▁for ▁the ▁Court ▁as ▁it ▁denied ▁pet itions ▁for ▁prohib ition ▁which ▁maintained ▁that ▁Mar cos , ▁whose ▁original ▁term ▁as ▁President ▁exp ired ▁ 2 ▁years ▁earlier , ▁held ▁no ▁legal ▁office ▁nor ▁law ful ▁authority . ▁R ely ing ▁on ▁J av ell ana ▁and ▁Aqu ino ▁v . ▁P once - En rile ▁( which ▁aff ir med ▁the ▁valid ity ▁of ▁the ▁ 1 9 7 2 ▁pro clam ation ▁of ▁mart ial ▁law ), ▁Mak as iar ▁wrote ▁that ▁Mar cos ▁was ▁the ▁de ▁j ure ▁inc umb ent ▁President ▁of ▁the ▁Philippines . ▁ ▁In ▁questions ▁concerning ▁labor ▁law ▁and ▁social ▁justice , ▁Mak as iar ' s ▁opinions ▁for ▁the ▁Court ▁reflected ▁sympath ies ▁to ▁the ▁common ▁man , ▁and ▁would ▁sometimes ▁resort ▁in ▁re bu ke ▁to ▁in just ices ▁as ▁reflected ▁by ▁the ▁facts ▁of ▁the ▁case . ▁For ▁example , ▁in ▁Car bon ell ▁v . ▁CA , ▁ 6 9 ▁SC RA ▁ 9 9 ( 1 9 7 6 ), ▁Mak as iar ▁wrote : ▁Hence , ▁Car bon ell ' s ▁prior ▁purchase ▁of ▁the ▁land ▁was ▁made ▁in ▁good ▁faith . ▁Her ▁good ▁faith ▁subs isted ▁and ▁continued ▁to ▁exist ▁when ▁she ▁recorded ▁her ▁ad verse ▁claim ▁four ▁( 4 ) ▁days ▁prior ▁to ▁the ▁registration ▁of ▁Inf ante ' s ▁de ed ▁of ▁sale . ▁Car bon ell ' s ▁good ▁faith ▁did ▁not ▁ce ase ▁after ▁Pon cio ▁told ▁her ▁on ▁January ▁ 3 1 , ▁