230 PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES (AS OF 2020) RESEARCHED AND COMPILED BY PROF. ALVIN T. CLARIDADES

1. 230 PHILIPPINE LEGAL DOCTRINES (AS OF 2020)
RESEARCHED AND COMPILED BY PROF. ALVIN T. CLARIDADES
PROFESSOR, PUP COLLEGE OF LAW AND
UNIVERSITY OF ASIA AND THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE OF LAW;
BAR REVIEWER, VLC BAR REVIEW CENTER
(FOR THE BENEFIT OF BAR EXAMINATION REVIEWEES,
LAW STUDENTS, PROFESSORS AND PRACTITIONERS)
1. Doctrine of absolute privilege. Doctrine that protects persons from claims alleging
defamation where the alleged defamatory statements were made by members of
legislative assemblies while on the floor of the assembly or communications made in
the context of judicial proceedings, as part of a
2. Doctrine of absorption of common crimes. The rule enunciated in People v.
Hernandez [99 Phil. Rep 515 (1956)] that the ingredients of a crime form part and
parcel thereof, and hence, are absorbed by the same and cannot be punished either
separately therefrom or by the application of Art. 48 of the RPC. [Ponce Enrile v. Amin,
GR 93335, Sep. 13, 1990, 189 SCRA 573]. It held that the crime of rebellion under
the RPC is charged as a single offense, and that it cannot be made into a complex
crime. Also Hernandez doctrine.
3. Doctrine of actio personalis moritur cum persona. The doctrine that personal action
terminates or dies with the person. [Santos v. Sec. of Labor, GR L-21624, 27 Feb.
1968, 22 SCRA 848].
4. Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction. Law. 1. The principle that once a court has
acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the court has done all that it can
do in the exercise of that jurisdiction. 2. The doctrine holding that even the finality of
the judgment does not totally deprive the court of jurisdiction over the case. What the
court loses is the power to amend, modify or alter the judgment. Even after the
judgment has become final, the court retains jurisdiction to enforce and execute it
[Echegaray v. Sec. of Justice, GR 132601, Jan. 19, 1999, 301 SCRA 96]. Also Doctrine
of continuity of jurisdiction.
5. Doctrine of adherence to judicial precedents. The doctrine that enjoins adherence to
judicial precedents. It requires courts in a country to follow the rule established in a
decision of its Supreme Court. That decision becomes a judicial precedent to be
followed in subsequent cases by all courts in the land. [Phil. Guardians Brotherhood,
Inc. (PGBI) v. Comelec, GR 190529, Apr. 29, 2010, 619 SCRA 585]. Also Doctrine of
stare decisis.
6. Doctrine of adoptive admission. Rem. Law. The doctrine pertaining to a party’s reaction
to a statement or action by another person when it is reasonable to treat the party’s
reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by the other person. [Estrada
v. Desierto, GR 146710-15, Apr. 3, 2001, 356 SCRA 108].

2. 7. Doctrine of agency by The doctrine where the principal will be estopped from denying
the grant of authority if 3rd parties have changed their positions to their detriment in
reliance on the representations made. Also Doctrine of holding out.
8. Doctrine of alter ego. A doctrine based upon the misuse of a corp. by an individual for
wrongful or inequitable purposes, and in such case the court merely disregards the
corporate entity and holds the individual responsible for acts knowingly and
intentionally done in the name of the corp. The doctrine imposes upon the individual
who uses a corp. merely as an instrumentality to conduct his own business liability as
a consequence of fraud or injustice perpetuated not on the corp., but on 3rd persons
dealing with the corp. [Cited Sulo ng Bayan, Inc. v. Araneta, Inc., GR L-31061, Aug. 17,
1976, 72 SCRA 347].
9. Doctrine of ancillary jurisdiction. Rem. Law. The doctrine that the court acquires
jurisdiction of case or controversy as an entirety and may, as incident to disposition of
matter properly before it, possess jurisdiction to decide other matters raised by case,
such as proceedings which are concerned with pleadings, processes, records or
judgments of court in principal case or proceedings which affect property already in
court’s custody. [Malaloan v. CA, GR 104879, May 6, 1994, 232 SCRA 249].
10. Doctrine of anticipatory breach. Rem. Law. The doctrine holding that even if the
contract is divisible in its performance and the future periodic deliveries are not yet
due, if the obligor has already manifested his refusal to comply with his future periodic
obligations, “the contract is entire and the breach total,” hence there can only be 1
action for damages. [Blossom and Co., Inc. v. Manila Gas Corp., GR L-32958, Nov. 8,
1930 55 Phil. 226].
11. Doctrine of apparent authority. The doctrine under which the acts and contracts of the
agent, as are within the apparent scope of the authority conferred on him, although no
actual authority to do such acts or to make such contracts has been conferred, bind
the principal. The principal’s liability, however, is limited only to 3rd persons who have
been led reasonably to believe by the conduct of the principal that such actual
authority exists, although none was given. In other words, apparent authority is
determined only by the acts of the principal and not by the acts of the agent. [Banate
v. Phil. Countryside Rural Bank, Inc., GR 163825, July 13, 2010, 625 SCRA 21]. Also
Holding out theory; or Doctrine of ostensible agency; or Agency by estoppel; or Apparent
authority doctrine.
12. Doctrine of assumption of risk. The precept that denotes that a person who knows and
comprehends the peril and voluntarily exposes himself or herself to it, although not
negligent in doing so, is regarded as engaging in an assumption of the risk and is
precluded from a recovery for an injury ensuing therefrom. Also Doctrine of volenti non
fit injuria.
13. Doctrine of attractive nuisance. A legal doctrine that makes a person negligent for
leaving a piece of equipment or other condition on property which would be both
attractive and dangerous to curious children. These have included tractors, unguarded
swimming pools, open pits, and abandoned refrigerators. Liability could be placed on
the people owning or controlling the premises even when the child was a trespasser
who sneaked on the property. Also called Attractive nuisance doctrine.
14. Doctrine of autolimitation. The doctrine in pol. law. where the Phils. adheres to
principles of intl. law as a limitation to the exercise of its sovereignty.

3. 15. Doctrine of bar by prior judgment. Law. A concept of res judicata holding that when, as
bet. the 1st case where the judgment was rendered and the 2nd case that is sought
to be barred, there is identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of action. In this
instance, the judgment in the 1st case constitutes an absolute bar to the 2nd action.
[Antonio v. Sayman Vda. de Monje, GR 149624, 29 Sep. 2010, 631 SCRA 471].
16. Doctrine of benevolent neutrality. Constl. Law. The doctrine holding that freedom to
carry out one’s duties to a Supreme Being is an inalienable right, not one dependent
on the grace of legislature and religious freedom is seen as a substantive right and not
merely a privilege against discriminatory legislation. With religion looked upon with
benevolence and not hostility, benevolent neutrality allows accommodation of religion
under certain circumstances. [Estrada v. Escritor, AM P-02-1651. Aug. 4, 2003, 408
SCRA 1].
17. Doctrine of caveat emptor. A warning that notifies a buyer that the goods he or she is
buying are “as is,” or subject to all defects. The principle under which the buyer could
not recover damages from the seller for defects on the property that rendered the
property unfit for ordinary purposes. The only exception was if the seller actively
concealed latent defects or otherwise made material misrepresentations amounting
to fraud. Also Doctrine of let the buyer beware.
18. Doctrine of centralized management. The doctrine holding that the corporate powers
of all corps. shall be exercised by the BoD or the individual officers or agents appointed
by it. [Manila Metal Container Corp. v. PNB, GR 166862, Dec. 20, 2006, 511 SCRA
444]. Also called Centralized management doctrine.
19. Doctrine of checks and balances. A doctrine in constl. law. that allows 1 dept. to resist
encroachments upon its powers and prerogatives by the other depts. or to rectify the
mistakes or curb the excesses committed by the other depts. Also called Checks and
balances doctrine.
20. Doctrine of collateral estoppel. A doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an
issue. Once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that
decision preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a diff. cause of action involving
a party to the 1st case. Also Doctrine of preclusion of issues.
21. Doctrine of class suit or virtual representation. A doctrine based on the concept that
members of a class who are made parties will protect their own interests which are
such that in protecting them the interests of the persons not made parties will also be
protected. [67 CJS 919].
22. Doctrine of command responsibility. The doctrine under which any govt. official or
supervisor, or officer of the PNP or that of any other law enforcement agency shall be
held accountable for “Neglect of Duty” if he has knowledge that a crime or offense
shall be committed, is being committed, or has been committed by his subordinates,
or by others within his area of responsibility and, despite such knowledge, he did not
take preventive or corrective action either before, during, or immediately after its
commission. [Sec. 1, EO 226. Feb. 17, 1995].
23. Doctrine of command responsibility. Elements: (a) The existence of a superior-
subordinate relationship bet. the accused as superior and the perpetrator of the crime
as his subordinate; (b) the superior knew or had reason to know that the crime was
about to be or had been committed; and (c) the superior failed to take the necessary
and reasonable measures to prevent the crim. acts or punish the perpetrators itself.

4. 24. Doctrine of comparative injury. A rule in equity which states that although a person is
entitled to injunctive relief, if the injury done to the respondent or the public would be
disproportionate, then injunctive relief must be denied.
25. Doctrine of comparative negligence. The doctrine that allows a recovery by a plaintiff
whose own act contributed to his injury, provided his negligence was slight as
compared with that of the defendant. [Rakes v. The Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific, Co., GR
1719, Jan. 23, 1907, 7 Phil., 359].
26. Doctrine of compassionate justice. The doctrine that the harsh provisions of law and
the rigid rules of procedure may sometimes be tempered and dispensed with to give
room for compassion.
27. Doctrine of completeness. Evid. The doctrine holding that a dying declaration to be
admissible must be complete in itself. To be complete in itself does not mean that the
declarant must recite everything that constituted the res gestae of the subject of his
statement, but that his statement of any given fact should be a full expression of all
that he intended to say as conveying his meaning in respect of such fact. [People v. De
Joya, GR 75028, Nov. 8, 1991, 203 SCRA 343].
28. Doctrine of conclusiveness of judgment. Law. A concept of res judicata holding that
where there is identity of parties in the 1st and 2nd cases, but no identity of causes of
action, the 1st judgment is conclusive only as to those matters actually and directly
controverted and determined and not as to matters merely involved therein. Stated
differently, any right, fact or matter in issue directly adjudicated or necessarily involved
in the determination of an action before a competent court in which judgment is
rendered on the merits is conclusively settled by the judgment therein and cannot
again be litigated bet. the parties and their privies, whether or not the claim, demand,
purpose, or subject matter of the 2 actions is the same. [Antonio v. Sayman Vda. de
Monje, GR 149624, 29 Sep. 2010, 631 SCRA 471].
29. Doctrine of condonation. Law. 1. The doctrine that a public official cannot be removed
for admin. misconduct committed during a prior term, since his re-election to office
operates as a condonation of the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent of cutting
off the right to remove him therefor. The foregoing rule, however, finds no application
to crim. cases pending against petitioner. [Aguinaldo v. Santos, GR 94115, Aug. 21,
1992, 212 SCRA 768]. 2. This doctrine was abandoned by the SC [in Morales v. CA
and Binay, Jr., GR 217126-27, Nov. 10, 2015] but the abandonment is prospectivein
effect Also Doctrine of forgiveness.
30. Doctrine of constitutional avoidance. The doctrine in constl. law prescribing that the
court should refuse to rule on a Constl. issue if the case can be resolved on another
ground.
31. Doctrine of constitutional supremacy. The doctrine that if a law or contract violates any
norm of the constitution, that law or contract, whether promulgated by the legislative
or by the exec. branch or entered into by private persons for private purposes, is null
and void and without any force and effect. Thus, since the Consti. is the fundamental,
paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed written in every statute and
contract. [Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, GR 122156, Feb. 3, 1997, 267 SCRA 408].
32. Doctrine of constructive compliance. The doctrine that states that if, without the fault
of the heir, the modal institution cannot take effect in the exact manner stated by the
testator, it shall be complied with in a manner most analogous to and in conformity
with his wishes. [Art. 883, CC].

