Sunday, September 25, 2005

Ask Scaebolah! #2

(Legal Solutions to Life’s Real Problems)

Dear Scaebolah,

I'm thinking of getting a pet. What do you think should I get? Although it would be hot to get a tiny dog just like Paris Hilton's Tinkerbell, I just don't see myself cleaning it's muck out of my designer purse.

Please help.

Hugs and Kisses,


Dear Lindsee,

A dog is an common (some would say obvious) choice for a pet. Our jurisprudence has recognized that they make loyal companions. They alert you of intruders (People v. Ilano, G.R. No. 31320; People v. Barredo G.R. No. L-2728), they can be used for races (see Art. 195(1) of the Revised Penal Code), they even eat the poisoned food that your unfaithful wife and her paramour have prepared for you (albeit belatedly, in People v. Bucsit G.R. No. L-17865). Furthermore, if you have the appetite for it, dogs can serve as pulutan (People v. Aguarino, G.R. No. 93199; People v. Olasan, G.R. No. 25155). Just check if you have any local ordinance against the consumption of dog meat.

However, cleaning up after your dog may be the least of your problems. Legal consequences attach to the ownership of animals, and although at common law dogs were regarded as ordinarily harmless animals (Splaine v. Eastern Dog Club, 28 N.E. 2d 250), where, however, "the owner of a dog knows it to be vicious...he is under a duty to either kill it or so restrain or confine it that it may not exercise its propensities to the injury of others" (3A C.J.S, S186). Furthermore, article 2183 of the Civil Code says that:

The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the same is responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may escape or be lost. This responsibility shall cease only in case the damage should come from force majeure or from the fault of the person who has suffered damage.

This provision was applied squarely in Vestil v. IAC (G.R. No. 74431), where the owner of a dog was made liable for the death of a child it bit. The Court ratiocinated thus:

According to Manresa, the obligation imposed by Article 2183 of the Civil Code is not based on the negligence or on the presumed lack of vigilance of the possessor or user of the animal causing the damage. It is based on natural equity and on the principle of social interest that he who possesses animals for his utility, pleasure or service must answer for the damage which such animal may cause.

Cats are accorded less recognition in our jurisdiction. "Cool as a cat" has been used to describe a felon's behavior (People v. Curatchia G.R. No. L-31771). A citation of note is In Re: Petition for Philippine Citizenship of Luis Tan (G.R. No. L-5593), where petitioner was asked to translate the following senteces as a language test: "This is a cat. This is a ball. This is a flower. . . . Do you have a panty?". One can inquire into the possible correlations between a cat, a ball, a flower, and a panty-but that is perhaps a subject for a more extensive treatise.

My true suggestion for anyone involved in the legal profession is to get a porpoise. Porpoises are smart, and it can be a matter of judicial notice that they ram sharks in order to protect humans. If you don't mind your pet ramming your compañeros and compañeras in the future, a porpoise will be a worthwhile investment. If you plan working for a large firm, get two, and be careful not to turn into a shark yourself.

Best wishes,


Alone? Hurt? Pregnant? Just Ask Scaebolah! email

Thursday, September 22, 2005

New Dean

The tribe has spoken and has declared that he is it. Congratulations Sir, I mean, Dean Carlota. Enjoy your new office :)

Image hosted by

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Philippine Law Journal Board

These are the cuties and hotties of the Philippine Law Journal. But mind you, they are not just mere eye candies. They represent the best and the brightest that the College has to offer. And we couldn't be any prouder to have them at the helm of our College publication.

Image hosted by

Image hosted by

Image hosted by
(L-R) John Fajardo, Bo Tiojanco, Judy Repol, Miguel De Jesus, Valerie Buenaventura, Jing Balba, Robert Ty, Jojo Pampolina

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Ask Scaebolah! #1

(Legal Solutions to Life’s Real Problems)

Dear Scaebolah,

My boyfriend is pressuring to have sex with him. I’m really in love with him but I’m not sure I’m ready for this. What shall I do?

- Juris Prudent

Dear Juris Prudent,

Many say that there is no love in law: only marriage, property, parental authority, and succession. This is error. The juristic arts may come to the aid of persons like you who wish to look to the guiding light of time-tested legal principles to solve the deepest problems of heart and soul.

The law of contracts is of doubtful application, under the given facts. Marriage (as a special contract) obviously does not apply, and your boyfriend cannot assert the right to consortium (or anything analogous thereto). No form of contract, nominate or innominate covers the prestation he desires. It can be argued that it is a species of facio ut facias, that is, he does (you) and you do (him), but no authority supports that assertion.

But even if specific performance arising from a contractual obligation is not due your boyfriend, your correlative rights and obligations may still be determined by custom.

The Civil Code, through Articles 11 and 12, implicitly recognize the validity of custom as a distinct normative system. As long as the custom is sufficiently proven and not contrary to positive legislation, it subsists as a form of social regulation. As to the question of the source of custom, there is no need to quibble: Custom is handed down by learned jurists like myself. Just ask any student of International Law.

As a starting point, I invite you to browse The Restatement of Love (104 Yale L.J. 707), an attempt to codify the common law rules on love and romance. On the subject of “Sex” it states:

i. Sex within an established relationship. The most common context for sexual intercourse is between two parties to an established relationship. While sexual intercourse is commonly considered a medium by which the parties advance the relationship, this perception is false; sexual intercourse merely reflects the bona fides of the relationship. Sex cannot remedy or compensate for the weaknesses in a flawed relationship, nor can it be used to circumvent the laborious process of establishing emotional intimacy. A fortiori, the introduction of sex into a strong relationship simply reinforces the parties' established emotional attachments.

