, bind the principal. judgment was rendered and the second case that
The principals liability, however, is limited is sought to be barred, there is identity of
only to 3rd persons who have been led parties, subject matter, and causes of action. In
reasonably to believe by the conduct of the this instance, the judgment in the first case
principal that such actual authority exists, constitutes an absolute bar to the second action.
although none was given. In other words, [Antonio v. Sayman Vda. de Monje, GR
apparent authority is determined only by the 149624, 29 Sept. 2010, 631 SCRA 471, 480].
acts of the principal and not by the acts of the 12. Doctrine of caveat emptor. Also called the
agent.[Banate v. Phil. Countryside Rural Bank, Doctrine of let the buyer beware. A warning
Inc., GR 163825, July 13, 2010].Also called the that notifies a buyer that the goods he or she is
Holding out theory; or Doctrine of ostensible buying are as is, or subject to all defects.
agency or Agency by estoppel. See Apparent The principleunder which the buyer could not
authority doctrine. recover damages from the seller for defects on
9. Doctrine of assumption of risk. The precept the property that rendered the property unfit for
that denotes that a person who knows and ordinary purposes. The only exception was if
comprehends the peril and voluntarily exposes the seller actively concealed latent defects or
himself or herself to it, although not negligent otherwise made material misrepresentations
in doing so, is regarded as engaging in an amounting to fraud.
assumption of the risk and is precluded from a 13. Doctrine of collateral estoppel. A doctrine
recovery for an injury ensuing therefrom. Also that prevents a person from relitigating an issue.
called Doctrine of volenti non fit injuria. Once a court has decided an issue of fact or law
10. Doctrine of attractive nuisance. A legal necessary to its judgment, that decision
doctrine which makes a person negligent for preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on
leaving a piece of equipment or other condition a different cause of actioninvolving a party to
on property which would be both attractive and the first case. Also called Doctrine of preclusion
dangerous to curious children. These have of issues.
included tractors, unguarded swimming pools, 14. Doctrine of command responsibility. The
open pits, and abandoned refrigerators. doctrine under which any government official
 or supervisor, or officer of the PNP or that of statement, but that his statement of any given
any other law enforcement agency shall be held fact should be a full expression of all that he
accountable for Neglect of Duty if he has intended to say as conveying his meaning in
knowledge that a crime or offense shall be respect of such fact. [People v. De Joya, GR
committed, is being committed, or has been 75028, Nov. 8, 1991].
committed by his subordinates, or by others 19. Doctrine of conclusiveness of
within his area of responsibility and, despite judgment. Rem. Law. A concept of res judicata
such knowledge, he did not take preventive or holding that] where there is identity of parties
corrective action either before, during, or in the first and second cases, but no identity of
immediately after its commission. [Sec. 1, EO causes of action, the first judgment is
226. Feb. 17, 1995]. conclusive only as to those matters actually and
15. Doctrine of comparative injury. A rule in directly controverted and determined and not as
equity which states that although a person is to matters merely involved therein. Stated
entitled to injunctive relief, if the injury done to differently, any right, fact or matter in issue
the respondent or the public would be directly adjudicated or necessarily involved in
disproportionate, then injunctive relief must be the determination of an action before a
denied. competent court in which judgment is rendered
16. Doctrine of comparative negligence, [The on the merits is conclusively settled by the
doctrine that allows] a recovery by a plaintiff judgment therein and cannot again be litigated
whose own act contributed to his injury, between the parties and their privies, whether or
provided his negligence was slight as compared not the claim, demand, purpose, or subject
with that of the defendant. [Rakes v. The matter of the two actions is the same. [Antonio
Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific, Co., GR 1719, Jan. v. Sayman Vda. de Monje, GR 149624,
23, 1907]. 29 Sept. 2010, 631 SCRA 471, 480].
17. Doctrine of compassionate justice. The 20. Doctrine of condonation. Admin. Law. [The
doctrine that the harsh provisions of law and the doctrine that a] public official cannot be
rigid rules of procedure may sometimes be removed for administrative misconduct
tempered and dispensed with to give room for committed during a prior term, since his re-
compassion. election to office operates as a condonation of
18. Doctrine of completeness. [The doctrine the officers previous misconduct to the extent
holding that] a dying declaration to be of cutting off the right to remove him therefor.
admissible must be complete in itself. To be The foregoing rule, however, finds no
complete in itself does not mean that the application to criminal cases pending against
declarant must recite everything that petitioner. [Aguinaldo v. Santos, 212 SCRA
constituted the res gestae of the subject of his
 768, 773 (1992)]. Also called Doctrine of until the court has done all that it can do to
forgiveness. exercise that jurisdiction. See Doctrine of
21. Doctrine of constitutional supremacy. [The adherence of jurisdiction.
doctrine that] if a law or contract violates any 25. Doctrine of corporate negligence. [T]he
norm of the constitution, that law or contract, judicial answer to the problem of allocating
whether promulgated by the legislative or by hospitals liability for the negligent acts of
the executive branch or entered into by private health practitioners, absent facts to support the
persons for private purposes, is null and void application of respondeat superior or apparent
and without any force and effect. Thus, since authority. Its formulation proceeds from the
the Constitution is the fundamental, paramount judiciarys acknowledgment that in these
and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed modern times, the duty of providing quality
written in every statute and contract. [Manila medical service is no longer the sole
Prince Hotel v. GSIS, 335 Phil. 101 (1997]. prerogative and responsibility of the physician.
22. Doctrine of constructive compliance. Succ. The modern hospitals have changed structure.
Doctrine which states that if, without the fault Hospitals now tend to organize a highly
of the heir, the modal institution cannot take professional medical staff whose competence
effect in the exact manner stated by the testator, and performance need to be monitored by the
it shall be complied with in a manner most hospitals commensurate with their inherent
analogous to and in conformity with his wishes. responsibility to provide quality medical care.
[Art. 883, CC]. [Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR
23. Doctrine of constructive trust. A general 126297, Jan. 31, 2007].
principle that one who acquires land or other 26. Doctrine of corporate responsibility. The
property by fraud, misrepresentation, doctrine following which it was held that] a
imposition, or concealment, or under any such hospital x x x has the duty to see that it meets
other circumstances as to render it inequitable the standards of responsibilities for the care of
for him to retain the property, is in equity to be patients. Such duty includes the proper
regarded as a trustee ex maleficio thereof for a supervision of the members of its medical staff.
person who suffers by reason of the fraud or [Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR
other wrong, and is equitably entitled to the 126297, Jan. 31, 2007].
property, even though such beneficiary may 27. Doctrine of deference and non-disturbance on
never have any legal estate therein. [Magallon appeal. [The doctrine that the Sup.] Court on
v. Montejo, GR 73733, Dec. 16, 1986]. appeal would not disturb the findings of the trial
24. Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction. Rem. court on the credibility of witnesses in view of
Law. The general principle that once a court has the latters advantage of observing at first hand
acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues their demeanor in giving their testimony.