5. 33. Doctrine of constructive trust. A gen. principle that a person who acquires land or other
property by fraud, misrepresentation, imposition, or concealment, or under any such
other circumstances as to render it inequitable for him to retain the property, is in
equity to be regarded as a trustee ex maleficio thereof for a person who suffers by
reason of the fraud or other wrong, and is equitably entitled to the property, even
though such beneficiary may never have any legal estate therein. [Magallon v. Montejo,
GR 73733, Dec. 16, 1986, 146 SCRA 282].
34. Doctrine of continuity of jurisdiction. Law. The gen. principle that once a court has
acquired jurisdiction, that jurisdiction continues until the court has done all that it can
do to exercise that jurisdiction. See Doctrine of adherence of jurisdiction.
35. Doctrine of contributory infringement. The doctrine holding that, aside from the
infringer, any person who actively induces the infringement of a patent or provides the
infringer with a component of a patented product or of a product produced bec. of a
patented process knowing it to be esp. adapted for infringing the patented invention
and not suitable for substantial non-infringing use is liable jointly and severally with
the infringer as a contributory infringer. It must, however, be proven that the product
can only be used for infringement purposes bec. if it can be used for legitimate
purposes, the action shall not prosper.
36. Doctrine of corporate negligence. The judicial answer to the problem of allocating
hospital’s liability for the negligent acts of health practitioners, absent facts to support
the application of respondeat superior or apparent authority. Its formulation proceeds
from the judiciary’s acknowledgment that in these modern times, the duty of providing
quality medical service is no longer the sole prerogative and responsibility of the
physician. The modern hospitals have changed structure. Hospitals now tend to
organize a highly professional medical staff whose competence and performance need
to be monitored by the hospitals commensurate with their inherent responsibility to
provide quality medical care. [Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR 126297, Jan.
31, 2007, 513 SCRA 478].
37. Doctrine of corporate opportunity. The doctrine under which a director of a corp. is
made to account to his corp., the gains and profits from transactions entered into by
him or by another competing corp. in which he has substantial interests which should
have been a transaction undertaken by his corp. This s a breach of fiduciary
relationship.
38. Doctrine of corporate responsibility. The doctrine following which it was held that a
hospital has the duty to see that it meets the standards of responsibilities for the care
of patients. Such duty includes the proper supervision of the members of its medical
staff. [Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR 126297, Jan. 31, 2007, 513 SCRA
478].
39. Doctrine of deference and non-disturbance on appeal. The doctrine that the SC on
appeal would not disturb the findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses in
view of the latter’s advantage of observing at first hand their demeanor in giving their
testimony. [Tehankee, concurring op., Llamoso v Sandiganbayan, GR L-63408 &
64026, Aug. 7, 1985, 138 SCRA 92].
40. Doctrine of dependent relative revocation. The doctrine that states that a revocation
subject to a condition does not revoke a will unless and until the condition occurs.
Thus, where a testator “revokes” a will with the proven intention that he would execute

6. another will, his failure to validly make a latter will would permit the allowance of the
earlier will.
41. Doctrine of discouraging the splitting of cause of action in complex crimes. Pro. The
doctrine dissuading the splitting of a cause of action in complex crimes for the reason
that it would work unnecessary inconvenience to the administration of justice in
general and to the accused in particular, considering that it would require the
presentation of substantially the same evidence in diff. courts. [People v. Cano, GR L-
19660, May 24, 1966].
42. Doctrine of discovered peril. The doctrine to the effect that where both parties are
negligent, but the negligent act of one is appreciably later in time than that of the other,
or when it is impossible to determine whose fault or negligence should be attributed
to the incident, the party who had the last clear opportunity to avoid the impending
harm and failed to do so is chargeable with the consequences thereof. [See Picart v.
Smith, Jr., GR L-12219, Mar. 15, 1918, 37 Phil. 809]. 2. The rule that an antecedent
negligence of a person does not preclude the recovery of damages for supervening
negligence of, or bar a defense against the liability sought by, another if the latter, who
had the last fair chance, could have avoided the impending harm by the exercise of
due diligence. [Glan People’s Lumber and Hardware v. IAC, GR 70493, May 18,
1989, 173 SCRA 464]. Also called Last clear chance doctrine.
43. Doctrine of disregarding the distinct personality of the corporation. The doctrine stating
that when “the notion of legal entity is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong,
protect fraud, or defend crime, the law will regard the corp. as an assoc. of persons, or
in the case of 2 corps., merge them into one, the one being merely regarded as part or
instrumentality of the other. [Yutivo Sons Hardware Co. v. CTA, GR L-13203, Jan. 28,
1961, 1 SCRA 160]. The same is true where a corp. is a dummy and serves no
business purpose and is intended only as a blind, or an alter ego or business conduit
for the sole benefit of the stockholders. [McConnel v. CA, GR L-10510, Mar. 17,
1961, 1 SCRA 722].
44. Doctrine of effective nationality. Law. The doctrine holding that a person having more
than 1 nationality shall be treated as if he had only one-either the nationality of the
country in which he is habitually and principally resident or the nationality of the
country with which, in the circumstances, he appears to be most closely connected.
[Frivaldo v. Comelec, GR 87193, June 23, 1989, 174 SCRA 245].
45. Doctrine of effective occupation. A doctrine in intl. law which holds that in order for a
nation to occupy a coastal possession, it also had to prove that it controlled sufficient
authority there to protect existing rights such as freedom of trade and transit. Also
called Effective occupation doctrine.
46. Doctrine of ejusdem generis. Con. The doctrine under which where gen. terms follow
the designation of particular things or classes of persons or subjects, the gen. term will
be construed to comprehend those things or persons of the same class or of the same
nature as those specifically enumerated. [Napocor v. Angas, GR 60225-26 May 8,
1992, 208 SCRA 542].
47. Doctrine of election of remedies. A doctrine developed to prevent a plaintiff from a
double recovery for a loss, making the person pursue only 1 remedy in an action.
Although its application is not restricted to any particular cause of action, it is most
commonly employed in contract cases involving fraud, which is a misrepresentation of
a material fact that is intended to deceive a person who relies on it.

7. 48. Doctrine of equality of shares. The doctrine that all stocks issued by the corp. are
presumed equal with the same privileges and liabilities, provided that the AoI is silent
on such differences. Also called Equality of shares doctrine.
49. Doctrine of equitable recoupment. It provides that a claim for refund barred by
prescription may be allowed to offset unsettled tax liabilities should be pertinent only
to taxes arising from the same transaction on which an overpayment is made and
underpayment is due.
50. Doctrine of equivalents. Intel. Prop. The rule stating that an infringement also takes
place when a device appropriates a prior invention by incorporating its innovative
concept and, although with some modification and change, performs substantially the
same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result.
[Smith Kline and Beckman Corp. v. CA, GR 126627, Aug. 14, 2003, 409 SCRA 33].
51. Doctrine of equivalents test. Intel. Prop. A test established to determine infringement
which recognizes that minor modifications in a patented invention are sufficient to put
the item beyond the scope of literal infringement. Thus, an infringement also occurs
when a device appropriates a prior invention by incorporating its innovative concept
and, albeit with some modification and change, performs substantially the same
function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result.
[Godines v. CA, GR 97343, Sep. 13, 1993, 226 SCRA 338]. Compare with Literal
infringement test.
52. Doctrine of estoppel. Law. A doctrine based on grounds of public policy, fair dealing,
good faith and justice, the purpose [of which is to forbid one to speak against his own
act, representations, or commitments to the injury of one to whom they were directed
and who reasonably relied thereon. [PNB v. CA, GR L-30831, Nov. 21, 1979, 94 SCRA
357].
53. Doctrine of estoppel by laches. Law. An equitable doctrine by which some courts deny
relief to a claimant who has unreasonably delayed or been negligent in asserting a
claim. A person invoking laches should assert that an opposing party has slept on
his/her rights and that the party is no longer entitled to his/her orig. claim.
54. Doctrine of executive privilege. The doctrine stating that the Pres. and those who assist
him must be free to explore alternatives in the process of shaping policies and making
decisions and to do so in a way many would be unwilling to express except privately.
These are the considerations justifying a presumptive privilege for presl.
communications. The privilege is fundamental to the operation of govt. and inextricably
rooted in the separation of powers under the Consti. [Almonte v. Vasquez, GR 95367,
May 23, 1995, 244 SCRA 286].
55. Doctrine of exhaustion. The doctrine that provides that the patent holder has control
of the 1st sale of his invention. He has the opportunity to receive the full consideration
for his invention from his sale. Hence, he exhausts his rights in the future control of his
invention. It espouses that the patentee who has already sold his invention and has
received all the royalty and consideration for the same will be deemed to have released
the invention from his monopoly. The invention thus becomes open to the use of the
purchaser without further restriction. [Adams v. Burke, 84 US 17, 1873]. Also Doctrine
of first sale.
56. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. The gen. rule that before a party
may seek the intervention of the court, he should first avail of all the means afforded
him by admin. processes. The issues which admin. agencies are authorized to decide

