SECTION 5
FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (SECTION 5)
By: Irish V. de Rama,Ed.D.

SECTION 5:Acts executed again the provisions of mandatory
prohibitory laws shall be void, except when the law itself authorizes the
validity.
Marriage
law are mandatory and prohibitory, such that if the marriage is contracted
where one of the parties is psychologically incapacitated to perform the duties
to the marriage bond, the marriage is void. ( Art. 36, Family Code)
But
the law recognizes as legitimate a child born or conceived out of such
marriage, provided that the child conceived or born prior to the
declaration of nullity of , . (Art 54 Family Code)
Kinds of Mandatory Law
1.POSITIVE When the law is something need to be done
2, NEGATIVE When the law is something prohibitory
EXCEPTIONS
1.When the law makes the act not
void but merely voidable (valid until anulled)
at the instance of the victim.
2.
When the law makes the act valid but subjects the wrong doer to criminal
responsibility.
3. When the law makes the act itself void,but
recognizes some legal effects flowing
therefrom
4 When
the law itself makes certain acts valid although generally they would have been
void.
In
the cases or matters filed after the effectivity of the constitution must be decided or
resolved within 24hrs from date of submission for the Supreme Court, twelve
months from the date of
submission for the supreme court, 12 months for all lower collegiate courts,
and three months for
all other lower courts
A
case matter shall be deemed submitted for decisions or resolution upon the filing of
the last pleading brief, or memoramdum required by the rules of court or by the
court itself
CASE
FOR ARTICLE 5
DBP
V. CA, 65 SCAD 82, 249 SCR.331, OCTOBER 16, 1995 The supreme court said that
the buyer of the parcel of the parcel of land that is considered as non
disposable land of the public domain didn’t acquire the valid title over the
land, but recognized the certain effects of the same, in that when the buyer
ask for the land was deducted from the amount reimbursed. This is the
recognition of a right without title was transmitted in
favor of the buyer.And the
reduction of the amount reimbursed is in conformity with the rule that no one
that shall enrich himself at the expense of another.
It
is well settled doctrine that a statute requiring rendition of judgment within
a specified time is generally construed to be merely directory, so that non
compliance with them does not invalidate
the judgment on the theory that if the statute had intended such result it
would clearly indicated it MARCOS V.COMELEC, et al 64 SCAD 358, 248 SCRA 300.
AN EXAMPLE of Constitutional provision requiring courts to render judgments
within a certain period.
All
cases or matters filed after the effectivity of
the constitution must
be decided or resolved within 24months from date of submission for the Supreme
court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts and three months for all
other lower courts
A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief or memorandum required by the rules of the court itself.
Upon the expiration of the corresponding period a certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof e record of the case attached to the matter, and served upon the parties.The certification shall state why a decision or resolution not been rendered or issued within said period
A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief or memorandum required by the rules of the court itself.
Upon the expiration of the corresponding period a certification to this effect signed by the Chief Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof e record of the case attached to the matter, and served upon the parties.The certification shall state why a decision or resolution not been rendered or issued within said period
Despite
the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice
to such responsibility as may have been incurred in consequence thereof, shall
decide or resolve the case or matter submitted thereto for determination ,
without further delay.
Hence such law can be considered
directory. In Marcelino v.
Cruz, it was said that the difference between mandatory and directory provision
is determined on the ground of expediency, the reason being that less injury
results to the general republic by disregarding than enforcing the letter of
the law.
Mga Komento
Mag-post ng isang Komento