 [Tehankee, concurring op., Llamoso v as a blind, or an alter ego or business conduit
Sandiganbayan, GR L-63408 & 64026 Aug. 7, for the sole benefit of the stockholders.
1985]. [McConnel v. CA, 1 SCRA 722].
28. Doctrine of dependent 31. Doctrine of effective occupation. A doctrine in
relative revocation.Succ. Doctrine which states international law which holds that in order for a
that a revocation subject to a condition does not nation to occupy a coastal possession, it also
revoke a will unless and until the condition had to prove that it controlled sufficient
occurs. Thus, where a testator revokes a will authority there to protect existing rights such as
with the proven intention that he would execute freedom of trade and transit. See Effective
another will, his failure to validly make a latter occupation doctrine.
will would permit the allowance of the earlier 32. Doctrine of election of remedies. A doctrine
will. developed to prevent a plaintiff from a double
29. Doctrine of discovered peril. The doctrine recovery for a loss, making the person pursue
[holding] that where both parties are negligent, only one remedy in an action. Although its
but the negligent act of one is appreciably later application is not restricted to any particular
in time than that of the other, or when it is cause of action, it is most commonly employed
impossible to determine whose fault or in contract cases involving fraud, which is
negligence should be attributed to the incident, a misrepresentationof a material fact that is
the one who had the last clear opportunity to intended to deceive a person who relies on it.
avoid the impending harm and failed to do so is 33. Doctrine of equitable recoupment. It provides
chargeable with the consequences thereof. [See that a claim for refund barred by prescription
Picart v. Smith, 37 Phil. 809]. See Last clear may be allowed to offset unsettled tax liabilities
chance doctrine. should be pertinent only to taxes arising from
30. Doctrine of disregarding the distinct personality the same transaction on which an overpayment
of the corporation. [The doctrine stating that] is made and underpayment is due.
when the notion of legal entity is used to defeat 34. Doctrine of equivalents. The rule stating that an
public convenience, justify wrong, protect infringement also takes place when a device
fraud, or defend crime, x x x the law will regard appropriates a prior invention by incorporating
the corporation as an association of persons, or its innovative concept and, although with some
in the case of two corporations, merge them into modification and change, performs
one, the one being merely regarded as part or substantially the same function in substantially
instrumentality of the other. [Yutivo & Sons the same way to achieve substantially the same
Hardware Co. v. CTA, 1 SCRA 160]. The same result. [Smith Kline and Beckman Corp. v. CA,
is true where a corporation is a dummy and 409 SCRA 33].
serves no business purpose and is intended only
35. Doctrine of equivalents test. A test established unwilling to express except privately. These are
to determine infringement which recognizes the considerations justifying a presumptive
that minor modifications in a patented invention privilege for Presidential communications. The
are sufficient to put the item beyond the scope privilege is fundamental to the operation of
of literal infringement. Thus, an infringement government and inextricably rooted in the
also occurs when a device appropriates a prior separation of powers under the Constitution x x
invention by incorporating its innovative x [Almonte v. Vasquez, 314 Phil. 150 (1995)].
concept and, albeit with some modification and 39. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
change, performs substantially the same remedies. The general rule that before a party
function in substantially the same way to may seek the intervention of the court, he
achieve substantially the same result. [Godinez should first avail of all the means afforded him
v. CA, GR 97343. Sep. 13, 1993]. Compare by administrative processes. The issues which
with Literal infringement test. administrative agencies are authorized to
36. Doctrine of estoppel. Rem. Law. [A decide should not be summarily taken from
doctrine]based on grounds of public policy, fair them and submitted to a court without first
dealing, good faith and giving such administrative agency the
justice, [the] purpose [of which] is to forbid opportunity to dispose of the same after due
one to speak against his own act, deliberation. [Rep. v. Lacap, GR 158253, Mar.
representations, or commitments to the injury 2, 2007, 517 SCRA 255].
of one to whom they were directed and who 40. Doctrine of fair comment. A doctrine in the law
reasonably relied thereon. [PNB v. CA, 94 of libel, which means that while in general
SCRA 357]. every discreditable imputation publicly made is
37. Doctrine of estoppel by laches. Rem. Law. An deemed false, because every man is presumed
equitable doctrine by which some courts deny innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and
relief to a claimant who has unreasonably every false imputation is directed against a
delayed or been negligent in asserting a claim. public person in his public capacity, it is not
A person invoking laches should assert that an necessarily actionable. In order that such
opposing party has slept on his/her rights and discreditable imputation to a public official may
that the party is no longer entitled to his/her be actionable, it must either be a false allegation
original claim. of fact or a comment based on a false
38. Doctrine of executive privilege. [The doctrine supposition. If the comment is an expression of
stating that a] x x x President and those who opinion, based on established facts, then it is
assist him must be free to explore alternatives immaterial that the opinion happens to be
in the process of shaping policies and making mistaken, as long as it might reasonably be
decisions and to do so in a way many would be
 inferred from the facts. [Borjal v. CA, 361 Phil. 2000 Ed.] that is to prevent non-resident
1999]. litigants from choosing the forum or place
41. Doctrine of finality of judgment. Rem. Law. wherein to bring their suit for malicious
[The doctrine that] once a judgment attains reasons, such as to secure procedural
finality it thereby becomes immutable and advantages, to annoy and harass the defendant,
unalterable. It may no longer be modified in any to avoid overcrowded dockets, or to select a
respect, even if the modification is meant to more friendly venue. Under this doctrine, a
correct what is perceived to be an erroneous court, in conflicts of law cases, may refuse
conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of impositions on its jurisdiction where it is not the
whether the modification is attempted to be most convenient or available forum and the
made by the court rendering it or by the highest parties are not precluded from seeking remedies
court of the land. Just as the losing party has the elsewhere. [First Phil. Internatl. Bank v. CA,
right to file an appeal within the prescribed 252 SCRA 259, 281 (1996).].
period, the winning party also has the 44. Doctrine of governmental immunity from
correlative right to enjoy the finality of the suit. The doctrine that no governmental body
resolution of his case. The doctrine of finality can be sued unless it gives permission.
of judgment is grounded on fundamental 45. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts. Rem. Law. An
considerations of public policy and sound established policy that parties must observe the
practice, and that, at the risk of occasional hierarchy of courts before they can seek relief
errors, the judgments or orders of courts must directly from th[e Sup.] Court. Therationale for
become final at some definite time fixed by law; this rule is twofold: (a) it would be an
otherwise, there would be no end to litigations, imposition upon the limited time of th[e Sup.]