8. should not be summarily taken from them and submitted to a court without first giving
such admin. agency the opportunity to dispose of the same after due deliberation.
[Rep. v. Lacap, GR 158253, Mar. 2, 2007, 517 SCRA 255].
57. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. Exceptions: (a) The question
involved is purely legal; (b) the admin. body is in estoppel; (c) the act complained of is
patently illegal; (d) there is an urgent need for Judicial intervention; (e) the claim
involved is small; (f) grave and irreparable injury will be suffered; (g) there is no other
plain, speedy and adequate remedy; (h) strong public interest is involved; (i) the subject
of the controversy is private law; (j) the case involves a quo warranto proceeding
[Sunville Timber Products, Inc. v. Abad. 206 SCRA 482 {1992)]; (k) he party was denied
due process (Samahang Magbubukid ng Kapdula, Inc. v. CA, 305 SCRA 147 (1999)];
(l) the decision is that of a Dept. Sec. [Nazareno v. CA, GR 131641, Feb. 23. 2000];
(m) resort to admin. remedies would be futile (UP Board of Regents v. Rasul 200 SCRA
685 (1991)]; (n) there is unreasonable delay [Rep. v, Sandiganbayan, 301 SCRA 237
(1999)]; (o) the action involves recovery of physical possession of public land [Gabrito
u. CA, 167 SCRA 771 {1988)]; (p) the party is poor (Sabello v. DECS, 180 SCRA 623
(1989)]; and (q) the law provides for immediate resort to the court (Rulian v Valdez, 12
SCRA 501 (1964)].
58. Doctrine of fair comment. A doctrine in the law of libel which means that while in
general every discreditable imputation publicly made is deemed false bec. every man
is presumed innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and every false imputation is
directed against a public person in his public capacity, it is not necessarily actionable.
In order that such discreditable imputation to a public official may be actionable, it
must either be a false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false supposition. If
the comment is an expression of opinion, based on established facts, then it is
immaterial that the opinion happens to be mistaken, as long as it might reasonably be
inferred from the facts. [Borjal v. CA, GR 126466, Jan. 14, 1999, 301 SCRA 1].
59. Doctrine of fair use. Prop. The doctrine that permits a secondary use which serves the
copyright objective of stimulating productive thought and public instruction without
excessively diminishing the incentives for creativity. Also called Fair use doctrine.
60. Doctrine of file wrapper estoppel. The doctrine holding that a patentee is precluded
from claiming as part of patented product that which he had to excise or modify in
order to avoid patent office rejection, and that he may omit any additions which he was
compelled to add by patent office regulations. This doctrine balances the Doctrine of
equivalents.
61. Doctrine of finality of administrative action. The doctrine in pol. law that prior to the
completion or finality of the action of an admin. agency, courts will not interfere with it
for the reason that absent a final order or decision, power has not yet been fully and
finally exercised, and there can usu. be no irreparable harm at that point.
62. Doctrine of finality of judgment. Law. The doctrine that once a judgment attains finality
it thereby becomes immutable and unalterable. It may no longer be modified in any
respect, even if the modification is meant to correct what is perceived to be an
erroneous conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of whether the modification is
attempted to be made by the court rendering it or by the highest court of the land. Just
as the losing party has the right to file an appeal within the prescribed period, the
winning party also has the correlative right to enjoy the finality of the resolution of his
case. The doctrine of finality of judgment is grounded on fundamental considerations

9. of public policy and sound practice, and that, at the risk of occasional errors, the
judgments or orders of courts must become final at some definite time fixed by law;
otherwise, there would be no end to litigations, thus setting to naught the main role of
courts of justice which is to assist in the enforcement of the rule of law and the
maintenance of peace and order by settling justiciable controversies with finality.
[Gallardo-Corro v. Gallardo, GR 136228, Jan. 30, 2001, 350 SCRA 568].
63. Doctrine of first sale. A doctrine in intel prop. law wherein the owner of an intel. prop.,
such as a patent, loses or exhausts all his rights to the goods subject of the intel. prop.
right after its 1st sale in the market. Also Doctrine of exhaustion.
64. Doctrine of forgiveness. See Doctrine of condonation.
65. Doctrine of forum non-conveniens. The forum is inconvenient. Priv. Intl. Law. A rule
designed to deter the practice of global forum shopping, [Coquia and Aguiling-
Pangalangan, Conflicts of Laws, pp. 40-41, 2000 Ed.] that is, to prevent non-resident
litigants from choosing the forum or place wherein to bring their suit for malicious
reasons, such as to secure procedural advantages, to annoy and harass the
defendant, to avoid overcrowded dockets, or to select a more friendly venue. Under
this doctrine, a court, in conflicts of law cases, may refuse impositions on its
jurisdiction where it is not the most “convenient” or available forum and the parties
are not precluded from seeking remedies elsewhere. [First Phil. Intl. Bank v. CA, GR
115849, Jan. 24, 1996, 252 SCRA 259 ].
66. Doctrine of fraudulent title becoming the root of valid title. Land Titles. The doctrine
that a fraudulent or forged document of sale may become the root of a valid title if the
certificate of title has already been transferred from the name of the true owner to the
name of the forger or the name indicated by the forger. [Rep. v. Agunoy, Sr., GR
155394, Feb. 17, 2005, 451 SCRA 735].
67. Doctrine of fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant. It basically means that no one may enjoy
the fruits of fraud. [Acot v. Kempis, 55 OG 16, p. 2907 (1959)].
68. Doctrine of free enterprise. A doctrine holding that a capitalist economy can regulate
itself in a free and competitive market through the relationship of supply and demand
with a min. intervention and regulation from the state.
69. Doctrine of governmental immunity from suit. The doctrine that no governmental body
can be sued unless it gives permission.
70. Doctrine of hierarchy of courts. Law. An established policy that parties must observe
the hierarchy of courts before they can seek relief directly from the SC. The rationale
for this rule is twofold: (a) it would be an imposition upon the limited time of the SC;
and (b) it would inevitably result in a delay, intended or otherwise, in the adjudication
of cases, which in some instances, had to be remanded or referred to the lower court
as the proper forum under the rules of procedure, or as better equipped to resolve the
issues bec. the SC is not a trier of facts. [Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor, GR 140954, 12 Apr.
2005, 455 SCRA 460].
71. Doctrine of holding out. The doctrine where the principal will be estopped from denying
the grant of authority if 3rd parties have changed their positions to their detriment in
reliance on the representations made. Also Doctrine of agency by estoppel.
72. Doctrine of hold-over. The doctrine under which a public officer whose term has expired
or services have been terminated is allowed to continue holding his office until his
successor is appointed or chosen and had qualified.

10. 73. Doctrine of hot pursuit. Crim. Law. The doctrine under which a warrantless arrest may
be validly effected when an offense has just been committed, and the person arresting
has probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed it.
74. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final judgment. Two-fold purpose: (a) To
avoid delay in the administration of justice and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the
discharge of judicial business; and (b) to put an end to judicial controversies, at the
risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why courts exist. [Mercury Drug Corp. v.
Huang, GR 197654, Aug. 30, 2017, 838 SCRA 221].
75. Doctrine of immunity from suit. The doctrine the application of which has been
restricted to sovereign or governmental activities [jure imperii]. The mantle of state
immunity cannot be extended to commercial, private and proprietary acts [jure
gestionis]. [JUSMAG v. NLRC, GR 108813, Dec. 15, 1994, 239 SCRA 224]. 2. The
restrictive application of State immunity is proper when the proceedings arise out of
commercial transactions of the foreign sovereign, its commercial activities or
economic affairs. Stated differently, a State may be said to have descended to the level
of an individual and thus can be deemed to have tacitly given its consent to be used
only when it enters into business contracts. It does not apply where the contract relates
to the exercise of its sovereign functions. [USA v. Ruiz, GR L-35645, May 22,
1985, 136 SCRA 487].
76. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final judgment. The doctrine that has a
two-fold purpose: (a) to avoid delay in the administration of justice and thus,
procedurally, to make orderly the discharge of judicial business and (b) to put an end
to judicial controversies, at the risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why courts
exist. [SSS v. Isip, GR 165417, Apr. 3, 2007, 520 SCRA 310].
77. Doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final judgment. Exceptions: (a) The
correction of clerical errors; (b) the so-called nunc pro tunc entries that cause no
prejudice to any party; (c) void judgments; and (d) whenever circumstances transpire
after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust and inequitable. [Temic
Semiconductors, Inc. Employees Union (TSIEU)-FFW v. Federation of Free Workers
(FFW), GR 160993, May 20, 2008, 554 SCRA 122].
78. Doctrine of immutability of judgment. A fundamental legal principle that a decision that
has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable, and may no longer be
modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous
conclusions of fact and law, and whether it be made by the court that rendered it or by
the highest court of the land. The only exceptions to the gen. rule on finality of
judgments are the so-called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to any
party, void judgments, and whenever circumstances transpire after the finality of the
decision which render its execution unjust and inequitable. [Sacdalan v. CA, GR
128967, May 20, 2004, 428 SCRA 586].
79. Doctrine of implications. Con. That which is plainly implied in the language of a statute
is as much a part of it as that which is expressed. [In Re: McCulloch Dick, GR 13862,
Apr. 16, 1918, 38 Phil. 41].
80. Doctrine of implied conspiracy. The doctrine under which 2 or more persons
participating in the commission of a crime are held to be collectively liable as co-
conspirators, notwithstanding the absence of any agreement to that effect, if they act
in concert, showing unity of crim. intent and a common purpose.

11. 81. Doctrine of implied municipal liability. The doctrine that a municipality may become
obligated upon an implied contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits
accepted or appropriated by it as to which it has the gen. power to contract. [Prov. of
Cebu v. IAC, GR 72841, Jan. 29, 1987, 147 SCRA 447]. It applies to all cases where
money or property of a party is received under such circumstances that the gen. law,
independent of an express contract, implies an obligation to do justice with respect to
the same. [38 Am Jur. Sec. 515, p. 193].
82. Doctrine of implied trust. The doctrine enunciated in Art. 1456 of the Civ. Code which
provides that “if property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it
is, by force of law, considered a trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of the person
from whom the property comes.” [Armamento v. Guerrero, GR L-34228, Feb. 21,
1980, 96 SCRA 178].
83. Doctrine of in pari delicto. Legal principle that if 2 parties in a dispute are
equally at fault, then the party in possession of the contested property gets to retain it
and the courts will not interfere with the status quo. It implies that if a party
whose action or failure to act precipitates breach of a contract, or who fails to take
appropriate action or takes inappropriate action to limit or recoup a loss, such party
may not claim nor be awarded
84. Doctrine of inappropriate provision. It deals with item provisions in a budget bill that
are to be treated as items for the President’s veto power. [Dean Tupaz, 24 Hours
Before the Bar (1st Ed. 2005), p. 133].
85. Doctrine of incidental recognition. The doctrine that voluntary acknowledgment of a
child may be done incidentally in a pubic document; that a father’s incidental mention
of a child as his in a public document executed by him deserves full faith and credit.
[Javelona v. Monteclaro, GR L-48464, Oct. 4, 1943].
86. Doctrine of incompatibility of public offices. Law. It concerns a potential clash of 2
incompatible public offices held by a single official. In other words, the doctrine
concerns a conflict bet. an individual’s performance of potentially overlapping public
duties.
87. Doctrine of incomplete testimony. Rem. Law. The doctrine holding that when cross-
examination of a witness cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to
the party who offered the witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent
and should be stricken from the record.
88. Doctrine of incorporation. Law. The doctrine that states that the rules of Intl. Law form
part of the law of the land and no legislative action is required to make them applicable
to a country. The Phils. follows this doctrine, bec. Sec. 2. Art. II of the Consti. states that
the Phils. adopts the generally accepted principles of intl. law as part of the law of the
land. Compare with Doctrine of transformation.
89. Doctrine of indefeasibility of torrens titles. A certificate of title, once registered, should
not thereafter be impugned, altered, changed, modified, enlarged or diminished except
in a direct proceeding permitted by law. [De Pedro v. Romasan Devt. Corp., GR
158002, Feb. 28, 2005, 452 SCRA 564].
90. Doctrine of indelible allegiance. The doctrine that an individual may be compelled to
retain his orig. nationality notwithstanding that he has already renounced or forfeited
it under the laws of the 2nd state whose nationality he has acquired.
91. Doctrine of independence. Comml. Law. The doctrine that the relationship of the buyer
and the bank is separate and distinct from the relationship of the buyer and seller in

