ACCURACY

Accuracy, as a feature of legal writing, focuses on getting legal facts correct in all
their details and ensuring that cited cases are viable as precedents and stand for what
they are cited for. It also requires that statements made must be presented as they are
without bias or half-truths. Accuracy places honesty as one of the principal components
of a good legal writing.

Reason out with basis

CONCISENESS

It basically emphasizes on the need for a legal document, most pertinently a brief
to be as concise as possible. This does not imply that the brief must be extremely short
as it would lack substance. However, the receiver might not want to read an email or
letter if you write too long and complicated.

Use short sentences

Omit needless words
Avoid elaborating the obvious
Get to the point
Avoid tautology
CLARITY

Clarity in writing results when the writer is able to express exactly and
unambiguously what he wants to be reflected on his work. It involves clarity of
expression and sentence structure. It also refer to clearness of ones logic and
arguments. The cardinal principle in clear writing is to be concrete.

Use familiar and concrete words

Avoid gaps between subject, verb, and object

Avoid misplaced or dangling modifiers

Avoid ambiguous pronoun reference

Punctuation must avoid, not cause ambiguity

Article 19. Every person must, in the
exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due, and observe
honesty and good faith.
Article 19, known to contain
what is commonly referred to as
the principle of abuse of rights,
sets certain standards which
may be observed not only in the
exercise of ones rights but also
in the performance of ones
duties. These standards are the
following: to act with justice; to
give everyone his due; and to
observe honesty and good faith.
The law, therefore, recognizes
the primordial limitation on all
rights; that in their exercise, the
norms of human conduct set
forth in Article 19 must be
observed. A right, though by
itself legal because recognized
or granted by law as such, may
nevertheless become a source
of some illegality. When a right
is exercised in a manner which
does not conform with the
norms enshrined in Article 19
 and results in damage to
another, a legal wrong is
thereby committed for which
the wrongdoer must be held
responsible.
Elements of abuse of rights:
1. There is a legal right or
duty;
2. Which is exercised in bad
faith;
3. For the sole intent of
prejudicing or injuring
another.
Article 2. No marriage shall be valid,
unless these essential requisites are
present:
1) Legal capacity of the contracting
parties who must be a male and a
female; and
2) Consent freely given in the presence of
the solemnizing officer.
Article 3. The formal requisites of
marriage
are:
1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;
2) A valid marriage license except in the
cases provided for in Chapter 2 of this
Title; and
3) A marriage ceremony which takes
place
with the appearance of the contracting
parties
before the solemnizing offi cer and
their personal
declaration that they take each other
as husband
and wife in the presence of not less
than two
witnesses of legal age.
Article 4. The absence of any of the
essential or formal requisites shall render
the marriage void ab initio, except as
stated in Article 35(2).
A defect in any of the essential requisites
shall render the marriage voidable as
provided in Article 45.
An irregularity in the formal requisites shall
not affect the validity of the marriage but
the party or parties responsible for the
irregularity shall be civilly, criminally and
administratively liable.
Article 36. A marriage contracted by any
party who, at the time of the celebration,
was psychologically incapacitated to
comply with the essential marital
obligations of marriage, shall likewise be
void even if such incapacity becomes
manifest only after its solemnization.
PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY. The law does
not define what psychological incapacity is
and therefore, the determination is left
solely with the courts on a case-to-case
basis. Determination of psychological
incapacity depends on the facts of the
case. Each case must be judged, not on
the basis of a priori assumptions,
predilections or generalizations but
according to its own facts (Republic v.
Dagdag, G.R. No. 109975, February 9,
2001). From the Committee deliberations
relative to the drafting of the Family Code,
it can be clearly deduced that this absence
of definition was intentionally made
because the situations contemplated by
the law vary from one case to another. The
rationale for this want of definition was
succinctly explained by Justice Eduardo
Caguioa, one of the members of the Civil
Code Revision Committee and the main
proponent for the incorporation of this
provision in the Family Code, during the
Congressional Hearing before the Senate
Committee on Women and Family
Relations on February 3, 1988. Thus,
Justice
Caguioa stated that
a code should not have so many
definitions, because a definition
straight-jackets the concept and,
therefore, many cases that should go
under it are excluded by the
definition. Thats why we leave it up
to the court to determine the
meaning of psychological incapacity.
The ground, therefore, does not
comprehend any and all forms of mental
incapacity so as to preclude the individual
from performing other endeavors in life,
such as the carrying out of his or her
profession or career. The incapacity is
clearly limited to his and/ or her failure or
disregard to comply with his and/or her
essential marital obligations. The spouses
simply refuse to perform these obligations
although physically capable of doing so. It
is not mere stubborn refusal but can be
attributed to psychological causes. As
Justice Caguioa stated during the
committee deliberations relative to this
particular ground, psychological incapacity
solely refers to the lack of appreciation of
ones marital obligation and that
psychological incapacity does not refer to
mental faculties and has nothing to do
with consent; it refers to obligations
attendant to marriage. It does not deal
with mental faculties in the sense that he
or she or both shouldnecessarily be shown
to be insane. While insanity can be a good
indicator of psychological incapacity, it is
not a pre-requisite for the existence of the
ground for nullity under Article 36.
Article 19. The local civil registrar shall
require the payment of the fees prescribed
by law or regulations before the issuance
of the marriage license. No other sum shall
be collected in the nature of a fee or a tax
of any kind for the issuance of said license.
It shall, however, be issued free of charge
to indigent parties, that is, those who have
no visible means of income or whose
income is insufficient for their subsistence,
a fact established by their affidavit, or by
their oath before the local civil registrar.