thus setting to naught the main role of courts of Court; and (b) it would inevitably result in a
justice which is to assist in the enforcement of delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication
the rule of law and the maintenance of peace of cases, which in some instances, had to be
and order by settling justiciable controversies remanded or referred to the lower court as the
with finality. [Gallardo-Corro v. Gallardo, 403 proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as
Phil. 498 (2001)]. better equipped to resolve the issues because
42. Doctrine of forgiveness. See Doctrine of th[e Sup.] Court is not a trier of facts. [Heirs of
condonation. Hinog v. Melicor, GR 140954, 12 Apr. 2005,
43. Doctrine of forum non-conveniens. Lat. The 455 SCRA 460].
forum is inconvenient. Priv. Internatl. Law. [A 46. Doctrine of holding out. Also known as the
rule designed] to deter the practice of global Doctrine of agency by estoppel. The doctrine
forum shopping, [Coquia and Aguiling- where the principal will be estopped from
Pangalangan, Conflicts Of Laws, pp. 40-41, denying the grant of authority if 3rd parties
 have changed their positions to their detriment 50. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a
in reliance on the representations made. final judgment. Exceptions: (1) the correction
47. Doctrine of hold-over. The doctrine under of clerical errors; (2) the so-called nunc pro tunc
which a public officer whose term has expired entries that cause no prejudice to any party; (3)
or services have been terminated is allowed to void judgments; and (4) whenever
continue holding his office until his successor circumstances transpire after the finality of the
is appointed or chosen and had qualified. decision rendering its execution unjust and
48. Doctrine of immunity from suit. 1. [The inequitable. [Temic Semiconductors, Inc.
doctrine the application of which] has been Employees Union (TSIEU)-FFW v. Federation
restricted to sovereign or governmental of Free Workers (FFW), GR 160993, May 20,
activities [jure imperii]. The mantle of state 2008, 554 SCRA 122, 134].
immunity cannot be extended to commercial, 51. Doctrine of immutability of judgment. A
private and proprietary acts [jure fundamental legal principle that a decision that
gestionis]. [Jusmag v. NLRC, GR 108813. Dec. has acquired finality becomes immutable and
15, 1994]. 2. The restrictive application of State unalterable, and may no longer be modified in
immunity is proper when the proceedings arise any respect, even if the modification is meant to
out of commercial transactions of the foreign correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law,
sovereign, its commercial activities or and whether it be made by the court that
economic affairs. Stated differently, a State rendered it or by the highest court of the land.
may be said to have descended to the level of an The only exceptions to the general rule on
individual and thus can be deemed to have finality of judgments are the so-called nunc pro
tacitly given its consent to be used only when it tunc entries which cause no prejudice to any
enters into business contracts. It does not apply party, void judgments, and whenever
where the contract relates to the exercise of its circumstances transpire after the finality of the
sovereign functions. [US v. Ruiz, GR L-35645, decision which render its execution unjust and
May 22, 1985, 136 SCRA 487, 490]. inequitable. [Sacdalan v. CA, GR 128967, May
49. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a 20, 2004, 428 SCRA 586, 599].
final judgment. The doctrine that has a two-fold 52. Doctrine of implications. Stat. Con. That which
purpose: (1) to avoid delay in the administration is plainly implied in the language of a statute is
of justice and thus, procedurally, to make as much a part of it as that which is expressed.
orderly the discharge of judicial business and [In Re: McCulloch Dick, 35 Phil. 41, 45, 50].
(2) to put an end to judicial controversies, at the 53. Doctrine of implied municipal liability. A
risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why municipality may become obligated upon an
courts exist. [SSS v. Isip, GR 165417, Apr. 3, implied contract to pay the reasonable value of
2007]. the benefits accepted or appropriated by it as to
 which it has the general power to contract. form part of the law of the land and no
[Province of Cebu v. IAC, 147 SCRA 447]. legislative action is required to make them
54. Doctrine of implied trust. [The doctrine] applicable to a country. The Phils. follows this
enunciated in Art. 1456 of the Civ. Code [which doctrine, because Sec. 2. Art. II of the Consti.
provides that] if property is acquired through states that the Phils. adopts the generally
mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it is, by accepted principles of international law as part
force of law, considered a trustee of an implied of the law of the land.
trust for the benefit of the person from whom 59. Doctrine of indefeasibility of torrens titles. A
the property comes. [Armamento v. Guerrero, certificate of title, once registered, should not
GR L-34228 Feb. 21, 1980]. thereafter be impugned, altered, changed,
55. Doctrine of in pari delicto. Legalprinciplethat if modified, enlarged or diminished except in a
two parties in a dispute are equally at fault, direct proceeding permitted by law. [De Pedro
then the party in possession of the v. Romasan, GR 158002, Feb. 28, 2005].
contested property gets to retain it and 60. Doctrine of indelible allegiance. The doctrine
the courts will not interfere with the status quo. that an individual may be compelled to retain
It implies that if a party his original nationality notwithstanding that he
whose action or failure to act precipitates has already renounced or forfeited it under the
breach of a contract, or who fails to take laws of the 2nd state whose nationality he has
appropriate action or takes inappropriate action acquired.
to limit or recoup a loss, such party may 61. Doctrine of informed consent.A duty imposed
not claim nor be awarded damages. on a doctor to explain the risks of recommended
56. Doctrine of inappropriate provision. [It deals procedures to a patient before a patient
with]item provisions [in a budget bill] that are determines whether or not he or she should go
to be treated as items for the Presidents veto forward with the procedure. See Informed
power. [Dean Tupaz, 24 Hours Before the Bar consent doctrine.
(1st 2005), p. 133]. 62. Doctrine of interlocking confessions. Evid.
57. Doctrine of incompatibility of public [The doctrine under which] extra-judicial
offices. Pol. Law. It concerns a potential clash confessions independently made without
of two incompatible public offices held by a collusion which are identical with each other in
single official. In other words, the doctrine their essential details and are corroborated by
concerns a conflict between an individuals other evidence on record are admissible, as
performance of potentially overlapping public circumstantial evidence, against the person
duties. implicated to show the probability of the latters
58. Doctrine of incorporation. Intl. Law. The actual participation in the commission of the
doctrine that states that the rules of Intl. Law
 crime. [People v. Molleda, 86 SCRA 667, 701 67. Doctrine of judicial supremacy. 1. [The
(1978)]. doctrine recognizing that] the judiciary is
63. Doctrine of inverse condemnation. [It involves] vested with the power to annul the acts of either
[t]he action to recover just compensation from the legislative or the executive or of both when
the State or its expropriating agency. It has the not conformable to the fundamental law.
objective to recover the value of property taken [Assoc. of Small Landowners v. Sec. of
in fact by the governmental defendant, even Agrarian Reform, GR 78742. July 14, 1989]. 2.
though no formal exercise of the power of The power of judicial review under the
eminent domain has been attempted by the Constitution. [Angara v. Electoral Commission,
taking agency. [Napocor v. Heirs of Sangkay, 63 Phil. 139].
GR 165828, Aug. 24, 2011]. 68. Doctrine of jus sanguinis.Right of blood. A
64. Doctrine of judicial admissions. [The] well- principle of nationality law by
settled [doctrine] that judicial admissions which citizenship is not determined by place of
cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is birth but by having instead one or both parents
the party himself and binds the person who who are citizens of the state or more generally
makes the same, and absent any showing that by having state citizenship or membership to a
this was made thru palpable mistake, no amount nation determined or conferred by ethnic,
of rationalization can offset it. [Binarao v. Plus cultural or other descent or origin.