12. the main contract such that the bank is not required to investigate if the contract
underlying the letters of credit has been fulfilled or not bec. in such transactions banks
deal only with documents and not goods (BPI v. De Reny Fabric Industries, Inc., L-‐
2481, Oct. 16, 1970). In effect, the buyer has no course of action against the issuing
bank. Also called Independence principle. The exception to this doctrine is the Fraud
exception rule.
92. Doctrine of independently relevant statements. Evid. The doctrine holding that only the
fact that statements were made is relevant, and the truth or falsity thereof is
immaterial, hence, such statements are admissible in evidence, as an exception to the
hearsay rule.
93. Doctrine of individuality of subscription. A subscription is 1 entire and indivisible whole
contract. It cannot be divided into portions. [Sec. 64, Corp. Code]. Also Doctrine of
indivisibility of subscription.
94. Doctrine of indivisibility of subscription. The doctrine that a subscription contract is
one, entire and indivisible contract. It cannot be divided into portions so that the
stockholder shall not be entitled to a certificate of stock until full payment of his
subscription together with interest, and expenses if any is due. [SEC Opinion, Apr. 11,
1994]. Also Doctrine of individuality of subscription.
95. Doctrine of informed consent. A duty imposed on a doctor to explain the risks of
recommended procedures to a patient before a patient determines whether or not he
or she should go forward with the procedure. Also called Informed consent doctrine.
96. Doctrine of inscrutable fault. The doctrine holding that in case of a maritime collision
where the vessel at fault not known, each vessel shall suffer its own losses and both
shall be solidarily liable for loses or damages on the cargo.
97. Doctrine of interlocking confessions. The doctrine under which extra-judicial
confessions independently made without collusion which are identical with each other
in their essential details and are corroborated by other evidence on record are
admissible, as circumstantial evidence, against the person implicated to show the
probability of the latter’s actual participation in the commission of the crime. [People
v. Molleda, GR L-34248, Nov. 21, 1978, 86 SCRA 667].
98. Doctrine of inverse condemnation. It involves the action to recover just compensation
from the State or its expropriating agency. It has the objective to recover the value of
property taken in fact by the governmental defendant, even though no formal exercise
of the power of eminent domain has been attempted by the taking agency. [Napocor
v. Heirs of Macabangkit Sangkay, GR 165828, Aug. 24, 2011, 656 SCRA 60].
99. Doctrine of isolated transactions. The doctrine that foreign corps., even unlicensed
ones, can sue or be sued on a transaction or series of transactions set apart from their
common business in the sense that there is no intention to engage in a progressive
pursuit of the purpose and object of business transaction. [Eriks Pte. Ltd. v. CA, GR
118843, Feb. 6, 1997, 267 SCRA 567].
100. Doctrine of judicial admissions. The well-settled doctrine that judicial admissions
cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is the party himself and binds the person
who makes the same, and absent any showing that this was made thru palpable
mistake, no amount of rationalization can offset it. [Binarao v. Plus Builders, Inc., GR
154430, June 16, 2006, 491 SCRA 49].

13. 101. Doctrine of judicial estoppel. The doctrine that when a party assumes a certain position
in a legal proceeding and succeeds in maintaining it, he may not thereafter be
permitted to assume a contrary position just bec. his interests have changed.
102. Doctrine of judicial Rem. Law. The doctrine holding that courts may take cognizance of
matters as true or existing without need of introduction of evidence, or accept certain
matters as facts even if no proof of their existence is presented.
103. Doctrine of judicial stability. Rem. Law. 1. The doctrine that no court can interfere by
injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction
having the power to grant the relief sought by the injunction. [Cabili v. Balindong, AM
RTJ-10-2225, Sep. 6, 2011, 656 SCRA 747]. 2. An elementary principle in the
administration of justice where no court can interfere by injunction with the judgments
or orders of another court of concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief
sought by the injunction. [Go v. Villanueva, Jr., GR 154623, Mar. 13, 2009, 581 SCRA
126]. Also Doctrine of non-interference.
104. Doctrine of judicial supremacy. The doctrine recognizing that the judiciary is vested
with the power to annul the acts of either the legislative or the exec. or of both when
not conformable to the fundamental law. [Assoc. of Small Landowners v. Sec. of
Agrarian Reform, GR 78742, July 14, 1989, 175 SCRA 343]. 2. The power of judicial
review under the Consti. [Angara v. Electoral Commission, GR L-45081, July 15,
1936, 63 Phil. 139].
105. Doctrine of jus sanguinis. Right of blood. A principle of nationality law by
which citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having instead 1 or both
parents who are citizens of the state or more generally by having state citizenship or
membership to a nation determined or conferred by ethnic, cultural or other descent
or origin.
106. Doctrine of jus soli. Right of the soil. The doctrine recognizing the right of anyone born
in the territory of a state to nationality or citizenship.
107. Doctrine of laches. A doctrine based upon grounds of public policy which requires, for
the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and is principally a question
of the inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or asserted.
[Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, GR L-21450 Apr. 15, 1968, 23 SCRA 29]. 2. The time-honored
rule anchored on public policy that relief will be denied to a litigant whose claim or
demand has become “stale”, or who has acquiesced for an unreasonable length of
time, or who has not been vigilant or who has slept on his rights either by negligence,
folly or inattention. [Arradaza v. CA, GR 50422, Feb. 8, 1989, 170 SCRA 12]. Also
Doctrine of stale demands.
108. Doctrine of lack of capacity to sue. The doctrine of lack of capacity to sue based on
failure to first acquire a local license is based on considerations of public policy. It was
never intended to favor nor insulate from suit unscrupulous establishments or
nationals in case of breach of valid obligations or violations of legal rights of
unsuspecting foreign firms or entities simply bec. they are not licensed to do business
in the country. [Facilities Mngt. Corp. v. De la Osa, GR L-38649, Mar. 26, 1979, 89
SCRA 131].
109. Doctrine of last clear chance. A doctrine in the law of torts which states that the
contributory negligence of the party injured will not defeat the claim for damages if it
is shown that the defendant might, by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the negligence of the injured party. In such cases,

14. the person who had the last clear chance to avoid the mishap is considered in law
solely responsible for the consequences thereof. [Ong v. Metropolitan Water District,
GR L-7664, Aug. 29, 1958, 104 Phil. 397]. Also Doctrine of discovered peril or
Humanitarian doctrine. Also called Last clear chance doctrine.
110. Doctrine of legal entity of the separate personality of the corporation. The doctrine that
a corp. may not be made to answer for acts and liabilities of its stockholders or those
of legal entities to which it may be connected or vice versa. [Palay, Inc. v. Clave, GR L-
56076, Sep. 21, 1983, 124 SCRA 638].
111. Doctrine of let the buyer beware. A warning that notifies a buyer that the goods he or
she is buying are “as is,” or subject to all defects. The principle under which
the buyer could not recover damages from the seller for defects on the property that
rendered the property unfit for ordinary purposes. The only exception was if the seller
actively concealed latent defects or otherwise made material misrepresentations
amounting to fraud. Also Doctrine of caveat emptor.
112. Doctrine of lex loci celebrationis. The doctrine under which the law of the place where
a contract was made or celebrated, as in the case of a marriage, shall govern.
113. Doctrine of lex loci delicti commissi. The doctrine that the substantive rights and
obligations arising out of a tort controversy are determined by the law of the place of
injury or the lex loci delicti.
114. Doctrine of liberal construction of retirement laws. Con. The doctrine that retirement
laws are liberally construed and administered in favor of the persons intended to be
benefited. All doubts as to the intent of the law should be resolved in favor of the retiree
to achieve its humanitarian purposes. [Borromeo v. CSC, GR 96032 July 31,
1991, 199 SCRA 911].
115. Doctrine of limited liability. The [doctrine that the] ship agent shall also be civilly liable
for the indemnities in favor of 3rd persons which may arise from the conduct of the
captain in the care of the goods which he loaded on the vessel; but he may exempt
himself therefrom by abandoning the vessel with all the equipment and the freight it
may have earned during the voyage. [Art. 587, Code of Commerce; Yangco v. Laserna,
GR L-47447-47449, Oct. 29, 1941, 73 Phil., 330]. Also called Limited liability doctrine.
116. Doctrine of limited liability. Exceptions: (a) Repairs and provisioning of the vessel
before its loss; [Art. 586, Code of Commerce]; (b) Ins. proceeds. If the vessel is insured,
the proceeds will go to the persons entitled to claim from the shipowner; [Vasquez v.
CA, GR L-42926, Sep. 13, 1985, 138 SCRA 553]; (c) Workmen’s Compensation cases
(now Employees’ Compensation under the LC) [Oching v. San Diego, GR 775, Dec. 17,
1946]; (d) When the shipowner is guilty of fault or negligence; But if the captain is the
one who is guilty, the doctrine may still be invoked, hence, abandonment is still an
option; (e) Private carrier; or (f) Voyage is not maritime in character.
117. Doctrine of lis pendens. A pending suit. The jurisdiction, power or control which a court
acquires over the property involved in a suit pending the continuance of the action and
until final judgment thereunder.
118. Doctrine of logical relevance. Crim. Law. The rule that allows a judge to draw a
reasonable inference from the appearance of an accused as his appearance is a
material fact. The inference should then be weighed in light of the other legally relevant
evidence. [Puno, J., Dissenting Op., People v. Tapales, GR 125808, Sep. 3, 1999, 313
SCRA 610].

