DISPOSITIVE:

WHEREFORE, the present petition is PARTIALLY GRANTED. The May 16, 2014 Decision and the September 30, 2015 Resolution of theCourt of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 122602 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Judgment is hereby rendered ORDERING Citibank Savings,Inc. and/or its successors-in-interest to PAY Brenda L. Rogan separation pay as financial assistance, in the amount of one-half (1/2) month’s salary forevery year of service. This case is hereby REMANDED to the Labor Arbiterfor the proper computation of the amount of separation pay due to Brenda L. Rogan.

SO ORDERED.

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE EMPLOYEE ROGAN WAS DISMISSED FOR JUST CAUSE. SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE DISMISSAL BUT STILL AWARDED ROGAN SEPARATION PAY. BECAUSE ROGAN WAS DISMISSED FOR A CAUSE FOR OTHER THAN SERIOUS MISCONDUCT OR THOSE REFLECTING ON HIS [ OR HER] MORAL CHARACTER.

Taking together the existence of just cause for termination, her apologetic admission of fault, as well as her length of service, previous exemplary performance, and the circumstances which led to her dismissal, we sustain the award of separation pay to Rogan. Considering that she was validly dismissed for a just cause, the award of separation pay shall be in the form of financial assistance. “As a measure of social justice, the award of separation pay/financial assistance has been upheld in some cases even if there is no finding of illegal dismissal,” 113 “where the employee is validly dismissed for causes other than serious misconduct or those reflecting on his [ or her] moral character.” 114 Here, Rogan is being dismissed for an accumulation of relativelyminor lapses. There is no proof of any material benefit or gain to Rogan in connection with the noncompliant transactions processed by Axalan; there waslikewise no proof of any pecuniary loss or damage to CSI or any of its clientsin connection therewith. Ultimately, Rogan’s dismissal was necessitated by thenature and character of her lapses, as calibrated against the sensitive nature ofher position and her employer’s obligation to exercise extraordinary diligencein the selection and supervision of its employees. We are of the consideredopinion that such a situation justifies a minor shifting of the scales of justice infavor of labor in the form of separation pay as financial assistance.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

……………………………………………………………………….

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THIS IS A CASE OF UNLAWFUL DETAINER. RESPONDENTS FILED THE CASE. RESPONDENTS ALLEGED THAT THEY ARE THE OWNERS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY BY VIRTUE OF SALE. BUT AT THE TIME OF THE SALE THE SELLER WAS ALREADY DEAD. RESPONDENTS THEREFORE HAVE NO STANDING/RIGHT TO FILE THE CASE. THUS, THE CASE WAS DISMISSED.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

…………………………………………

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

WHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari, and REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the July 22, 2020 Decision and the February 18, 2021 Resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals En Banc in CTAE No. 2072. Accordingly, respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue is ORDERED to refund or issue a tax credit certificate in favor of petitioner Petron Corporation in the total amount of’P219,153,851.00, representing the e oneously paid excise taxes on its importation of alkylate covered by Import Entry and Internal Revenue Declaration Nos. 122844547, 122773043, 1 4315222, 125253615, and 125644382.

SO ORDERED.

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

Verily, since petitioner’s claim for tax refund is not in the nature of a tax
exemption, it is not burdened to prove that the legislature intended to exempt it
from tax clearly and distinctly, contrary to the CTA Special Second Division’s
ratiocination. To reiterate, alkylate is not among the articles covered by Sec.
148 (e) of the 1997 NIRC, as amended. Thus, in the absence of a law expressly
and unambiguously imposing excise tax on alkylate, the appropriate rule to be
applied is the strict interpretation in the imposition of taxes such that the statute
must be construed most strongly against the government and in favor of the
taxpayer. 37 Simply put, insofar as excise tax is concerned, non-taxability is the
rule, while taxability is the exception. Verily, since alkylate is not categorically
covered by Sec. 148 ( e) of the 1997 NIRC, as amended, the doubt should be
resolved in petitioner’s favor. As burdens, taxes should not be unduly exacted
nor assumed beyond the plain meaning of the tax laws. 38

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

In sum, the CDC has valid reason not to implement the increases in
salaries and benefits as provided in the renegotiated CBA. The Court reminds
that the law fixed the terms and conditions of government employment,35 and
any contract that violates the law is void and cannot be a source of rights and
obligations.36

FOR THESE REASONS, the petition is GRANTED. The Court of
Appeals’ Decision dated April 8, 2013 in CA-G.R. SP No. 127560 is
REVERSED. The complaint in NCMB-AC25-RB3-08-0l -0l -2012 is
DISMISSED for lack of merit.