Builders, Inc., GR 154430, June 16, 2006, 491 69. Doctrine of jus soli.Right of the soil. The
SCRA 49, 54]. doctrine recognizing the right of anyone born in
65. Doctrine of judicial stability. [The doctrine the territory of a state
that] no court can interfere by injunction with to nationality or citizenship.
the judgments or orders of another court of 70. Doctrine of laches. Also Doctrine of stale
concurrent jurisdiction having the power to demands. 1. [A doctrine] based upon grounds
grant the relief sought by the injunction. [Cabili of public policy which requires, for the peace of
v. Balindong, AM RTJ-10-2225, Sept. 6, 2011]. society, the discouragement of stale claims and
66. Doctrine of judicial stability. An elementary x x x is principally a question of the inequity or
principle in the administration of justice unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be
[where] no court can interfere by injunction enforced or asserted. [Tijam v. Sibonghanoy,
with the judgments or orders of another court of 23 SCRA 29 (1968)]. 2. The time-honored rule
concurrent jurisdiction having the power to anchored on public policy that relief will be
grant the relief sought by the injunction. [Go v. denied to a litigant whose claim or demand has
Villanueva, Jr., GR 154623, Mar. 13, 2009, 581 become stale, or who has acquiesced for an
SCRA 126, 131-132]. See Doctrine of non- unreasonable length of time, or who has not
interference. been vigilant or who has slept on his rights
 either by negligence, folly or inattention. connected or vice versa. [Panay, Inc. v. Clave,
[Arradaza v. CA, 170 SCRA 12, 20 (1989)]. GR L-56076, Sept. 21, 1983, 124 SCRA 638].
71. Doctrine of lack of capacity to sue. The 74. Doctrine of let the buyer beware. Also called
doctrine of lack of capacity to sue based on the Doctrine of caveat emptor. A warning that
failure to first acquire a local license is based on notifies a buyer that the goods he or she is
considerations of public policy. It was never buying are as is, or subject to all defects.
intended to favor nor insulate from suit The principleunder which the buyer could not
unscrupulous establishments or nationals in recover damages from the seller for defects on
case of breach of valid obligations or violations the property that rendered the property unfit for
of legal rights of unsuspecting foreign firms or ordinary purposes. The only exception was if
entities simply because they are not licensed to the seller actively concealed latent defects or
do business in the country. [Facilities Mngt. otherwise made material misrepresentations
Corp. v. De la Osa, GR L-38649, Mar. 26, 1979, amounting to fraud.
89 SCRA 131]. 75. Doctrine of liberal construction of retirement
72. Doctrine of last clear chance. Also known as the laws. Stat. Con. [The doctrine] that retirement
Doctrine of discovered peril or the laws are liberally construed and administered in
Humanitarian doctrine. A doctrine in the law of favor of the persons intended to be benefited.
torts which states that the contributory All doubts as to the intent of the law should be
negligence of the party injured will not defeat resolved in favor of the retiree to achieve its
the claim for damages if it is shown that the humanitarian purposes. [Borromeo v. CSC, 199
defendant might, by the exercise of reasonable SCRA 924 (1991)].
care and prudence, have avoided the 76. Doctrine of limited liability.The ship agent
consequences of the negligence of the injured shall also be civilly liable for the indemnities in
party. In such cases, the person who had the last favor of 3rd persons which may arise from the
clear chance to avoid the mishap is considered conduct of the captain in the care of the goods
in law solely responsible for the consequences which he loaded on the vessel; but he may
thereof. [Ong v. Metropolitan Water District, exempt himself therefrom by abandoning the
104 Phil. 405 (1958)]. See Last clear chance vessel with all the equipments and the freight it
doctrine. may have earned during the voyage. [Art. 587,
73. Doctrine of legal entity of the separate Code of Commerce; Yangco v. Lasema, 73
personality of the corporation.[The doctrine] Phil. 330 (1941)]. See Limited liability
that a corporation may not be made to answer doctrine.
for acts and liabilities of its stockholders or 77. Doctrine of lis pendens. Lat. A pending suit.
those of legal entities to which it may be The jurisdiction, power or control which a court
acquires over the property involved in a suit
 pending the continuance of the action and until appears on the face of the title. The public
final judgment thereunder. interest in upholding the indefeasibility of a
78. Doctrine of loss of confidence. Requisites: (1) certificate of title, as evidence of the lawful
Loss of confidence should not be simulated; (2) ownership of the land or of any encumbrance
it should not be used as a subterfuge for causes thereon, protects a buyer or mortgagee who, in
which are improper, illegal, or unjustified; (3) it good faith, relied upon what appears on the face
may not be arbitrarily asserted in the face of of the certificate of title. [Cavite Devt. Bank v.
overwhelming evidence to the contrary; (4) it Sps. Lim, GR 131679, 1 Feb. 2000].
must be genuine, not a mere afterthought to 82. Doctrine of mutuality of remedy. A civil law
justify an earlier action taken in bad faith; and doctrine founded on the idea that one party
(5) the employee involved holds a position of should not obtain from equity that which the
trust and confidence. [Midas Touch Food Corp. other party could not obtain.
v. NLRC, GR 111639, July 29, 1996, 259 83. Doctrine of necessary implication. Stat. Con.
SCRA 652]. See Loss of confidence doctrine. The doctrine which states that what is implied
79. Doctrine of malicious prosecution. [The in a statute is as much a part thereof as that
doctrine that pertains to] persecution through which is expressed. [Natl. Assoc. of Trade
the misuse or abuse of judicial processes; or the Unions (NATU) v. Torres, GR 93468. Dec. 29,
institution and pursuit of legal proceedings for 1994].
the purpose of harassing, annoying, vexing or 84. Doctrine of non-delegation. 1. [The principle
injuring an innocent person. [Villanueva v. that] delegated power constitutes not only a
UCPB, GR 138291, Mar. 7, 2000]. right but a duty to be performed by the delegate
80. Doctrine of management prerogative. [The through the instrumentality of his own
doctrine under which] every employer has the judgment and not through the intervening mind
inherent right to regulate, according to his own of another. 2. The recognized exceptions to this
discretion and judgment, all aspects of principle are as follows: (1) Delegation of tariff
employment, incl. hiring, work assignments, powers to the Pres. under Sec. 28 (2) of Art. VI
working methods, the time, place and manner of the Consti.; (2) Delegation of emergency
of work, work supervision, transfer of powers to the Pres. under Sec. 23(2) of Art. VI
employees, lay-off of workers, and discipline, of the Consti.; (3) Delegation to the people at
dismissal, and recall of employees. [Rural Bank large; (4) Delegation to local governments; and
of Cantilan, Inc. vs Julve, 517 SCRA 17]. (5) Delegation to administrative bodies.