15. 119. Doctrine of loss of confidence. Labor. Requisites: Loss of confidence should not be
simulated; (b) it should not be used as a subterfuge for causes which are improper,
illegal, or unjustified; (c) it may not be arbitrarily asserted in the face of overwhelming
evidence to the contrary; (d) it must be genuine, not a mere afterthought to justify an
earlier action taken in bad faith; and (e) the employee involved holds a position of trust
and confidence. [Midas Touch Food Corp. v. NLRC, GR 111639, July 29, 1996, 259
SCRA 652]. Also called Loss of confidence doctrine.
120. Doctrine of loss of trust and confidence. Labor. The doctrine that loss of trust and
confidence, as a just cause for termination of employment, is premised on the fact that
an employee concerned holds a position where greater trust is placed by management
and from whom greater fidelity to duty is correspondingly expected. [Wesleyan Univ.
Phils. v. Reyes, GR 208321, July 30, 2014]
121. Doctrine of majority rule. The rule that is almost universally used as a mechanism for
adjusting and resolving conflicts and disagreements within the group after the
members have been given an opportunity to be heard. While it does not efface
conflicts, nonetheless, once a decision on a contentious matter is reached by a
majority vote, the dissenting minority is bound thereby so that the board can speak
with 1 voice, for those elected to the governing board are deemed to implicitly contract
that the will of the majority shall govern in matters within the authority of the board.
[Velez v. De Vera, AC 6697, BM 1227, AM 05-5-15-SC, July 25, 2006, 496 SCRA 345].
122. Doctrine of malicious prosecution. The doctrine that pertains to persecution through
the misuse or abuse of judicial processes; or the institution and pursuit of legal
proceedings for the purpose of harassing, annoying, vexing or injuring an innocent
person. [Villanueva v. UCPB, GR 138291, Mar. 7, 2000, 327 SCRA 391].
123. Doctrine of management prerogative. The doctrine under which every employer has
the inherent right to regulate, acc. to his own discretion and judgment, all aspects of
employment, incl. hiring, work assignments, working methods, the time, place and
manner of work, work supervision, transfer of employees, lay-off of workers, and
discipline, dismissal, and recall of employees. [Rural Bank of Cantilan, Inc. v. Julve, GR
169750, Feb. 27, 2007, 517 SCRA 17].
124. Doctrine of mechanical equivalents. The doctrine under which the patentee is pro-
tected from colorable invasions of his patent under the guise of substitution of some
part of his invention by some well-known mechanical equivalent. It is an infringement
of the patent if the substitute performs the same function and was well known at the
date of the patent as a proper substitute for the omitted ingredient. [Gsell v. Yap-Jue,
GR L-4720, Jan. 19, 1909, 12 Phil. 519].
125. Doctrine of mortgagee in good faith. The rule that all persons dealing with property
covered by a Torrens Certificate of Title, as buyers or mortgagees, are not required to
go beyond what appears on the face of the title. The public interest in upholding the
indefeasibility of a certificate of title, as evidence of the lawful ownership of the land
or of any encumbrance thereon, protects a buyer or mortgagee who, in good faith,
relied upon what appears on the face of the certificate of title. [Cavite Devt. Bank v.
Lim, GR 131679, 1 Feb. 2000, 324 SCRA 346].
126. Doctrine of multiple admissibility. Evid. The doctrine that the evidence may either be
admissible for several purposes or not admissible for 1 purpose but may be admitted
for a diff. purpose if it satisfies all the requirements of the latter.

16. 127. Doctrine of mutuality of remedy. A civil law doctrine founded on the idea that 1 party
should not obtain from equity that which the other party could not obtain.
128. Doctrine of necessary implication. Con. 1. The doctrine that states that what is implied
in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed. [Natl. Assoc. of Trade
Unions-Republic Planters Bank Supervisors Chapter v. Torres, GR 93468, Dec. 29,
1994, 239 SCRA 546]. 2. The doctrine that every statutory grant of power, right or
privilege is deemed to include all incidental power, right or privilege. [DENRv. United
Planners Consultants, Inc. (UPCI), GR 212081, Feb. 23, 2015].
129. Doctrine of no – estafa – in – bouncing – checks – issued – in – payment – of – pre-
existing – obligations. The doctrine that a check issued in payment of a pre-existing
obligation does not constitute estafa even if there is no fund in the bank to cover the
amount of the check. [People v. Lilius, 59 Phil. 339 (1933)].
130. Doctrine of non-delegation. Law. The principle that delegated powe0r constitutes not
only a right but a duty to be performed by the delegate through the instrumentality of
his own judgment and not through the intervening mind of another.
131. Doctrine of non-delegation. Law. Exceptions to this principle: (a) Delegation of tariff
powers to the Pres. under Sec. 28 (2) of Art. VI of the Consti.; (b) Delegation of
emergency powers to the Pres. under Sec. 23(2) of Art. VI of the Consti.; (c) Delegation
to the people at large; (d) Delegation to local govts.; and (e) Delegation to admin.
bodies. [Abakada Guro Party List v. Ermita, GR 168056, Sep. 1, 2005, 469 SCRA 14].
132. Doctrine of non-esopprl. The doctrine in election law that there can be no estoppel
from questioning coerced or irregular returns despite failure of the affected candidate
to attend or be represented at the canvassing or to file his objections during the
canvassing. This is based on the fundamental premise in election cases that the
candidates-protagonists are mere incidents and that the real party in interest is the
electorate whose true will must be determined without technicalities and
equivocations. [Guiao v. Comelec, GR L-68056, July 5, 1985, 137 SCRA 356].
133. Doctrine of non-interference. Law. The doctrine holding that the judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction may not be opened, modified, or vacated by any court of
concurrent jurisdiction. [Rep. v. Reyes, GR L-30263-5, Oct. 3, 1987, 155 SCRA 313].
Also Doctrine of judicial stability.
134. Doctrine of non-suability. The basic postulate enshrined in the Consti. that “(t)he State
may not be sued without its consent,” which reflects nothing less than a recognition of
the sovereign character of the State and an express affirmation of the unwritten rule
effectively insulating it from the jurisdiction of courts. It is based on the very essence
of sovereignty. [DA v. NLRC, GR 104269, Nov. 11, 1993, 227 SCRA 693].
135. Doctrine of operative fact. The doctrine that nullifies the effects of an unconstl. law by
recognizing that the existence of a statute prior to a determination of
unconstitutionality is an operative fact and may have consequences which cannot
always be ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration. It
is applicable when a declaration of unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden on
those who have relied on the invalid law. [Planters Products, Inc. v. Fertiphil Corp., GR
166006, 14 Mar. 2008, 548 SCRA 485]. Also called Operative fact doctrine.
136. Doctrine of ostensible agency. The doctrine that imposes liability, not as the result of
the reality of a contractual relationship, but rather bec. of the actions of a principal or
an employer in somehow misleading the public into believing that the relationship or

17. the authority exists. [Professional Services, Inc. v. Agana, GR 126297, 126467 and
127590, Jan. 31, 2007, 513 SCRA 478]. See Doctrine of ostensible authority.
137. Doctrine of ostensible authority. The doctrine holding that if a corp. knowingly permits
1 of its officers, or any other agent, to do acts within the scope of an apparent authority,
and thus holds him out to the public as possessing power to do those acts, the corp.
will, as against any person who has in good faith dealt with the corp. through such
agent, be estopped from denying his authority [Prudential Bank v. CA, GR 108957,
June 14, 1993, 223 SCRA 350]. Also Doctrine of apparent authority.
138. Doctrine of outside appearance. The doctrine that states that a corp. is bound by a
contract entered into by an officer who acts without, or in excess of his actual authority,
in favor of a person who deals with him in good faith relying on such apparent authority.
139. Doctrine of overbreadth. Law. [A]n exception to the prohibition against 3rd-party
standing, the doctrine permitting a person to challenge a statute on the ground that it
violates the free speech rights of 3rd parties not before the court, even though the law
is Constl. as applied to that defendant. In other words, the overbreadth doctrine
provides that: “Given a case or controversy, a litigant whose own activities are
unprotected may nevertheless challenge a statute by showing that it substantially
abridges the [free speech] rights of other parties not before the court.” [Chemerinsky,
Constl. Law, p. 86, 2nd Ed. (2002)]. Compare with Doctrine of void for vagueness.
140. Doctrine of parens patriae (father of his country). The doctrine referring to the inherent
power and authority of the state to provide protection of the person and property of a
person non sui juries. Under that doctrine, the state has the sovereign power of
guardianship over persons under disability. Thus, the state is considered the parens
patriae of minors. [Govt. of the Phil. Islands. v. Monte de Piedad, GR L-9959, Dec. 13,
1916, 35 Phil. 728].
141. Doctrine of pari delicto. The doctrine under which no recovery can be made in favor of
the plaintiffs for being themselves guilty of violating the law. [Ponce v. CA, GR L-49494
May 31, 1979, 90 SCRA 533].
142. Doctrine of part performance. An equitable principle holding that where 1 party to an
oral contract has, in reliance thereon, so far performed his part of the agreement that
it would be perpetuating a fraud upon him to allow the other party to repudiate the
contract and to set up the statute of frauds in justification thereof, equity will regard
the case as being removed from the operation of the statute and will enforce the
contract by decreeing specific performance of it, or by granting other appropriate relief,
such as quieting title, establishing a resulting or a constructive trust, enjoining
interference with the possession of property, or enjoining a conveyance of property.
[Shoemaker v. La Tondeña, Inc., GR L-45667. May 9, 1939].
143. Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. The principle that the corporate mask may be
removed or the corporate veil pierced when the corp. is just an alter ego of a person or
of another corp. For reasons of public policy and in the interest of justice, the corporate
veil will justifiably be impaled only when it becomes a shield for fraud, illegality or
inequity committed against 3rd persons. [PNB v. Andrada Electric Eng’g. Co., 430 Phil.
882 (2002)].
144. Doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. Areas of application: (a) defeat of public
convenience as when the corporate fiction is used as a vehicle for the evasion of an
existing obligation; (b) fraud cases or when the corporate entity is used to justify a
wrong, protect fraud, or defend a crime; or (c) alter ego cases, where a corp. is merely

