Civil Code, Article 10 — Presumption of Right and Justice

What this article means

When a law is genuinely open to more than one reading, the court must choose the interpretation that produces a just and reasonable result, on the presumption that Congress never intends injustice. It is an aid to construction, not a license to ignore clear text: where the law is unambiguous, the court applies it as written even if the outcome seems harsh (dura lex sed lex).

Questions about this provision

• When a law is genuinely ambiguous, how should a court interpret it — in favor of justice or strictly as written?

Related provisions

• Article 9 — the duty to decide despite gaps.
• Article 11 — customs must yield to law and public policy.

Cases citing this article

• In the Matter of Urgent Petition for the Release of Prisoners on Humanitarian Grounds, G.R. No. 252117, July 28, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Oceanmarine Resources Corporation vs. Jenny Rose G. Nedic, on behalf of her minor son, G.R. No. 236263, July 19, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Randy Michael Knutson, acting on behalf of minor Rhuby Sibal Knutson vs. Hon. Elisa R. Sarmiento-Flores, in her capacity as Acting Presiding Judge of Branch 69, Regional Trial Court, Taguig City, and Rosalina Sibal Knutson, G.R. No. 239215, July 12, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Lito Corpuz vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 180016, April 29, 2014 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Wilson P. Gamboa vs. Finance Secretary Margarito B. Teves, et al.; Pablito V. Sanidad, et al. -in-intervention, G.R. No. 176579, June 28, 2011 — read the decision on LawPhil →

Compiled automatically from Supreme Court decisions published on LawPhil that expressly cite this article, most frequently cited first. A listing means the decision cites the provision — it is not a statement that the case is the leading authority, and it does not show whether a ruling has since been modified or abandoned. Always read the decision itself.