SO ORDERED.

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

Furthermore, it was on March 22, 2016, that the President issued EO
No. 203, 28 Series of 2016, adopting the compensation and position
classification system as well as the index of occupational services for GOCCs.
Section 2 of EO No. 203, Series of 2016, is explicit that “[ w ]hile recognizing
the constitutional right of workers to self-organization, collective bargaining
and negotiations, the Governing Boards of all covered GOCCs, whether
Chartered or Non-chartered, may not negotiate with their officers and
employees the economic terms of their CBAs.” This provision supports the
GCG’s position that the moratorium under EO No. 7, Series of 2010 on the
grant of additional benefits remains effective pending the promulgation and
approval of the compensation framework for all the GOCCs. Quite the
contrary, the Court finds no factual and legal bases for the CA and the AV A to
presume that the President approved the renegotiated economic provisions of
the CBA between CDC and ACSP. To be sure, the construction in favor of
labor only applies when there are doubts in the interpretation and
implementation of the provisions of the Labor Code and its implementing
rules and regulations. 29 As explained above, however, the language of
Section 9 ofEO No. 7, Series of2010 on the moratorium on increases in rates
of salaries and other benefits is unambiguous. Consequently, the law must be
interpreted following its plain and obvious meaning, and applied according to
its express tenns. 30 Again, the law requires the President’s consent as to
additional benefits effectively lifting the moratorium, and any presumption of
such approval is unwarranted.

In the analogous case of Social Housing Employees Association, Inc.
v. Social Housing Finance Corp., 31 the respondent revoked the economic
provisions of the CBA because they violated EO No. 7, Series of 2010, and
RA No. 10149, that prohibited the adjustment of several benefits without the
President’s approval. The Court ruled that the petitioner “is not entitled to the
new benefits and increases which yield neither legal nor binding effect.”32
The revocation of the CBA’ s economic provisions is valid and did not amount
to diminution of benefits. Similarly, in Philippine National Construction
Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission,33 the Court held that
the petitioner “did not violate the non-diminution rule when it desisted from
granting mid-year bonus to its employees”34 without first securing authority
from the President in view of the enactment of RA No. 10149. In that case, the
petitioner failed to obtain the President’s approval as to the grant of additional
benefits.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE

PETITIONER, CITY MAYOR OF ILIGAN CITY TRANSFERRED RESPONDENT FROM SLAUGHTER HOUSE TO VETERAN’S OFFICE. SUCH ACT WAS CONSIDERED OPPRESSIVE.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

 DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

EVIDENCES SHOW THAT A CHILD WAS BOUGHT BY PETITIONER AND HER COHORTS FROM THE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER TO BE BROUGHT TO THE UNITED STATES.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

THE ISSUES:

THE RENDITION OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS SANCTIONED ONLY IF THE PLEADINGS DO NOT TENDER A GENUINE ISSUE.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

A PERSON’S REFUSAL TO ASSUME ESSENTIAL MARITAL DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE TITLEHOLDER IS ENTITLED TO ALL THE ATTRIBUTES OF OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY INCLUDING POSSESSION.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THERE WAS A FORECLOSURE OF MORTGAGE. ABELLANA THE MORTGAGOR FILED A CASE AND RAISED THE ISSUE ON WHETHER HE HAS THE RIGHT TO REPURCHASE THE PROPERTY. COURT SAID HE HAS NO RIGHT AND COURT DECISION BECAME FINAL. LAND THEN WAS SOLD TO ANOTHER. ABELLANA FILED CASE FOR ANNULMENT OF THE FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS AND FOR RECONVEYANCE OF THE PROPERTY TO HIM. LANDBANK MOVED FOR DISMISSAL OF CASE. RTC AND CA DENIED SUCH MOTION TO DISMISS. SUPREME COURT SAID DISMISSAL IS PROPER BECAUSE WHEN ABELLANA PREVIOUSLY RAISED THE ISSUE ON WHETHER HE CAN REPURCHASE THE PROPERTY FROM LANDBANK HE ALREADY ADMITTED THAT LANDBANK IS NOW OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. HE CANNOT THEREFORE FILE A CASE THAT THE PROPERTY BE RE-CONVEYED TO HIM.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE:

ON THE RULE THAT ONE WHO COMES TO COURT MUST COME WITH CLEAN HANDS. THIS DOES NOT AP,PLY TO A SITUATION WHERE FRAUD AND DILATORY SCHEMES EXIST.