18. a farce since it is a mere alter ego or business conduit of a person, or where the corp.
is so organized and controlled and its affairs are so conducted as to make it merely an
instrumentality, agency, conduit or adjunct of another corp. [PNB v. HydroResources
Contractors Corp, 706 Phil. 297 (2013)].
145. Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate entity. The doctrine under which the legal
fiction that a corp. is an entity with a juridical personality separate and distinct from its
members or stockholders may be disregarded when valid grounds therefore exist [and]
in such cases, the corp. will be considered as a mere assoc. of persons. The members
or stockholders of the corp. will be considered as the corp., that is liability will attach
directly to the officers and stockholders. [Indophil Textile Mill Workers Union-PTGWO v.
Calica, GR. 96490, Feb. 3, 1992, 205 SCRA 697]. The doctrine that applies when the
corporate fiction is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, or
defend crime, or when it is made as a shield to confuse the legitimate issues, or where
a corp. is the mere alter ego or business conduit of a person, or where the corp. is so
organized and controlled and its affairs are so conducted as to make it merely an
instrumentality, agency, conduit or adjunct of another corp. [Umali v. CA, GR 89561,
Sep. 13, 1990, 189 SCRA 529].
146. Doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate fiction. The doctrine that allows the State to
disregard the notion of separate personality of a corp. for justifiable reason/s. This is
an exception to the Doctrine of separate corporate entity.
147. Doctrine of political question. The well-settled doctrine that political questions are not
within the province of the judiciary, except to the extent that power to deal with such
questions has been conferred upon the courts by express Constl. or statutory
provisions. [Tañada v. Cuenco, GR L-10520, Feb. 28, 1957, 103 Phil. 1051].
148. Doctrine of preclusion of issues. The doctrine un which issues actually and directly
resolved in a former suit cannot again be raised in any future case bet. the same
parties involving a diff. cause of action. [Borlongan v. Buenaventura, GR 167234, Feb.
27, 2006, 483 SCRA 405]. Also Doctrine of collateral estoppel.
149. Doctrine of prejudicial question. The doctrine that comes into play generally in a
situation where civil and crim. actions are pending and the issues involved in both
cases are similar or so closely related that an issue must be preemptively resolved in
the civil case before the crim. action can proceed. Thus, the existence of a prejudicial
question in a civil case is alleged in the crim. case to cause the suspension of the latter
pending final determination of the former. [Quiambao v. Osorio, GR L-48157, Mar. 16,
1988, 158 SCRA 674].
150. Doctrine of presumed-identity approach. Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is the same as ours. [EDI-
Staffbuilders Intl., Inc. v. NLRC, GR 145587, Oct. 26, 2007, 537 SCRA 409]. Also
Doctrine of processual presumption.
151. Doctrine of presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty. The doctrine
holding that every public official, absent any showing of bad faith and malice, is entitled
to the presumption regularity in the performance of official duties.
152. Doctrine of primacy of administrative remedies. Rem. Law. The rule that before a party
may seek the intervention of the court, he should first avail of all the means afforded
him by admin. processes; that the issues which admin. agencies are authorized to
decide should not be summarily taken from them and submitted to a court without first

19. giving such admin. agency the opportunity to dispose of the same after due
deliberation. [Rep. v. Lacap, GR 158253, Mar. 2, 2007, 517 SCRA 255].
153. Doctrine of primary jurisdiction. Law. The doctrine that holds that if the case is such
that its determination requires the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the
proper admin. bodies bec. technical matters or intricate questions of facts are
involved, then relief must first be obtained in an admin. proceeding before a remedy
will be supplied by the courts even though the matter is within the proper jurisdiction
of a court. [Ind’l. Ent., Inc. v. CA, GR 88550, Apr. 18, 1990, 184 SCRA 426].
154. Doctrine of prior resort. A doctrine in admin. law holding that when a claim originally
cognizable in the courts involves issues which, under a regulatory scheme, are within
the special competence of an admin. agency, judicial proceedings will be suspended
pending the referral of these issues to the admin. body for its view.
155. Doctrine of prior restraint. The doctrine concerning official governmental restrictions
on the press or other forms of expression in advance of actual publication or
dissemination. [Bernas, The 1987 Consti. of the Rep. of the Phils., A Commentary,
2003 ed., p. 225].
156. Doctrine of prior use. The principle that prior use of a trademark by a person, even in
the absence of a prior registration, will convert a claim of legal appropriation by
subsequent users.
157. Doctrine of privileged communication. The doctrine that utterances made in the course
of judicial proceedings, incl. all kinds of pleadings, petitions and motions, belong to the
class of communications that are absolutely privileged. [Sison v. David, GR L-11268,
Jan. 28, 1961, 1 SCRA 60]. 2. The doctrine that statements made in the course of
judicial proceedings are absolutely privileged – that is, privileged regardless of
defamatory tenor and of the presence of malice – if the same are relevant, pertinent,
or material to the cause in hand or subject of inquiry. [Tolentino v. Baylosis, GR L-
15742, Jan. 31, 1961, 1 SCRA 396].
158. Doctrine of privity of Doctrine that provides that a contract cannot confer rights or
impose obligations arising under it on any person or agent except the parties to it. The
basic premise is that only parties to contracts should be able to sue to enforce their
rights or claim damages as such.
159. Doctrine of pro reo. Law. The doctrine that where the evidence on an issue of fact is in
question or there is doubt on which side the evidence weighs, the doubt should be
resolved in favor of the accused. [Abarquez v. People, GR 150762, 20 Jan. 2006, 479
SCRA 225]. Also called Pro reo doctrine.
160. Doctrine of processual presumption. The doctrine holding that where a foreign law is
not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that foreign law is
the same as ours. [Atci Overseas Corp. v. Echin, GR 178551, Oct. 11, 2010, 632 SCRA
528]. 2. The presumption that, in the absence of anything to the contrary as to the
character of a foreign law, it is the same as the domestic law on the same subject. [Lim
v. Insular Collector of Customs, GR 11759, Mar. 16, 1917, 36 Phil. 472]. Also Doctrine
of presumed-identity approach.
161. Doctrine of promissory estoppel. The doctrine under which an estoppel may arise from
the making of a promise, even though without consideration, if it was intended that
the promise should be relied upon and in fact it was relied upon, and if a refusal to
enforce it would be virtually to sanction the perpetration of fraud or would result in
other injustice. In this respect, the reliance by the promisee is generally evidenced by

20. action or forbearance on his part, and the Idea has been expressed that such action
or forbearance would reasonably have been expected by the promisor. Mere omission
by the promisee to do whatever the promisor promised to do has been held insufficient
‘forbearance’ to give rise to a promissory estoppel.’ [Ramos v. Central Bank of the
Phils., GR L-29352, Oct. 4, 1971, 41 SCRA 565].
162. Doctrine of proper submission. Law. All the proposed amendments to the Consti. shall
be presented to the people for the ratification or rejection at the same time, not
piecemeal. 2. Plebiscite may be held on the same day as regular election provided the
people are sufficiently informed of the amendments to be voted upon, to
conscientiously deliberate thereon, to express their will in a genuine manner.
Submission of piece-meal amendments is constitutional. All the amendments must be
submitted for ratification at 1 plebiscite only. The people have to be given a proper
frame of reference in arriving at their decision. They have no idea yet of what the rest
of the amended Consti. would be. [Tolentino v. Comelec, GR L-34150, Oct. 16,
1971, 41 SCRA 702].
163. Doctrine of protection against compulsory disclosures. The doctrine that no person
could be compelled to testify against himself or to answer any question which would
have had a tendency to expose his property to a forfeiture or to form a link in a chain
of evidence for that purpose, as well as to incriminate him. [Cabal v. Kapunan, Jr., GR
L-19052, Dec. 29, 1962, 6 SCRA 1059].
164. Doctrine of proximate cause. The doctrine stating that proximate legal cause is that
acting first and producing the injury, either immediately or by settling other events in
motion, all constituting a natural and continuous chain of events, each having a close
causal connection with its immediate predecessor, the final event in the chain
immediately affecting the injury as a natural and probable result of the cause which
first acted, under such circumstances that the person responsible for the 1st event
should, as an ordinarily prudent and intelligent person, have reasonable ground to
expect at the moment of his act or default that an injury to some person might probably
result therefrom. [Vda. de Bataclan v. Medina, GR L-10126, Oct. 22, 1957, 102 Phil.
181].
165. Doctrine of public policy. The doctrine under which, as applied to the law of contracts,
courts of justice will not recognize or uphold a transaction when its object, operation,
or tendency is calculated to be prejudicial to the public welfare, to sound morality or to
civic honesty. [Cui v. Arellano Univ., GR L-15127, 30 May 1961, 2 SCRA 205].
166. Doctrine of purposeful hesitation. The doctrine that charges every court, incl. the SC,
with the duty of a purposeful hesitation before declaring a law unconstitutional, on the
theory that the measure was first carefully studied by the exec. and legislative depts.
and determined by them to be in accordance with the fundamental law before it was
finally approved. [Drilon v. Lim, GR 112497, Aug. 4, 1994, 235 SCRA 135].
167. Doctrine of qualification. of Laws. The process of deciding whether or not the facts
relate to the kind of question specified in a conflicts rule. The purpose of
characterization is to enable the court of the forum to select the proper law. [Agpalo,
Conflict of Laws, p. 18].
168. Doctrine of qualified political agency. Law. The doctrine that holds that, as the Pres.
cannot be expected to exercise his control powers all at the same time and in person,
he will have to delegate some of them to his Cabinet members, who in turn and by his

21. authority, control the bureaus and other offices under their respective jurisdictions in
the exec. dept. [Carpio v. Exec. Sec., GR 96409, Feb. 14, 1992, 206 SCRA 290].
169. Doctrine of quantum meruit. As much as one deserves. The doctrine that prevents
undue enrichment based on the equitable postulate that it is unjust for a person to
retain benefit without paying for it. [See Soler v. CA, GR 123892, 21 May 2001, 358
SCRA 57].
170. Doctrine of qui facit per alium. The doctrine holding that, if in the nature of things, the
master is obliged to perform the duties by employing servants, he is responsible for
their acts in the same way that he is responsible for his own acts. See Doctrine of
respondeat superior.
171. Doctrine of ratification in agency. The doctrine pertaining to the adoption or
confirmation by 1 person of an act performed on his behalf by another without
authority. The substance of the doctrine is confirmation after conduct, amounting to a
substitute for a prior authority. [Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc. v. Linsangan, GR
151319, Nov. 22, 2004, 443 SCRA 377].
172. Doctrine of rational equivalence. The reasonable necessity of the means employed [to
repel the unlawful aggression] does not imply material commensurability bet. the
means of attack and defense [but] [w]hat the law requires is rational equivalence, in
the consideration of which will enter the principal factors of the emergency, the
imminent danger to which the person attacked is exposed, and the instinct, more than
the reason, that moves or impels the defense, and the proportionateness thereof does
not depend upon the harm done, but rests upon the imminent danger of such injury.
[People v. Gutual, GR 115233, Feb. 22, 1996, 254 SCRA 37].
173. Doctrine of relation back. A principle that something done today will be treated as if it
were done earlier. This doctrine is applied under certain circumstances. For example,
a document held in escrow and then delivered later will be treated as if delivered when
it was put into escrow. Also Doctrine of relations back or Relation back doctrine.
174. Doctrine of relations back. That principle of law by which an act done at one time is
considered by a fiction of law to have been done at some antecedent period. It is a
doctrine that, although of equitable origin, has a well-recognized application to
proceedings at law; a legal fiction invented to promote the ends of justice or to prevent
injustice end the occurrence of injuries where otherwise there would be no remedy.
The doctrine, when invoked, must have connection with actual fact, must be based on
some antecedent lawful rights. [Allied Banking Corp. v. CA, GR 85868, Oct. 13,
1989, 178 SCRA 526]. Also Doctrine of relation back or Relation back doctrine.
175. Doctrine of renvoi. Refer back. The process by which a court adopts the rules of a
foreign jurisdiction with respect to any conflict of laws that arises. In some instances,
the rules of the foreign state might refer the court back to the law of the forum where
the case is being heard.
176. Doctrine of res gestae. Things done. Doctrine that is a recognized exception to the rule
against hearsay evidence based on the belief that, bec. certain statements are made
naturally, spontaneously, and without deliberation during the course of an event, they
leave little room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation upon hearing by someone
else, i.e., by the witness, who will later repeat the statement to the court, and thus the
courts believe that such statements carry a high degree of credibility.
177. Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The thing itself speaks. A doctrine of law that one is
presumed to be negligent if he had exclusive control of whatever caused the injury