This seems to suggest an a priori right to sex in established relationships, the way it is with those trashy American shows you kids watch. Whether or not this is applicable to our jurisdiction is doubtful. This is because American girls are sluts. The typical Filipina, on the other hand, is by nature shy and naïve when it comes to worldly things (see People v. Molina, GR No. L-30191 October 27,1973; People v. Ramos, GR No. 50450 March 16, 1984). Our jurisprudence (see for example People v. Campuhan, GR No. 129433 March 30, 2000) has compared the female virtue to a “citadel of passion”, and you must not so easily let anyone, including your boyfriend, bombard your drawbridge. The more apposite rule is based on the principle quum virginitas, vel castitas, corrupta restitui non potest (1 Viada, 301, 5th edition). Or, simply stated: just say no. for true love waits.



Looking for advice? Just Ask Scaebolah! Send your questions to

Monday, September 12, 2005


The CRS website is always down! What's up with that?!

Is the transport strike pushing through? But more importantly, do we have classes today? :)

A Solemn Request

Dear fellow UP Law citizens,

This blog needs pictures. Your pictures. Pictures at work, at play, in repose, in costume, while doing the nasty etc. This site is turning into nothing but words, words, words! Walang peekchurs! :(

So please, overwhelm me with your .jpg files at

Merci beaucoup.

Saturday, September 10, 2005

Bakasyon Grande

Brace yourself up for a long break starting October 29. Here's why:

October 29 Saturday
October 30 Sunday
October 31 Monday (Sandwiched by two non-working days)
November 1 All Saints Day
November 2 All Souls Day
November 3 Eidl Feitre (Last day of Ramadan which, officially, is a legal
November 4 Friday (Who would want to go to work on a Friday after a long
November 5 Saturday
November 6 Sunday

Spread the good news!






*WHEREAS, *December 26, 2005 (Monday), may be declared as an additional
day-off pursuant to Section 9, Rule IV of the Omnibus rules Implementing the
Labor Code, which states that "where a regular holiday falls on a Sunday,
the following day shall be considered a special holiday for purposes of the
Labor Code, unless said day is also a regular holiday;

*WHEREAS, *October 31, 2005 (Monday) may also be declared as a special day
to give our people more time to observe All Saints day;

*WHEREAS, *November 28, 2005 (Monday) may also be declared as a non-working
holiday while November 30, 2005 (Wednesday) may be declared a working day,
provided that all activities and celebration in observance of "Bonifacio
Day" shall remain to be observed on November 30, 2005 (Wednesday); and

*WHEREAS, *a longer weekend also promotes domestic tourism and enables
employers to plan their work schedules effectively and efficiently,
resulting in improved productivity.

*NOW, THEREFORE, I, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, *President of the Republic of
the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, do hereby
declare the following:

*SECTION 1. *October 31, 2005 (Monday) and December 26, 2005 (Monday) shall
be special (non-working) days throughout the country.

*SECTION 2. *November 30, 2005 (Wednesday) shall be a working day, while
November 28, 2005 (Monday) shall be the non-working holiday throughout the

All activities and celebrations in observance of "Bonifacio Day" shall,
however, remain to be observed on November 30, 2005 (Wednesday).

*SECTION 3. *The Department of Labor and Employment shall issue the
appropriate guidelines to implement this Proclamation.

*SECTION 4. *This Proclamation shall take effect immediately.

*IN WITNESS WHEREOF, *I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the
Republic of the Philippines to be affixed.

Done, in the City of Manila this 10th day of May in the year of our Lord,
Two Thousand and Five.


By the President:

Executive Secretary

Monday, September 05, 2005

Dates to Remember

September 19, 2005 First day of Second Semester pre-enlistment period
October 7, 2005 Last day of 1st Second Semester pre-enlistment period (7:00pm cutoff )
October 9, 2005 Start of 2nd Second Semester pre-enlistment period
October 14, 2005 Last day of 2nd Second Semester pre-enlistment period
October 16, 2005 First day of Final Second Semester pre-enlistment period
October 22, 2005 Last day of Final Second Semester pre-enlistment period

Sunday, September 04, 2005

Cattle Call


We represent an international company based in Miami, Florida USA, who is looking for qualified candidates to fill the vacant positions for a newly established Philippine Office.

Candidates must hold a Bachelor of Law degree or equivalent
Must be a member of the Philippine Bar (for lawyers)
Required language(s): English
Excellent computer skills
Proficient in written and oral communication
Must have adequate competency in the drafting of pleadings and other legal documents
Willing to be trained in International and US Law
Willing to work on a night shift
Applicants must be willing to work in Makati
Estimated Gross Annual Compensation
For Lawyers: Php 650,000.00
For Legal Researchers: Php 390,000.00

Accepted applicants will have the opportunity to learn and develop expertise in American and International Law and will have opportunities to travel abroad. No litigation or court hearing will be involved nor will there be outside meetings, nor Filipino Law will be practiced.

Interviews invitations and status updates will be sent via e-mail so please check your e-mail regularly.
Interested applicants may send their resume and or credentials
Qualification Degree
Yr(s) Exp N/A
Job Location NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION - Metro Manila (NCR)
Salary Not Specified / Negotiable
Job Type Full Time, Permanent

Friday, September 02, 2005

Sunday Cometh

Good luck to all our barristers!

Go go go!

Feel free to command and use your Bar-ops team for the next four Sundays. We live and breathe for your comfort :)