Jurisprudence = NOT independent source of law


According to Article 8 of the New Civil Code, judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines. Although jurisprudence forms part of the legal system, it cannot be considered as an independent source of law; it cannot create law. (See 1 Camus 38 as cited in Tolentino.) This is because lawmaking is the function of Congress and judicial legislation is not allowed.

The "doctrine of stare decisis," ordained in Article 8 of the Civil Code, expresses that judicial decisions applying or interpreting the law shall form part of the legal system of the Philippines. The rule follows the settled legal maxim - "legis interpretado legis vim obtinet" - that the interpretation placed upon the written law by a competent court has the force of law.

The interpretation or construction placed by the courts establishes the contemporaneous legislative intent of the law. The latter as so interpreted and construed would thus constitute a part of that law as of the date the statute is enacted. It is only when a prior ruling of this Court finds itself later overruled, and a different view is adopted, that the new doctrine may have to be applied prospectively in favor of parties who have relied on the old doctrine and have acted in good faith in accordance therewith under the familiar rule of "lex prospicit, non respicit." (G.R. No. 136921. April 17, 2001)

Article 8 of the Civil Code declares that "[j]udicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines." While decisions of the Court are not laws pursuant to the doctrine of separation of powers, they evidence the laws' meaning, breadth, and scope and, therefore, have the same binding force as the laws themselves. Article 4 of the Civil Code, on the other hand, enunciates the rule on non-retroactivity of laws, in that ''(l)aws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided." (G.R. No. 205837. November 21, 2017)

The doctrine of stare decisis enjoins adherence to judicial precedents. It requires courts in a country to follow the rule established in a decision of the Supreme Court thereof. 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. (G.R. No. 147097. June 5, 2009)