22. even though there is no specific evidence of an act of negligence, and without
negligence the accident would not have happened.
178. Doctrine of res judicata. The doctrine that has 2 aspects. The 1st is the effect of a
judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a 2nd action upon the same claim, demand or
cause of action. The 2nd aspect is that it precludes the relitigation of a particular fact
or issues in another action bet. the same parties on a diff. claim or cause of action.
[Lopez v. Reyes, GR L-29498, Mar. 31, 1977, 76 SCRA 179].
179. Doctrine of res perit domino. The thing is lost to the owner. The doctrine that states
that when a thing is lost or destroyed, it is lost to the person who was the owner of it
at the time.
180. Doctrine of residual jurisdiction. Rem. Law. The doctrine that the residual jurisdiction
of trial courts is available at a stage in which the court is normally deemed to have lost
jurisdiction over the case or the subject matter involved in the appeal. This stage is
reached upon the perfection of the appeals by the parties or upon the approval of the
records on appeal, but prior to the transmittal of the orig. records or the records on
appeal. In either instance, the trial court still retains its so-called residual jurisdiction
to: (a) issue protective orders; (b) approve compromises; (c) permit appeals of indigent
litigants; (d) order execution pending appeal; and (e) allow the withdrawal of the
appeal.
181. Doctrine of respect for administrative or practical construction. The doctrine which the
courts apply by referring to several factors such as: (a) the respect due the
governmental agencies charged with administration, their competence, expertness,
experience, and informed judgment and the fact that they frequently are the drafters
of the law they interpret; (b) the fact that the agency is the one on which the legislature
must rely to advise it as to the practical working out of the statute; and (c) the practical
application of the statute presents the agency with unique opportunity and
experiences for discovering deficiencies, inaccuracies, or improvements in the statute.
[Asturias v. Comm. of Customs, GR L-19337, Sep. 30, 1969, 29 SCRA 617].
182. Doctrine of respondeat superior. Let the master answer. A legal doctrine which states
that, in many circumstances, an employer is responsible for the actions of employees
performed within the course of their employment.
183. Doctrine of restrictive foreign sovereign immunity. The doctrine of intl. law under which
a State or State instrumentality is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another
State, except with respect to claims arising out of activities of the kind that may be
carried on by private persons.
184. Doctrine of ripeness for judicial review. This doctrine determines the point at which
courts may review admin. action. The basic principle of ripeness is that the judicial
machinery should be conserved for problems which are real and present or imminent
and should not be squandered on problems which are future, imaginary or remote.
[Mamba v. Lara, GR 165109, Dec. 14, 2009, 608 SCRA 149].
185. Doctrine of secondary meaning. The doctrine that a word or phrase originally incapable
of exclusive appropriation with reference to an article in the market, bec. geographical
or otherwise descriptive might nevertheless have been used so long and so exclusively
by 1 producer with reference to this article that, in that trade and to that group of the
purchasing public, the word or phrase has come to mean that the article was his
produce. [Ang v. Teodoro, GR L-48226, Dec. 14, 1942, 74 Phil., 50].

23. 186. Doctrine of self-help. The doctrine enunciated in Art. 429 of the Civ. Code which
provides: “The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the right to exclude any person
from the enjoyment and disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as
may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful
physical invasion or usurpation of his property.”
187. Doctrine of separability. The doctrine that enunciates that an arbitration agreement is
independent of the main contract. The arbitration agreement is to be treated as a
separate agreement and the arbitration agreement does not automatically terminate
when the contract of which it is part comes to an end. [Gonzales v. Climax Mining Ltd.,
GR 161957, Jan. 22, 2007, 512 SCRA 148]. Also called Doctrine of severability.
188. Doctrine of separate (legal) personality. A well-settled doctrine both in law and in equity
that as a legal entity, a corp. has a personality distinct and separate from its individual
stockholders or members. [Cruz v. Dalisay, AM R-181-P, July 31, 1987, 152 SCRA
482].
189. Doctrine of separate juridical personality. 1. The doctrine which provides that a corp.
has a legal personality separate and distinct from that of people comprising it. [Heirs
of Tan Uy v. Intl. Exchange Bank, 703 Phil. 477(2013)]. 2. The doctrine by virtue of
which stockholders of a corp. enjoy the principle of limited liability: the corporate debt
is not the debt of the stockholder. [PNB v. Hydro Resources Contractors Corp., 706
Phil. 297 (2013)].
190. Doctrine of separation of church and state. The doctrine enshrined in Sec. 6, Art. II of
the 1987 Phil. which provides that: “The separation of Church and State shall be
inviolable.” The idea advocated by this principle is to delineate the boundaries bet. the
2 institutions and thus avoid encroachments by one against the other bec. of a
misunderstanding of the limits of their respective exclusive jurisdictions. [Austria v.
NLRC, GR 124382, 16 Aug. 1999, 312 SCRA 410].
191. Doctrine of separation of powers. A basic postulate that forbids 1 branch of govt. to
exercise powers belonging to another coequal branch; or for 1 branch to interfere with
the other’s performance of its constitutionally-assigned functions. [Velasco, Jr.,
concurring op., Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and
Investigations, GR 180643, Mar. 25, 2008, 549 SCRA 77].
192. Doctrine of severability. Also called Doctrine of separability.
193. Doctrine of shifting majority. For each House of Congress to pass a bill, only the votes
of the majority of those present in the session, there being a quorum, is required.
194. Doctrine of sole and exclusive competence of the labor tribunal. The doctrine that
recognizes the Labor Arbiters’ exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide the ff. cases
involving all workers, whether agricultural or non-agricultural: (a) Unfair labor practice
cases; (b) Termination disputes; (c) If accompanied with a claim for reinstatement,
those cases that workers may file involving wages, rate of pay, hours of work and other
terms and conditions of employment; (e) Claims for actual, moral, exemplary and other
forms of damages arising from the employer-employee relations; (f) Cases arising from
any violation of Art. 264 of the LC, incl. questions involving the legality of strikes and
lockouts; and (g) Except claims for employees compensation, social security, medicare
and maternity benefits, all other claims arising from employer-employee relations, incl.
those of persons in domestic or household service, involving an amount exceeding
P5,000.00, whether or not accompanied with a claim for reinstatement. [From Art.
217, LC].

24. 195. Doctrine of sovereign immunity. The doctrine expressly provided in Art. XVI of the 1987
Consti., viz: “Sec. 3. The State may not be sued without its consent.” 2. The doctrine
that holds that a sovereign is exempt from suit, not bec. of any formal conception or
obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right
as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends. Also Doctrine
of non-suability.
196. Doctrine of specialty. A principle of Intl. law included in most extradition treaties
whereby a person who is extradited to a country to stand trial for certain crim. offenses
may be tried only for those offenses and not for any other pre-extradition offenses.
197. Doctrine of stale demands. 1. [A doctrine] based upon grounds of public policy which
requires, for the peace of society, the discouragement of stale claims and is principally
a question of the inequity or unfairness of permitting a right or claim to be enforced or
asserted. [Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, GR L-21450, Apr. 15, 1968, 23 SCRA 29]. 2. The
time-honored rule anchored on public policy that relief will be denied to a litigant whose
claim or demand has become “stale”, or who has acquiesced for an unreasonable
length of time, or who has not been vigilant or who has slept on his rights either by
negligence, folly or inattention. [Arradaza v. CA, GR 50422, Feb. 8, 1989, 170 SCRA
12]. Also Doctrine of laches.
198. Doctrine of stare decisis. The doctrine that enjoins adherence to judicial precedents.
It requires courts in a country to follow the rule established in a decision of its Supreme
Court. That decision becomes a judicial precedent to be followed in subsequent cases
by all courts in the land. [Phil. Guardians Brotherhood, Inc. (PGBI) v. Comelec, GR
190529, Apr. 29, 2010, 619 SCRA 585]. Also Doctrine of adherence to judicial
precedents.
199. Doctrine of stare decisis. Instances when the doctrine may be abandoned: (a) When
adherence to it would result in the govt.’s loss of its case; (b) when the application of
the doctrine would cause great prejudice to a foreign national; and (c) when it is
necessary to promote the passage of a new law.
200. Doctrine of stare decisis et non quieta movere. To adhere to precedents and not to
unsettle things which are established. The doctrine that enjoins adherence to judicial
precedents. It requires courts in a country to follow the rule established in a decision
of its Supreme Court. 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. [Fermin v. People, GR 157643, Mar.
28, 2008, 550 SCRA 132].
201. Doctrine of state immunity from suit. 1. The doctrine under which a state cannot be
sued in the courts of another State, without its consent or waiver. [Jusmag Phils. v.
NLRC, GR 108813, Dec. 15, 1994, 239 SCRA 224]. 2. The doctrine holding that a
sovereign is exempt from suit, not bec. of any formal conception or obsolete theory,
but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the
authority that makes the law on which the right depends. [Kawamanakoa v. Polyblank,
205 US 353, 51 L. ed. 834]. Also called Royal prerogative of dishonesty.
202. Doctrine of state responsibility to aliens. Law. The doctrine that a state is under
obligation to make reparation to another state for the failure to fulfill its primary
obligation to afford; in accordance with intl. law, the proper protection due to an alien
who is a national of the latter state. Also called State responsibility doctrine.