81. Doctrine of mortgagee in good faith. The rule [Abakada Guro Party List v. Ermita, GR
that all persons dealing with property covered 168056, Sept. 1, 2005, 469 SCRA 1, 115-116].
by a Torrens Certificate of Title, as buyers or 85. Doctrine of non-interference. Rem. Law. An
mortgagees, are not required to go beyond what elementary principle of higher importance in
 the administration of justice that the judgment authority exists. [Professional Services, Inc. v.
of a court of competent jurisdiction may not be Agana, GR 126297, 126467 and 127590, Jan.
opened, modified, or vacated by any court of 31, 2007, 513 SCRA 478, 500-501]. See
concurrent jurisdiction. [Rep. v. Reyes, 155 Doctrine of ostensible authority.
SCRA 313 (1987)]. Also Doctrine of judicial 89. Doctrine of ostensible authority. Also known as
stability. Doctrine of apparent authority. [The doctrine
86. Doctrine of non-suability. The basic postulate holding that] if a corporation knowingly
enshrined in the constitution that (t)he State permits one of its officers, or any other agent,
may not be sued without its consent, [which] to do acts within the scope of an apparent
reflects nothing less than a recognition of the authority, and thus holds him out to the public
sovereign character of the State and an express as possessing power to do those acts, the
affirmation of the unwritten rule effectively corporation will, as against any one who has in
insulating it from the jurisdiction of courts. It is good faith dealt with the corporation through
based on the very essence of sovereignty. [DA such agent, be estopped from denying his
v. NLRC, GR 104269, Nov. 11, 1993, 227 authority [Prudential Bank v. CA, GR 103957,
SCRA 693]. June 14, 1993].
87. Doctrine of operative fact. [The doctrine that] 90. Doctrine of outside appearance. The
nullifies the effects of an unconstitutional law doctrine which states that a corporation is
by recognizing that the existence of a statute bound by a contract entered into by an officer
prior to a determination of unconstitutionality is who acts without, or in excess of his actual
an operative fact and may have consequences authority, in favor of a person who deals with
which cannot always be ignored. The past him in good faith relying on such apparent
cannot always be erased by a new judicial authority.
declaration. [It] is applicable when a 91. Doctrine of overbreadth. Consti. Law. [A]n
declaration of unconstitutionality will impose exception to the prohibition against third-party
an undue burden on those who have relied on standing, [the doctrine] permits a person to
the invalid law. [Planters Products, Inc. v. challenge a statute on the ground that it violates
Fertiphil Corp., GR 166006, 14 Mar. 2008]. See the [free speech] rights of third parties not
also Operative fact doctrine. before the court, even though the law is
88. Doctrine of ostensible agency. [The doctrine constitutional as applied to that defendant. In
which] imposes liability, not as the result of the other words, the overbreadth doctrine provides
reality of a contractual relationship, but rather that: Given a case or controversy, a litigant
because of the actions of a principal or an whose own activities are unprotected may
employer in somehow misleading the public nevertheless challenge a statute by showing that
into believing that the relationship or the it substantially abridges the [free speech] rights
 of other parties not before the court. finds that the corporate fiction is being used to
[Chemerinsky, Consti. Law, p. 86, 2nd (2002)]. defeat public convenience, justify wrong,
Compare with Doctrine of void for vagueness. protect fraud, or defend crime, or to confuse
92. Doctrine of parens patriae (father of his legitimate issues, or that a corporation is the
country). The doctrine [referring] to the mere alter ego or business conduit of a person
inherent power and authority of the state to or where the corporation is so organized and
provide protection of the person and property of controlled and its affairs are so conducted as to
a person non sui juries. Under that doctrine, the make it merely an instrumentality, agency,
state has the sovereign power of guardianship conduit or adjunct of another corporation.
over persons under disability. Thus, the state is [Indophil Textile Mill Workers Union v. Calica,
considered the parens patriae of minors. [Govt. 205 SCRA 697 (1992)].
of the P. I. v. Monte de Piedad, 35 Phil. 728]. 96. Doctrine of political question. [The] well-
93. Doctrine of pari delicto. [The doctrine under settled doctrine that political questions are not
which] no recovery can be made in favor of the within the province of the judiciary, except to
plaintiffs for being themselves guilty of the extent that power to deal with such
violating the law. [Ponce v. CA, GR L-49494 questions has been conferred upon the courts by
May 31, 1979]. express constitutional or statutory provisions.
94. Doctrine of part performance. An equitable [Taada v. Cuenco, GR L-10520, Feb. 28,
principle that allows a court to recognize and 1957].
enforce an oral contract despite its legal 97. Doctrine of preclusion of issues. The doctrine
deficiencies and provides a way around the un which issues actually and directly resolved
statutory bar to the enforcement of an oral in a former suit cannot again be raised in any
contract. By applying the doctrine, a party can future case between the same parties involving
establish the existence of a contract despite the a different cause of action. [Borlongan v.
lack of any written evidence. Generally, Buenaventura, GR 167234, Feb. 27, 2006].
without written evidence, a contract does not Also called Doctrine of collateral estoppel.
satisfy the formal requirements set by the 98. Doctrine of prejudicial question. The doctrine
legislature under the statute of frauds. The [that] comes into play generally in a situation
doctrine is an exception to this as it allows where civil and criminal actions are pending
failure to comply with the statute of frauds to be and the issues involved in both cases are similar
overcome by a partys execution, in reliance on or so closely related that an issue must be pre-
an opposing partys oral promise, of an oral emptively resolved in the civil case before the
contracts requirements. criminal action can proceed. Thus, the existence
95. Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate of a prejudicial question in a civil case is
entity. The doctrine used whenever a court alleged in the criminal case to cause the
 suspension of the latter pending final 103. Doctrine of prior use. The principle that
determination of the former. [Quiambao v. prior use of a trademark by a person, even in the
Osorio, GR L-48157 Mar. 16, 1988]. absence of a prior registration, will convert a
99. Doctrine of presumed-identity approach. Also claim of legal appropriation by subsequent
called Doctrine of processual presumption. users.
Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if 104. Doctrine of privileged communication. 1.
pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that [The doctrine] that utterances made in the
foreign law is the same as ours. [EDI- course of judicial proceedings, incl. all kinds of
Staffbuilders Internatl., v. NLRC, GR 145587, pleadings, petitions and motions, belong to the
Oct. 26, 2007, 537 SCRA 409, 430]. class of communications that are absolutely
100. Doctrine of presumption of regularity in the privileged. [US v. Salera, 32 Phil. 365]. 2. [The
performance of official duty. The doctrine doctrine that] statements made in the course of
holding that every public official, absent any judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged
showing of bad faith and malice, is entitled to that is, privileged regardless of defamatory
the presumption regularity in the performance tenor and of the presence of malice if the same
of official duties. are relevant, pertinent, or material to the cause
101. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction. Rem. in hand or subject of inquiry. [Tolentino v.