?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE CASE WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE THERE WAS NO VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCH.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

RESPONDENT GEORGE FILED A CASE FOR RECOVERY OF POSSESSION OF A LOT AGAINST PETITIONERS ON THE BASIS OF THE FACT THAT HE IS THE REGISTERED OWNER EVIDENCED BY A TORRENS TITLE. PETITIONERS CLAIM THEY ARE CO-OWNERS BY INHERITANCE. GEORGE ARGUES THAT HIS TORRENS TITLE CANNOT BE ATTACKED COLATERALLY BY PETITIONERS IN THE CASE. COURT RULED THAT PETITIONERS ARE CO-OWNERS AND CANNOT THEREFORE BE EJECTED. BUT THIS FINDING ON OWNERSHIP IS ONLY PROVISIONAL UNTIL THE SAME IS SETTLED BY PROPER ACTION.

………………………………….

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

COURTS MUST BE CAREFUL IN RENDERING SUMMARY JUDGMENTS ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE EXISTS A GENUINE ISSUE ON OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTIES.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

THE PENALTY OF DISMISSAL WAS FOUND TOO HARSH. NO AWARD FOR MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES BECAUSE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT EMPLOYER WAS MOTIVATED BY BAD FAITH.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

NOTE THAT THE CASES AGAINST PETITIONERS WERE DISMISSED FOR VIOLATION OF PETITIONERS’ RIGHT TO SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES.

EVIDENCE ALIUNDE PRESENTED DURING HEARING ON MOTION TO QUASH MUST BE CONSIDERED.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PNB ARGUES THAT THEIR COUNSELS WERE NEGLIGENT AND AS A RESULT THEY WERE DEPRIVED OF THEIR DAY IN COURT. SUPREME COURT SAID THE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL MUST BE GROSS. SUCH IS NOT THE CASE HERE. AS A GENERAL RULE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL BINDS THE CLIENT. THERE IS AN EXCEPTION: WHEN THE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL IS SO GROSS THAT ORDINARY NEGLIGENCE COULD NOT HAVE GUARDED AGAINST IT.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERED THE CASE FILED AGAINST JUDGE RACOMA AS HARASSMENT.

UNFOUNDED CRITICISMS AGAINST JUDGES DEGRADE THE JUDICIAL OFFICE. THEY DRAIN THE RESOURCES OF THE COURT IN RESOLVING THEM. THEY SOW THE SEEDS OF DISTRUST OF THE PUBLIC AGAINST THE JUDICIARY. THUS COMPLAINANTS MUST EXPLAIN THEIR ACT OF FILING PREMATURE COMPLAINT.

ON THE POWER TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONER FILED ADMINSTRATIVE CASE AT BSP AGAINST OFFICERS OF RESPONDENT BANK. BSP OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATION DISMISSED THE CASE. PETITIONER FILED AT CA AN APPEAL BASED ON RULE 65, THAT THERE WAS GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION. PETITIONER WAS WRONG. THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL BASIS. NEITHER CAN THE CASE BE REVIEWED UNDER RULE 45 BECAUSE ISSUES OF FACTS WERE RAISED. ONLY ISSUES OF LAW ARE ALLOWED UNDER RULE 45.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

RESPONDENT LUCENA WAS CONSTRUCTIVELY DISMISSED. THE FACTS ARE:

TEST FOR CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL:

PETITIONER SAID LUCENA WAS TERMINATED DUE TO LOSS OF TRUST AND CONFIDENCE. SC SAID WRONG.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

RESPONDENTS ON THE BASIS OF AN INVALID DEED OF DONATION (NOT NOTARIZED) OCCUPIED SUBECT LAND FOR MORE THAN 50 YEARS. DURING THAT PERIOD PETITIONER FAILED TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST RESPONDENTS. THUS BY THE PRINCIPLE OF LACHES, RESPONDENTS ACQUIRED, BY VIRTUE OF POSSESSION, OWNERSHIP OVER THE LAND.

