ARTICLE 11. Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public policy shall not be countenanced.
source: pdff.sytes.net
Explanation/Discussion:
(1) Custom Defined
A custom is a rule of human action (conduct) established by repeated acts, and uniformly observed or practiced as a rule of society, thru the implicit approval of the lawmakers, and which is therefore generally obligatory and legally binding.
(2) Requisites before the courts can consider customs
a. A custom must be proved as a fact, according to the rules of evidence, otherwise the custom cannot be considered as a source of right.
b. The custom must not be a contrary to law, public order, or pubic policy.
c. There must be a number of repeated acts.
d. The repeated acts must have been uniformly performed.
e. There must be a juridical intention. To make a rule of social conduct that is, there must be a conviction in the community that is the proper way of acting, and that therefore a person who disregards the custom in fact also disregards the law.
f. There must have be a sufficient lapse of time – this by itself is not a requisite of custom, but it gives evidence of the fact that indeed it exists and is being duly observed.
NOTE: An Igorot custom of adoption without legal formalities is contrary to law and cannot be countenanced or invoked.
(3) Law distinguished from custom
While ordinarily a law is written, consciously made, and enacted by congress, a custom is unwritten, spontaneous, and comes from society. Moreover, a law is superior to a custom as a source of right. While the courts take cognizance of local laws, there can be no judicial notice of customs, even if local.
What are the examples of customs in the Philippines that are already recognized by the Court?
ReplyDelete