Law. [The doctrine that holds that] if the case is Baylosis, 1 SCRA 396].
such that its determination requires the 105. Doctrine of privityof contract. Doctrine
expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of that provides that a contract cannot confer
the proper administrative bodies because rights or impose obligations arising under it on
technical matters or intricate questions of facts any person or agent except the parties to it. The
are involved, then relief must first be obtained basic premise is that only parties to contracts
in an administrative proceeding before a should be able to sue to enforce their rights or
remedy will be supplied by the courts even claim damages as such.
though the matter is within the proper 106. Doctrine of pro reo. Rem. Law. [The
jurisdiction of a court. [Industrial Enterprises, doctrine that] where the evidence on an issue of
Inc. v. CA, GR 88550. Apr. 18, 1990]. fact is in question or there is doubt on which
102. Doctrine of prior restraint. [The doctrine side the evidence weighs, the doubt should be
concerning] official governmental restrictions resolved in favor of the accused. [People v.
on the press or other forms of expression in Abarquez, GR 150762, 20 Jan. 2006, 479
advance of actual publication or dissemination. SCRA 225, 239]. See Pro reo doctrine.
[Bernas, The 1987 Consti. of the Rep. of the 107. Doctrine of processual presumption. [The
Phils., A Commentary, 2003 ed., p. 225]. doctrine holding that] if the foreign law
involved is not properly pleaded and proved,
 our courts will presume that the foreign law is arriving at their decision. They have no idea yet
the same as our local or domestic or internal of what the rest of the amended constitution
law. [Lim v. Collector, 36 Phil. 472]. would be. [Tolentino v. Comelec, 41 SCRA
108. Doctrine of promissory estoppel. [The 702].
doctrine under which] an estoppel may arise 110. Doctrine of protection against compulsory
from the making of a promise, even though disclosures. [The doctrine that] no person could
without consideration, if it was intended that the be compelled to testify against himself or to
promise should be relied upon and in fact it was answer any question which would have had a
relied upon, and if a refusal to enforce it would tendency to expose his property to a forfeiture
be virtually to sanction the perpetration of fraud or to form a link in a chain of evidence for that
or would result in other injustice. In this respect, purpose, as well as to incriminate him. [Cabal
the reliance by the promisee is generally v. Kapunan, Jr., GR L-19052, Dec. 29, 1962].
evidenced by action or forbearance on his part, 111. Doctrine of proximate cause. The [doctrine
and the Idea has been expressed that such action stating that] proximate legal cause is that acting
or forbearance would reasonably have been first and producing the injury, either
expected by the promisor. Mere omission by the immediately or by settling other events in
promisee to do whatever the promisor promised motion, all constituting a natural and
to do has been held insufficient forbearance to continuous chain of events, each having a close
give rise to a promissory estoppel. [Ramos v. causal connection with its immediate
Central Bank of the Phils., GR L-29352, Oct. 4, predecessor, the final event in the chain
1971; 41 SCRA 565 at p. 588]. immediately affecting the injury as a natural
109. Doctrine of proper submission. Consti. and probable result of the cause which first
Law. 1. All the proposed amendments to the acted, under such circumstances that the person
Consti. shall be presented to the people for the responsible for the first event should, as an
ratification or rejection at the same time, not ordinarily prudent and intelligent person, have
piecemeal. 2. Plebiscite may be held on the reasonable ground to expect at the moment of
same day as regular election provided the his act or default that an injury to some person
people are sufficiently informed of the might probably result therefrom. [Vda. de
amendments to be voted upon, to Bataclan v. Medina, GR L-10126, Oct. 22,
conscientiously deliberate thereon, to express 1957].
their will in a genuine manner. Submission of 112. Doctrine of public policy. [The doctrine
piece-meal amendments is constitutional. All under which], as applied to the law of contracts,
the amendments must be submitted for courts of justice will not recognize or uphold a
ratification at one plebiscite only. The people transaction when its object, operation, or
have to be given a proper frame of reference in tendency is calculated to be prejudicial to the
 public welfare, to sound morality or to civic paying for it. [See Soler v. CA, 410 Phil. 264,
honesty. [Cui v. Arellano University, GR L- 273 (2001)].
15127, 30 May 1961, 2 SCRA 205, 209]. 117. Doctrine of qui facit per alium. See
113. Doctrine of purposeful hesitation. [The Doctrine of respondeat superior.
doctrine that charges every court, including ths 118. Doctrine of ratification in agency. [The
Sup. Court,] with the duty of a purposeful doctrine pertaining to] the adoption or
hesitation before declaring a law confirmation by one person of an act performed
unconstitutional, on the theory that the measure on his behalf by another without authority. The
was first carefully studied by the executive and substance of the doctrine is confirmation after
legislative departments and determined by them conduct, amounting to a substitute for a prior
to be in accordance with the fundamental law authority. [Manila Memorial Park Cemetery,
before it was finally approved. [Drilon v. Lim, Inc. v. Linsangan, GR 151319, Nov. 22, 2004,
235 SCRA 135 (1994)]. 443 SCRA 394-395].
114. Doctrine of qualification. Conf. of Laws. 119. Doctrine of rational equivalence. [The]
The process of deciding whether or not the facts reasonable necessity of the means employed [to
relate to the kind of question specified in a repel the unlawful aggression] does not imply
conflicts rule. The purpose of characterization material commensurability between the means
is to enable the court of the forum to select the of attack and defense [but] [w]hat the law
proper law. [Agpalo, Conflict of Laws, p. 18]. requires is rational equivalence, in the
See Characterization. consideration of which will enter the principal
115. Doctrine of qualified political agency. Pol. factors of the emergency, the imminent danger
Law. The doctrine which holds that, as the Pres. to which the person attacked is exposed, and the
cannot be expected to exercise his control instinct, more than the reason, that moves or
powers all at the same time and in person, he impels the defense, and the proportionateness
will have to delegate some of them to his thereof does not depend upon the harm done,
Cabinet members, who in turn and by his but rests upon the imminent danger of such
authority, control the bureaus and other offices injury. [People v. Gutual, 324 Phil. 244, 259-
under their respective jurisdictions in the 260 (1996)].
executive department. [Carpio v. Exec. Sec., 120. Doctrine of relations back. That principle of
GR 96409. Feb. 14, 1992]. law by which an act done at one time is
116. Doctrine of quantum meruit. Lat. As much considered by a fiction of law to have been done
as one deserves. [Doctrine that] prevents undue at some antecedent period. It is a doctrine
enrichment based on the equitable postulate that which, although of equitable origin, has a well
it is unjust for a person to retain benefit without recognized application to proceedings at law; a
legal fiction invented to promote the ends of
 justice or to prevent injustice end the 124. Doctrine of res judicata. The doctrine [that]
occurrence of injuries where otherwise there has 2 aspects. The first is the effect of a
would be no remedy. The doctrine, when judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a second
invoked, must have connection with actual fact, action upon the same claim, demand or cause of
must be based on some antecedent lawful action. The second aspect is that it precludes the
rights. It has also been referred to as the relitigation of a particular fact or issues in
doctrine of relation back. [Allied Banking another action between the same parties on a
Corp. v. CA, GR 85868. Oct. 13, 1989]. Also different claim or cause of action. [Lopez v.
