Cases Persons
Cases Persons
Feb. 6, 1945: battle of liberation of Manila, Joaquin Navarro, Sr., 70, wife Angela
Joaquin, 67, daughters Pilar (32-33), Concepcion, and Natividad (23-25), son Joaquin
Navarro, Jr., 30 and his wife Adela Conde sought refuge on the ground floor of German
Club Building. Building was set on fire and Japanese started shooting hitting the three
daughters who fell. Sr. decided to leave building. His wife didn’t want to leave so he
left with his son, his son’s wife and neighbor Francisco Lopez . As they came out, Jr.
was hit and fell on the ground the rest lay flat on the ground to avoid bullets. German
Club collapsed trapping may people presumably including Angela Joaquin. Sr., Adela
and Francisco sought refuge in an air raid shelter where they hid for three days. Feb.
10, 1945: on their way to St. Theresa Academy, they met Japanese patrols, Sr. and
Adela were hit and killed.
Trial Court ruled that Angela Joaquin outlived her son while Court of Appeals ruled that
son outlived his mother.
ISSUE:
HELD:
Reversed. Art. 43 civil code: Whenever a doubt arises as to which was the first to
die of the two or more persons who would inherit one from the other, the person who
alleges prior death of either must prove the allegation; in the absence of proof the
presumption shall be that they died at the same time and no transmission of rights from
one to the other shall take place.
In light of the conditions painted by FL, a fair inference can be arrived at that JN
Jr died before his mother. The presumption that AJ died before her son was based on
speculations, not evidence. Gauged by the doctrine of preponderance of evidence by
which civil cases are decided, this inference should prevail.
(2) indirect
(3) circumstantial or
(4) inferential.
Art. 43 Speaks about resolving doubt when 2 or more persons are called to
succeed each other as to which of them died first. In the Civil Code, in the absence of
proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time, and there shall be no
transmission of rights from one to another. In the Rules of Court, in cases of calamity,
there is a hierarchy of survivorship.
FACTS:
Invoking the right of the people to be informed on matters of public concern as well as
the principle that laws to be valid and enforceable must be published in the Official
Gazette, petitioners filed for writ of mandamus to compel respondent public officials to
publish and/or cause to publish various presidential decrees, letters of instructions,
general orders, proclamations, executive orders, letters of implementations and
administrative orders.
The Solicitor General, representing the respondents, moved for the dismissal of the
case, contending that petitioners have no legal personality to bring the instant petition.
ISSUE:
Whether or not publication in the Official Gazette is required before any law or
statute becomes valid and enforceable.
HELD:
Art. 2 of the Civil Code does not preclude the requirement of publication in the Official
Gazette, even if the law itself provides for the date of its effectivity. The clear object of
this provision is to give the general public adequate notice of the various laws which are
to regulate their actions and conduct as citizens. Without such notice and publication,
there would be no basis for the application of the maxim ignoratia legis nominem
excusat. It would be the height of injustive to punish or otherwise burden a citizen for
the transgression of a law which he had no notice whatsoever, not even a constructive
one.
The very first clause of Section 1 of CA 638 reads: there shall be published in the
Official Gazette…. The word “shall” therein imposes upon respondent officials an
imperative duty. That duty must be enforced if the constitutional right of the people to
be informed on matter of public concern is to be given substance and validity.