25. 203. Doctrine of statistical improbability. Law. The doctrine that is applied only where the
unique uniformity of tally of all the votes cast in favor of all the candidates belonging
to 1 party and the systematic blanking of all the candidates of all the opposing parties
appear in the election return. [Sinsuat v. Pendatun, GR L-31501, June 30, 1970, 33
SCRA 630]. Also known as the Lagumbay doctrine. [Lagumbay v. Comelec, GR L-
25444, Jan. 31, 1966, 16 SCRA 175].
204. Doctrine of stewardship. A doctrine under which private property is supposed to be
held by the individual only as a trustee for the people in general, who are its real
owners. As a mere steward, the individual must exercise his rights to the property not
for his own exclusive and selfish benefit but for the good of the entire community or
nation. [Mataas na Lupa Tenants Assoc. v. Dimayuga, GR L-32049, June 25,
1984, 130 SCRA 30].].
205. Doctrine of strained relations. The rule that where reinstatement is not feasible,
expedient or practical, as where reinstatement would only exacerbate the tension and
strained relations bet. the parties, or where the relationship bet. the employer and
employee has been unduly strained by reason of their irreconcilable differences,
particularly where the illegally dismissed employee held a managerial or key position
in the company, it would be more prudent to order payment of separation pay instead
of reinstatement. [Quijano v. Mercury Drug Corp., GR 126561, July 8, 1998, 292 SCRA
109].
206. Doctrine of strict compliance. 1. A settled rule in commercial transactions involving
letters of credit (LCs) that the documents tendered must strictly conform to the terms
of the LC. The tender of documents by the beneficiary (seller) must include all
documents required by the letter. A correspondent bank which departs from what has
been stipulated under the letter of credit, as when it accepts a faulty tender, acts on
its own risks and it may not thereafter be able to recover from the buyer or the issuing
bank, as the case may be, the money thus paid to the beneficiary. [Feati Bank and
Trust Co. v. CA, GR 94209, Apr. 30, 1991, 196 SCRA 576]. 2. The doctrine in land
registration holding that in order to establish that the land subject of the application is
alienable and disposable public land, all applications for orig. registration under the
Property Registration Decree (PD 1529) must include both: (a) a CENRO or PENRO
certification; and (b) a certified true copy of the orig. classification made by the DENR
Sec. [Rep. v. Vega, GR 177790. Jan. 17, 2011, 639 SCRA 541]. Also called Strict
compliance doctrine.
207. Doctrine of subrogation. The principle that covers a situation wherein an insurer who
has paid a loss under an insurance policy is entitled to all the rights and remedies
belonging to the insured against a 3rd party with respect to any loss covered by the
policy. It contemplates full substitution such that it places the party subrogated in the
shoes of the creditor, and he may use all means that the creditor could employ to
enforce payment. [Keppel Cebu Shipyard, Inc. v. Pioneer Ins. and Surety Corp., GR
180880-81 & 180896-97, Sep. 25, 2009, 601 SCRA 96].
208. Doctrine of substantial compliance. A rule in land registration recognizing and affirming
applications for land registration on other substantial and convincing evidence duly
presented, as an exception to the gen. rule on strict compliance, where such
applications are without any opposition from the LRA or the DENR. [Rep. v. Vega, GR
177790. Jan. 17, 2011, 639 SCRA 541].

26. 209. Doctrine of supervening event. The doctrine under which facts and events transpiring
after the judgment or order had become final and executory [which circumstances]
affect or change the substance of the judgment and render its execution inequitable
would justify the suspension or nullification of such final and executory judgment or
order.
210. Doctrine of successor-employer. Labor. 1. The doctrine that rests on the in personam
character of employer-employee relationship. A 3rd party that buys the business of the
employer does not become the new employer of the employees of the latter. For this
reason, it is totally insulated from the liabilities of the latter in relation to its displaced
employees. 2. The doctrine holding that transfer or absorption of employees from one
company to another, as successor employer, may be held as valid as long as the
transferor is not in bad faith and the employees absorbed by a successor-employer
enjoy the continuity of their employment status and their rights and privileges with their
former employer. Also called Successor-employer doctrine.
211. Doctrine of supervening facts in double jeopardy. The doctrine in crim. law that where,
after the 1st prosecution for a lesser crime, new facts have supervened which, together
with those already in existence at the time of the 1st prosecution, have made the
offense graver and the penalty 1st imposed legally inadequate, the accused cannot be
said to be in 2nd jeopardy if indicted for the new offense. [Melo v. People, GR L-3580,
Mar. 22, 1950]. Also called the Melo doctrine.
212. Doctrine of supervening negligence. The doctrine to the effect that where both parties
are negligent, but the negligent act of one is appreciably later in time than that of the
other, or when it is impossible to determine whose fault or negligence should be
attributed to the incident, the party who had the last clear opportunity to avoid the
impending harm and failed to do so is chargeable with the consequences thereof.
[Picart v. Smith, GR L-12219, Mar. 15, 1918, 37 Phil. 809]. 2. The doctrine holding
that an antecedent negligence of a person does not preclude the recovery of damages
for supervening negligence of, or bar a defense against the liability sought by, another
if the latter, who had the last fair chance, could have avoided the impending harm by
the exercise of due diligence. [Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. Baesa, GR Nos. 79050-
51, Nov. 14, 1989, 179 SCRA 384]. Also Doctrine of discovered peril.
213. Doctrine of the law of the case. That principle under which determination of questions
of law will generally be held to govern a case throughout all its subsequent stages
where such determination has already been made on a prior appeal to a court of last
resort. It is “merely a rule of procedure and does not go to the power of the court, and
will not be adhered to where its application will result in an unjust decision.” It relates
entirely to questions of law, and is confined in its operation to subsequent proceedings
in the same case. [Villa v. Sandiganbayan, GR 87186, Apr. 24, 1992, 208 SCRA 283].
214. Doctrine of the mortgagee in good faith. The doctrine applicable to a situation where,
despite the fact that the mortgagor is not the owner of the mortgaged property, his title
being fraudulent, the mortgage contract and any foreclosure sale arising therefrom are
given effect by reason of public policy. [Cavite Devt. Bank v. Lim, GR 131679, Feb. 1,
2000, 324 SCRA 346].
215. Doctrine of the proper law. of Laws. The doctrine applied in the choice of law stage of
a lawsuit involving the conflict of laws. In a conflicts lawsuit, 1 or more state laws will
be relevant to the decision-making process. If the laws are the same, this will cause no
problems, but if there are substantive differences, the choice of which law to apply will

27. produce a diff. judgment. Each state therefore produces a set of rules to guide the
choice of law, and 1 of the most significant rules is that the law to be applied in any
given situation will be the proper law. This is the law which seems to have the closest
and most real connection to the facts of the case, and so has the best claim to be
applied.
216. Doctrine of the real and hypothecary nature of maritime law. Ins. The rule that a ship
owner’s liability is merely co-extensive with his interest in the vessel, except where
actual fault is attributable to the shipowner. [Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. CA, GR 121833,
Oct. 17, 2008, 569 SCRA 294].
217. Doctrine of the third group. The doctrine to the effect that the right of the owner of the
shares of stock of a Phil. Corp. to transfer the same by delivery of the certificate,
whether it be regarded as statutory on common law right, is limited and restricted by
the express provision that “no transfer, however, shall be valid, except as bet. the
parties, until the transfer is entered and noted upon the books of the corp.” [Uson v.
Diosomito, GR L-42135, June 17, 1935, 61 Phil., 535].
218. Doctrine of transformation. Intl. Law. The doctrine which holds that the generally
accepted rules of intl. law are not per se binding upon the State but must first be
embodied in a legislation enacted by the lawmaking body and only when so
transformed will they become binding upon the State as part of its municipal law. [Cruz,
Intl. Law, 2000]. Compare with Doctrine of incorporation.
219. Doctrine of ultimate consumption. Goods intended for civilian use which may ultimately
find their way and be consumed by belligerent forces, may be seized on the way. Also
called Ultimate consumption doctrine.
220. Doctrine of ultimate destination. The final destination in the territory of an enemy or
under its control making goods contraband under the doctrine of continuous voyage.
Also called Ultimate destination doctrine.
221. Doctrine of ultra vires. Beyond the powers. The doctrine in the law of corps. that holds
that if a corp. enters into a contract that is beyond the scope of its corporate powers,
the contract is illegal.
222. Doctrine of unforeseen events. The doctrine enunciated by Art. 1267 of the Civ. Code
which is not an absolute application of the principle of rebus sic stantibus that would
endanger the security of contractual relations. [So v. Food Fest land, Inc., GR 183628
& 183670, Apr. 7, 2010, 617 SCRA 541]. Art. 1267 provides: “When the service has
become so difficult as to be manifestly beyond the contemplation of the parties, the
obligor may also be released therefrom, in whole or in part.
223. Doctrine of vagueness. An aspect of the due process requirement of notice which holds
that a law is facially invalid if persons of “common intelligence must necessarily guess
as at its meaning and differ as to its application.”
224. Doctrine of vicarious liability. A legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a
person who did not cause the injury but who has a particular legal relationship to the
person who did act negligently. Also referred to as Imputed
225. Doctrine of virtual representation. See Doctrine of class suit.
226. Doctrine of void for vagueness. Law. The doctrine that is most commonly stated to the
effect that a statute establishing a crim. offense must define the offense with sufficient
definiteness that persons of ordinary intelligence can understand what conduct is
prohibited by the statute. It can only be invoked against that specie of legislation that
is utterly vague on its face, i.e., that which cannot be clarified either by a saving clause

28. or by construction. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, GR. 148560, 19 Nov. 2001, 369 SCRA
394]. Compare with Doctrine of overbreadth.
227. Doctrine of volenti non fit injuria. The doctrine that self-inflicted injury or to the consent
to injury precludes the recovery of damages by the person who has knowingly and
voluntarily exposed himself to danger, even if he is not negligent in doing so. [Nikko
Hotel Manila Garden v. Reyes, GR 154259, Feb. 28, 2005, 452 SCRA 532].
228. Doctrine of waiver. A doctrine resting upon an equitable principle which courts of law
will recognize, that a person, with full knowledge of the facts shall not be permitted to
act in a manner inconsistent with his former position or conduct to the injury of
another, a rule of judicial policy, the legal outgrowth of judicial abhorrence so to speak,
of a person’s taking inconsistent positions and gaining advantages thereby through
the aid of courts. [Lopez v. Ochoa, GR L-7955, May 30, 1958, 103 Phil. 950].
229. Doctrine of waiver of double jeopardy. The doctrine that holds that when the case is
dismissed with the express consent of the defendant, the dismissal will not be a bar
to another prosecution for the same offense; bec. his action in having the case
dismissed constitutes a waiver of his Constl. right or privilege, for the reason that he
thereby prevents the court from proceeding to the trial on the merits and rendering a
judgment of conviction against him. [People v. Salico, GR L-1567, Oct. 13, 1949, 84
Phil. 722].
230. Doctrine of willful blindness. A doctrine in taxation that an individual or corp. can no
longer say that the errors on their tax returns are not their responsibility or that it is the
fault of the accountant they hired.
HJGGHGHJKGJK