called Doctrine of relation back. Reyes, GR L-29498, Mar. 31, 1977, 76 SCRA
121. Doctrine of renvoi. Fr. Refer back. The 179].
process by which a court adopts the rules of a 125. Doctrine of res perit domino. Lat. The thing
foreign jurisdiction with respect to any conflict is lost to the owner. The doctrine that states that
of laws that arises. In some instances, the rules when a thing is lost or destroyed, it is lost to the
of the foreign state might refer the court back to person who was the owner of it at the time.
the law of the forum where the case is being 126. Doctrine of respect for administrative or
heard. practical construction. See Respect for
122. Doctrine of res gestae. Lat. Things done. administrative or practical construction
Doctrine that is a recognized exception to the doctrine.
rule against hearsayevidence based on the 127. Doctrine of respondeat superior.Let the
belief that, because certain statements are made master answer. A legal doctrine which states
naturally, spontaneously, and without that, in many circumstances, an employer is
deliberation during the course of an event, they responsible for the actions of employees
leave little room for misunderstanding or performed within the course of their
misinterpretation upon hearing by someone employment.
else, i.e., by the witness, who will later repeat 128. Doctrine of ripeness for judicial
the statement to the court, and thus the courts review. This [doctrine] determines the point at
believe that such statements carry a high degree which courts may review administrative action.
of credibility. The basic principle of ripeness is that the
123. Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Lat. The thing judicial machinery should be conserved for
itself speaks. A doctrine of law that one is problems which are real and present or
presumed to be negligent if he had exclusive imminent and should not be squandered on
control of whatever caused the injury even problems which are future, imaginary or
though there is no specific evidence of an act of remote. [Mamba v. Lara, GR 165109, Dec. 14,
negligence, and without negligence the 2009].
accident would not have happened.
129. Doctrine of secondary meaning. The the two institutions and thus avoid
doctrine [under which] a word or phrase encroachments by one against the other because
originally incapable of exclusive appropriation of a misunderstanding of the limits of their
with reference to an article in the market, respective exclusive jurisdictions. [Austria v.
because geographical or otherwise descriptive NLRC, GR 124382, 16 August 1999].
might nevertheless have been used so long and 133. Doctrine of separation of powers. A basic
so exclusively by one producer with reference postulate that forbids one branch of government
to this article that, in that trade and to that group to exercise powers belonging to another co-
of the purchasing public, the word or phrase has equal branch; or for one branch to interfere with
come to mean that the article was his produce. the others performance of its constitutionally-
[Ang v. Teodoro, 74 Phil. 56]. assigned functions. [Velasco, Jr., concurring
130. Doctrine of self-help. The doctrine op., Neri v. Senate Committee on
enunciated in Art. 429 of the Civ. Code which Accountability of Public Officers and
provides: The owner or lawful possessor of a Investigations, GR 180643, Mar. 25, 2007].
thing has the right to exclude any person from 134. Doctrine of severability. See Doctrine of
the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this separability.
purpose, he may use such force as may be 135. Doctrine of shifting majority. For each
reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an House of Congress to pass a bill, only the votes
actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion of the majority of those present in the session,
or usurpation of his property. there being a quorum, is required.
131. Doctrine of separability. [The doctrine that] 136. Doctrine of sole and exclusive competence
enunciates that an arbitration agreement is of the labor tribunal. Labor. The doctrine that
independent of the main contract. The recognizes the Labor Arbiters exclusive
arbitration agreement is to be treated as a jurisdiction to hear and decide the following
separate agreement and the arbitration cases involving all workers, whether
agreement does not automatically terminate agricultural or non-agricultural: (1) Unfair
when the contract of which it is part comes to labor practice cases; (2) Termination disputes;
an end. [Gonzales v. Climax Mining Ltd., GR (3) If accompanied with a claim for
161957, Jan. 22, 2007]. reinstatement, those cases that workers may file
132. Doctrine of separation of church and involving wages, rate of pay, hours of work and
state. The doctrine enshrined in Sec. 6, Art. II other terms and conditions of employment; (4)
of the 1987 Phil. which provides that: The Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other
separation of Church and State shall be forms of damages arising from the employer-
inviolable. The idea advocated by this employee relations; (5) Cases arising from any
principle is to delineate the boundaries between violation of Art. 264 of the Labor Code,
 including questions involving the legality of either by negligence, folly or inattention.
strikes and lockouts; and (6) Except claims for [Arradaza v. CA, 170 SCRA 12, 20 (1989)].
employees compensation, social security, 139. Doctrine of stare decisis. Also called the
medicare and maternity benefits, all other Doctrine of adherence tojudicial
claims arising from employer-employee precedents. [The] doctrine [that] enjoins
relations, including those of persons in adherence to judicial precedents. It requires
domestic or household service, involving an courts in a country to follow the rule established
amount exceeding P5,000.00, whether or not in a decision of its Sup. Court. That decision
accompanied with a claim for reinstatement. becomes a judicial precedent to be followed in
[From Art. 217, LC]. subsequent cases by all courts in the land. [Phil.
137. Doctrine of sovereign immunity. 1. Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) v.
[Doctrine] expressly provided in Art. XVI of Comelec, GR 190529, Apr. 29, 2010].
the 1987 Consti., viz: Sec. 3. The State may 140. Doctrine of stare decisis et non quieta
not be sued without its consent. 2. [The movere. Lat. To adhere to precedents and not to
doctrine which holds that] a sovereign is unsettle things which are established. The
exempt from suit, not because of any formal doctrine [that] enjoins adherence to judicial
conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical precedents. It requires courts in a country to
and practical ground that there can be no legal follow the rule established in a decision of the
right as against the authority that makes the law Supreme Court thereof. That decision becomes
on which the right depends. Also called a judicial precedent to be followed in
Doctrine of non-suability. subsequent cases by all courts in the land. The
138. Doctrine of stale demands. Also Doctrine of doctrine of stare decisis is based on the
laches. 1. [A doctrine] based upon grounds of principle that once a question of law has been
public policy which requires, for the peace of examined and decided, it should be deemed
society, the discouragement of stale claims and settled and closed to further argument. [Fermin
x x x is principally a question of the inequity or v. People, GR 157643, Mar. 28, 2008, 550
unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be SCRA 132].
enforced or asserted. [Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, 141. Doctrine of State immunity. [The doctrine
23 SCRA 29 (1968)]. 2. The time-honored rule under which] a State cannot be sued in the
anchored on public policy that relief will be courts of another State, without its consent or
denied to a litigant whose claim or demand has waiver. [Jusmag Phils. v. NLRC, GR 108813
become stale, or who has acquiesced for an Dec. 15, 1994].
unreasonable length of time, or who has not 142. Doctrine of state responsibility to
been vigilant or who has slept on his rights aliens. Intl. Law. The doctrine under which
astate is under obligation to make reparation to
 another state for the failure to fulfill its primary contemplates full substitution such that it places
obligation to afford; in accordance with the party subrogated in the shoes of the creditor,
international law, the proper protection due to and he may use all means that the creditor could
an alien who is a national of the latter state. See employ to enforce payment. [Keppel Cebu
also State responsibility doctrine. Shipyard, Inc. v. Pioneer Ins. and Surety Corp.,
143. Doctrine of statistical improbability. Also GR 180880-81 & 180896-97, Sept. 25, 2009,
known as Lagumbay doctrine. [Lagumbay v. 601 SCRA 96, 141-142].