BUT THE LAND IS TITLED AND REGISTERED UNDER THE TORRENS SYSTEM.

EVEN THOUGH.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THIS CONCERNS A PROPERTY MORTGAGED TO TRC. THE MORTGAGOR WAS NOT THE OWNER OF THE WHOLE PROPERTY. SHE CANNOT MORTGAGE THE PORTION SHE  DOES NOT OWN.

THE MORTGAGOR  ZARATE SPOUSES CLAIMS THAT IN 1978 THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD TO THEM. THIS SALE MUST TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE ORAL PARTITION CLAIMED BY HEIR ALVAREZ. THE COURT RECOGNIZED THAT SAID THE SALE WAS FAKE. ORAL PARTITION IS RECOGNIZED BY COURTS.

ZARATE SPOUSES CLAIM THAT ALVAREZ COMMITTED LACHES FOR BRINGING THE CASE LATE AFTER SO MANY YEARS. SUPREME COURT NOT ALL ELEMENTS OF LACHES ARE PRESENT. ALVAREZ DISCOVERED THE DEFECT LATE AND THUS FILED THE CASE ONLY RECENTLY.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

CHAN GRANTED A PERMIT TO HOLD COCKFIGHTS IN FAVOR OF LIGA NG MGA BARANGAY WHICH IS PROHIBITED FROM HAVING INTEREST IN ANY COCKPIT OPERATION.

………………………….

(NOTE: IT SOMEHOW APPEARS THAT CHAN ONLY CERTIFIED THAT A PERMIT WAS ISSUED BY THE SB IN FAVOR OF THE LIGA NG MGA BARANGAY. THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED BY THE SB NOT BY MAYOR CHAN? THE DECISION MIGHT BE WORTH REVISITING?)

CHAN ARGUED THAT SHE HAD NO INTENT TO COMMIT THE OFFENSE CHARGED. SC SAID CRIMINAL INTENT IS NOT NECESSARY IN MALA PROHIBITA CASES.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THIS CASE INVOLVES A CLAIM BY RESPONDENT FOR DAMAGES WHICH THE CA GRANTED. RESPONDENT MADE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PROPERTY.  PETITIONER SAID THERE WAS NO CONTRACT OF LEASE. SC SAID THERE WAS AS EVIDENCED BY SECURITY DEPOSIT AND RENTAL PAYMENTS. PETITIONER SAID RESPONDENT WAS NOT A PARTY IN INTEREST. SUPREME COURT SAID HE IS BECAUSE HE INVESTED HUGE SUM IN THE RESORT OF PETITIONER.

WAS THERE A CONTRACT OF LEASE EVEN THOUGH THE LEASE DOCUMENT WAS NOT PRODUCED?

YES BECAUSE THERE WAS SECURITY DEPOSIT AND RENTAL PAYMENTS.

IS PADILLA A PARTY IN INTEREST?

YES BECAUSE HE MADE HUGE INVESTMENTS IN THE RESORT AND THEREFORE A PARTY WHO WILL BE INJURED OR WILL BENEFIT IN THE CASE.

ON ATTY’S FEES:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE TULFO BROTHERS MADE UTTERANCES AGAINST SANTIAGO. SC SAID THESE UTTERANCES, ALTHOUGH PROFANE AND BULGAR DID NOT INCITE ITS AUDIENCE TO LAWLESS ACTION.

“Thus, the Tulfo brothers’ utterances are only considered threats against Santiago. Nothing more. The utterances made by them, although profane and vulgar, did not incite its audience to lawless action that may lead to a breach of peace of the State.”

WHAT ARE FIGHTING WORDS? IS IT PROTECTED SPEECH? HOW ABOUT WORDS SPEWED OUT IN A QUARREL OR FIGHT BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS ARE THEY FIGHTING WORDS? SC RULED AS FOLLOWS:

MTRCB INTENDS TO IMPOSE 3 MONTH SUSPENSION, FINE AND PROBATIONARY STATUS AGAINST THE TULFOS. SUPREME COURT SAID NO NEED. TV5′ ACT OF SELF REGULATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS CHARTER IS ENOUGH. TV5 CENSURED AND SUSPENDED THE TULFO BROTHERS.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THERE WERE SEVERAL MEDICAL REPORTS. THE PHYSICIANS OF CHOICE SUBMITTED REPORTS. COMPANY PHYSICIAN DR SANEZ ALSO SUBMITTED REPORT. SUPREME COURT FAVORED THE REPORT OF DR SANES AS HE ACTUALLY TREATED RESPONDENT  AND MONITORED HIS CONDITION. RESPONDENT’S PHYSICIANS’ FINDINGS WERE BASED ONLY ON GENERAL IMPRESSIONS AFTER CONDUCTING A SINGLE EXAMINATION.

