Art. 7. Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and their violation or
non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice to the
contrary.
When the courts declared a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution,
the former shall be void and the latter shall govern.
Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall be valid
only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution.
Article 7 is obvious because time moves forward.
Only subsequent laws can repeal prior laws either through:
1. A repealing clause
2. Incompatibility of the subsequent and prior laws
The violation of a law is not justified even if:
1. No one follows the law (i.e., nonpayment of taxes)
2. There is a custom to the contrary
The 2nd par. of Article 7 is judicial review in statutory form.
Legal Disclaimer
The information on this page is for general legal information only and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, rules, fees, procedures, and office requirements may change. For advice specific to your situation, consult a qualified Philippine lawyer. AttyKalibre Legal Center provides free legal information and general legal guidance. Reading this page does not constitute legal advice or establish a lawyer-client relationship.
Hello! I just want clarity between Art. 7. where violation or non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice to the contrary and the non-justification of the violation of the law if there is custom to the contrary.