Comelec, 16 SCRA 175 (1966)]. Elec. Law. 146. Doctrine of supervening event. The
The doctrine [that] is applied only where the doctrine under which facts and events
unique uniformity of tally of all the votes cast transpiring after the judgment or order had
in favor of all the candidates belonging to one become final and executory [which
party and the systematic blanking of all the circumstances] affect or change the substance
candidates of all the opposing parties appear in of the judgment and render its execution
the election return. [Sinsuat v. Pendatun, GR L- inequitable would justify the suspension or
31501, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 630]. nullification of such final and executory
144. Doctrine of strained relations. Labor. [The judgment or order.
rule]that where reinstatement is not feasible, 147. Doctrine of supervening negligence. Also
expedient or practical, as where reinstatement Doctrine of discovered peril. The doctrine x x x
would only exacerbate the tension and strained to the effect that where both parties are
relations bet. the parties, or where the negligent, but the negligent act of one is
relationship bet. the employer and employee appreciably later in time than that of the other,
has been unduly strained by reason of their or when it is impossible to determine whose
irreconcilable differences, particularly where fault or negligence should be attributed to the
the illegally dismissed employee held a incident, the one who had the last clear
managerial or key position in the company, it opportunity to avoid the impending harm and
would be more prudent to order payment of failed to do so is chargeable with the
separation pay instead of reinstatement. consequences thereof. [Picart v. Smith, 37 Phil.
[Quijano v. Mercury Drug Corp., GR 126561. 809]. [A]n antecedent negligence of a person
July 8, 1998]. does not preclude the recovery of damages for
145. Doctrine of subrogation. The principle supervening negligence of, or bar a defense
[that] covers a situation wherein an insurer against the liability sought by, another if the
[who] has paid a loss under an insurance policy latter, who had the last fair chance, could have
is entitled to all the rights and remedies avoided the impending harm by the exercise of
belonging to the insured against a 3rd party with due diligence. [Pantranco North Express, Inc. v.
respect to any loss covered by the policy. It Baesa, 179 SCRA 384].
148. Doctrine of the law of the case. That Shipping Corp. v. CA, GR 121833, Oct. 17,
principle under which determination of 2008].
questions of law will generally be held to 151. Doctrine of the third group. [The doctrine]
govern a case throughout all its subsequent to the effect that the right of the owner of the
stages where such determination has already shares of stock of a Phil. Corp. to transfer the
been made on a prior appeal to a court of last same by delivery of the certificate, whether it
resort. It is merely a rule of procedure and does be regarded as statutory on common law right,
not go to the power of the court, and will not be is limited and restricted by the express
adhered to where its application will result in an provision that no transfer, however, shall be
unjust decision. It relates entirely to questions valid, except as between the parties, until the
of law, and is confined in its operation to transfer is entered and noted upon the books of
subsequent proceedings in the same case. [Villa the corporation. [Uson v. Diosomito, GR L-
v. Sandiganbayan, GR 87186, Apr. 24, 1992, 42135, June 17, 1935].
208 SCRA 283, 295-296]. 152. Doctrine of ultimate consumption. Goods
149. Doctrine of the proper law. Conf. of Laws. intended for civilian use which may ultimately
The doctrine applied in the choice of lawstage find their way and be consumed by belligerent
of a lawsuit involving the conflict of laws. In a forces, may be seized on the way. See Ultimate
conflicts lawsuit, one or morestatelaws will be consumption doctrine.
relevant to the decision-making process. If the 153. Doctrine of ultimate destination. The final
laws are the same, this will cause no problems, destination in the territory of an enemy or under
but if there are substantive differences, the its control making goods contraband under the
choice of which law to apply will produce a doctrine of continuous voyage. See Ultimate
different judgment. Each state therefore destination doctrine.
produces a set of rules to guide the choice of 154. Doctrine of ultra vires. Lat. Beyond the
law, and one of the most significant rules is that powers. The doctrine in the law of corporations
the law to be applied in any given situation will that holds that if a corporation enters into a
be the proper law. This is the law which seems contract that is beyond the scope of its corporate
to have the closest and most real connection to powers, the contract is illegal.
the facts of the case, and so has the best claim 155. Doctrine of unforeseen events. The doctrine
to be applied. enunciated by Art. 1267 of the Civ. Code
150. Doctrine of the real and hypothecary nature [which] is not an absolute application of the
of maritime law. Mar. Ins. [The rule that] a ship principle of rebus sic stantibus [that] would
owners liability is merely co-extensive with his endanger the security of contractual relations.
interest in the vessel, except where actual fault [So v. Food Fest land, Inc., GR 183628 &
is attributable to the shipowner. [Aboitiz 183670. Apr. 7, 2010]. Art. 1267 provides:
 When the service has become so difficult as to [Nikko Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes, GR
be manifestly beyond the contemplation of the 154259, Feb. 28, 2005].
parties, the obligor may also be released 160. Doctrine of waiver. A doctrine resting upon
therefrom, in whole or in part. an equitable principle which courts of law will
156. Doctrine of vagueness. An aspect of the due recognize, that a person, with full knowledge of
process requirement of notice, [which] holds the facts shall not be permitted to act in a
that a law is facially invalid if persons of manner inconsistent with his former position or
common intelligence must necessarily guess conduct to the injury of another, a rule of
as at its meaning and differ as to its judicial policy, the legal outgrowth of judicial
application. abhorrence so to speak, of a persons taking
157. Doctrine of vicarious liability. A legal inconsistent positions and gaining advantages
doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a thereby through the aid of courts. [Lopez v.
person who did not cause the injury but who has Ochoa, GR L-7955, May 30, 1958].
a particular legal relationship to the person who 161. Doctrine of waiver of double
did act negligently. Also referred to as jeopardy. [The doctrine that holds that] when
Imputed negligence. the case is dismissed with the express consent
158. Doctrine of void for vagueness. Consti. of the defendant, the dismissal will not be a bar
Law. [The doctrine that] is most commonly to another prosecution for the same offense;
stated to the effect that a statute establishing a because, his action in having the case dismissed
criminal offense must define the offense with constitutes a waiver of his constitutional right
sufficient definiteness that persons of ordinary or privilege, for the reason that he thereby
intelligence can understand what conduct is prevents the court from proceeding to the trial
prohibited by the statute. It can only be invoked on the merits and rendering a judgment of
against that specie of legislation that is utterly conviction against him. [People v. Salico, 84
vague on its face, i.e., that which cannot be Phil. 722 (1949)].
clarified either by a saving clause or by
construction. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, GR.
148560, 19 Nov. 2001]. Compare with Doctrine
of overbreadth.
159. Doctrine of volenti non fit injuria. [The
doctrine that] refers to self-inflicted injury or to
the consent to injury which precludes the
recovery of damages by one who has
knowingly and voluntarily exposed himself to
danger, even if he is not negligent in doing so.