…………………………..

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

RESPONDENT WAS REPATRIATED DUE TO HIS AILMENT WHICH MADE HIM . PETITIONER SAID RESPONDENT WAS REPATRIATED BECAUSE HIS CONTRACT EXPIRED. SUPREME COURT SAID PETITIONER WAS WRONG BECAUSE WHY WOULD PETITIONER RECOMMEND THAT RESPONDENT UNDERGO MEDICAL EXAMINATION IF HIS CONTRACT ALREADY EXPIRED. FURTHER, COMPANY PHYSICIAN DECLARED HIM WITH DISABILITY. SINCE PHYSICIAN FAILED WITHIN THE REQUIRED PERIOD TO DECLARE WHETHER THE DISABILITY WAS PERMANENT AND TOTAL THE SAME IS PRESUMED TO BE PERMANENT AND TOTAL.

SUPREME COURT ADJUSTED THE BENEFITS DUE RESPONDENT OTHERWISE IT WOULD RESULT TO UNJUST ENRICHMENT.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONER MINING COMPANY CLAIMS THAT IT HAS MINING RIGHTS OVER CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR WHICH PUBLIC RESPONDENTS ISSUED FREE PATENTS. SUPREME COURT SAID THERE ARE TWO REQUIREMENTS FOR DECLARING DECLARING NULL AND VOID THE FREE PATENTS. ONE: THE CLAIMANT PROVES ITS OWNERSHIP. TWO: THE OWNER OF THE FREE PATENTS OBTAINED THEIR TITLES BY MISREPRESENTATION OR MISTAKE. THE MINING COMPANY FAILED TO PROVE THESE REQUIREMENTS. RTC RULED THAT THE FREE PATENTS WERE VALID. CA AFFIRMED. WHEN BOTH LOWER COURTS RULED UNIFORMLY, SUPREME COURT CANNOT CHANGE THE DECISION BECAUSE IT IS NOT A TRIER OF FACTS.

……………

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE MEMBERS OF THE AWARDS COMMITTEE COLLUDED WITH EACH OTHER TO ENSURE THAT A COMPANY WOULD  GET THE CONTRACT TO SUPPLY AN OVERPRICED ORGANIC FERTILIZER.

WHAT WERE THE ACTS OR OMISSIONS COMMITTED BY RESPONDENTS?

HOW ABOUT THE PROVINCIAL ACCOUNTANT? SHE WAS NOT LIABLE SINCE THE DOCUMENTS PRESENTED TO HER FOR REVIEW WERE IN ORDER.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONER IS A CONDOMINIUM RESIDENT. HE WAS QUESTIONING THE LEGALITY OF A BIR CIRCULAR IMPOSING INCOME TAX, VAT AND WITHHOLDING TAX ON CONDOMINIUM DUES. THE SUPREME COURT SAID IT WILL NOT RULE ON THE PETITION BECAUSE IT IS ALREADY MOOT. DECISIONS HAVE BEEN ISSUED DECLARING THE CIRCULAR INVALID.

WHEN IS A CASE CONSIDERED MOOT?

WHEN IT LOSES ITS JUSTICIABILITY DUE TO A SUPERVENING EVENT WHICH TAKES AWAY ITS PRACTICAL USE OR VALUE.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONERS ENTERED INTO TRUST RECEIPT AGREEMENT WITH BDO. A NEW AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED REVISING THE SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT. PETITIONERS CLAIM THEY CANNOT BE ACCUSED OF ESTAFA UNDER THE OLD AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY NOVATED OR SUPERSEDED BY A NEW AGREEMENT. SUPREME COURT SAID THERE IS NO NOVATION. THE NEW SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT IS MERELY SUPPLEMENTARY TO THE ORIGINAL OBLIGATION.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER’S REPRESENTATIVE CAN STILL BE APPEALED TO THE COMMISSIONER HIMSELF WHOSE DECISION CAN BE APPEALED TO THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS. THE IMPRESSION IS THAT THE DECISION OF COMMISSIONER’S REPRESENTATIVE IS THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER HIMSELF. THE 30 DAY PERIOD WITHIN WHICH TO FILE PETITION FOR REVIEW AT CTA STARTS FROM RECEIPT OF THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER, NOT FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE DECISION OF COMMISSIONER’S REPRESENTATIVE.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

