“Civil Law‟ Distinguished from „Political Law‟

While civil law governs the relations of the members of a community with one another, political law deals with
the relations of the people and the government.

„Civil Law‟ Distinguished from the „Civil Code‟

While most of our civil laws are found in the Civil Code, still the Civil Code is not the only place where we can
find our civil laws. A Civil Code is a compilation of existing civil laws, scientifically arranged into books, titles,
chapters, and subheads and promulgated by legislative authority.

Art. 3 CCP
Art. 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith.

Ignorance of the Law Distinguished from Ignorance of the Fact (Mistake of Fact)
While ignorance of the law is no excuse, i.e., no excuse for not complying with the law, ignorance of the fact
eliminates criminal intent as long as there is no negligence. Thus, a man who marries a second wife upon the
reasonable belief after due search that his wife, missing for 10 years, is dead, does not incur criminal
responsibility (U.S. v. Enriquez, 32 Phil. 202) even if it turns out that the first wife is still alive. This is merely
ignorance of the fact.

A marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void,
unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive
years and the spouse present had a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead.

Where there is danger of death, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient

Art. 4. Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.
.
In general, laws are prospective, not retroactive. the rule was that laws were retroactive, grave injustice would
occur, for these laws would punish individuals for violations of laws not yet enacted. While ignorance of the
law does not serve as an excuse, such ignorance refers only to laws that have already been enacted.

Art. 5. Acts executed against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void, except when
the law itself authorizes their validity.

Although in general, violations of mandatory or prohibitory laws result in void acts or contracts, in some
instances, the law authorizes their validity.

When the law makes the act not void but merely voidable (valid, unless annulled) at the instance of the victim.
Example: Although consent of the parties is essential for a valid marriage, still if that consent is vitiated by
intimidation or fraud, the marriage is not null and void, but only voidable. (Art. 87, Civil Code; Art. 45[3],
Family Code). A contract entered into by a municipal council for the lease of certain fi sheries without the
approval of the provincial governor is only voidable. (Mun. of Camiling v. Lopez, L-89945, May 23, 1956).

When the law makes the act valid, but subjects the wrongdoer to criminal responsibility.
Example: A widow generally must wait for 300 days before she can remarry. If she violates this and she marries
again, the marriage is valid, as long as she was able to obtain a marriage license, without prejudice to her
criminal liability. (Art. 351, Rev. Penal Code; See 1Manresa 64-65). Of course, had she married without the
requisite marriage license, the marriage would be void under the law. (Art. 80, Civil Code).

When the law makes the act itself void, but recognizes some legal effects flowing therefrom.
Example: A brother cannot marry his sister, and therefore ordinarily, any child they would have would be
illegitimate; if however, they marry first before having the child, the child would be legitimate if the child is
conceived or born before the judgment declaring the marriage void becomes final and executory. (Art. 54,
FamilyCode).

When the law itself makes certain acts valid although generally they would have been void.
Example: The Jai-Alai, or the horse races or the Sweepstakes, including Lotto, on the part at least of the
spectators, or purchasers (ticket), is a game of chance, but the law itself allows gambling on the results therein.

Art. 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or
good customs, or prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law.
General rule — Rights may be waived

Exceptions:
(a) When the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs.
(b) When the waiver is prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law. (Art. 6, Civil Code). (Unless,
of course, such waiver has been made with the consent of such third persons).

Right — the power or privilege given to one person and as a rule demandable of another

Generally, rights involve two subjects: the active subject (the person entitled) and the passive subject (the
person obliged to suffer the enforcement of the right).

Rights may be:

1) real rights (jus in re, jus in rem) — enforceable against the whole world (absolute rights);
2) personal rights (jus in personam, jus ad rem) — enforceable against a particular individual (relative rights).

(b) Waiver — the intentional or voluntary relinquishment of a known right, or such conduct as warrants an
inference of the relinquishment of such right.

Requisites for a Valid Waiver

(a) The person waiving must be capacitated to make the waiver. (Hence, a waiver by a minor or by an insane
person or non-compos mentis is voidable).
(b) The waiver must be made clearly, but not necessarily express. (Acting Prov. Sheriff of Surigao v. PTC, L-
4083,Aug. 31, 1953; Andres v. Crown Life Insurance Co.,L-10874, Jan. 28, 1958).
(c) The person waiving must actually have the right which he is renouncing; otherwise, he will not be
renouncing anything. (See TS, Mar. 11, 1964).
(d) In certain instances the waiver, as in the express remission of a debt owed in favor of the waiver, must
comply with the formalities of a donation. (See Art. 1270, Civil Code).
(e) The waiver must not be contrary to law, morals, public policy (the aim of the State in promoting the social
welfare of the people). (Ferrazini v. Gsell, 34 Phil. 693), public
(f) The waiver must not prejudice others with a right recognized by law.

(4) Examples of Rights that Cannot be Renounced

(a) Natural rights, such as the right to life

(b) Alleged rights which really do not yet exist
(c) Those the renunciation of which would infringe upon public policy
(d) When the waiver is prejudicial to a third person with a right recognized by law