PETITIONER WAS CONVICTED OF BIGAMY UPON HER PLEA OF BEING GUILTY. CSC DISMISSED HER FROM THE SERVICE ON GROUND THAT SHE WAS CONVICTED OF A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE. CAN SHE INVOKE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES TO LESSEN HER PENALTY?

YES BUT THIS WOULD DEPEND ON THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES SHE PROVES.

SHE INVOKED THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF LENGTH OF SERVICE. SC RULED LENGTH OF SERVICE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED MITIGATING BECAUSE THE CRIME OF BIGAMY WHICH IS A CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE IS A GRAVE OFFENSE.

SHE ALSO INVOKED AS MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE THE FACT THAT IT WAS HER FIRST OFFENSE AND HER WORK PERFORMANCE WAS OUTSTANDING. SUPREME COURT THE RULE CLEARLY STATES THAT DISMISSAL CAN BE METED OUT ON FIRST OFFENSE AND OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE IS NOT AMONG THOSE ENNUMERATED AS MITIGATING.

SHE CITED CASES SHOWING THAT A DISMISSAL ORDER CAN BE REDUCED TO LIGHTER PENALTIES. SUPREME COURT SAID THE CASES SHE INVOKED DO NOT APPLY TO HER CASE. THOSE CASES DO NOT INVOLVED CONVICTING OF A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE.

PETITIONER ALSO INVOKED HER RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL. SUPREME COURT SAID SHE RAISED THIS DEFENSE LATE. SHE SHOULD HAVE RAISED THIS POINT WHILE THE CASE WAS STILL WITH CSC, NOT WHEN IT IS ALREADY IN THE SUPREME COURT.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

RTC AWARDED MORAL DAMAGES AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES IN THIS EJECTMENT CASE. SUPREME COURT RULED THAT IN EJECTMENT CASE THE ONLY DAMAGES THAT CAN BE AWARDED ARE THE UNPAID RENT, COSTS AND ATTORNEY’S FEES.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

IN  NATURALIZATION CASES, WHAT SHOULD WITNESSES TESTIFY ABOUT?

WITNESSES ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS THAT ESTABLISH AN APPLICANT’S QUALIFICATIONS FOR NATURALIZATIONS.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

DRIVER FEGARIDO, DRIVING A PUBLIC JEEP, HIT ALCANTARA WHO LATER DIED. REGISTERED OWNER WAS MILAN. IS MILAN LIABLE?

UNDER THE CIVIL CAUSE WHEN AN EMPLOYEE, IN PERFORMANCE OF HIS DUTY, CAUSED DAMAGE TO ANOTHER THE PRESUMPTION IS THAT THE EMPLOYER IS ALSO LIABLE FOR NEGLIGENCE. THE EMPLOYER MUST PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT SHE OBSERVED DUE DILIGENCE IN THE SELECTION AND SUPERVISION OF HIS EMPLOYEE. IN THIS CASE MILAN FAILED TO REBUT SUCH PRESUMPTION.

IN THIS CASE ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES WERE AWARDED.  THE RULING FOLLOWS:

MORAL DAMAGES WERE ALSO AWARDED. THE RULING FOLLOWS:

EXEMPLARY DAMAGES WERE ALSO AWARDED. RULING FOLLOWS:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

MR SIMACAS DIED DUE TO PROSTATE CANCER. HE WAS HELPING IN WELDING WORKS. HIS WIFE VIOLETA FILED CLAIMS AT THE EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION COMMISSION. SSS DENIED THE CLAIMS ON THE GROUND THAT PROSTATE CANCER IS NOT LISTED AS AN OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE AND THAT VIOLETA FAILED TO PROVE THE RELATION BETWEEN WORK OF HER HUSBAND AND HIS PROSTATE CANCER. COURT OF APPEALS REVERSED SSS. SUPREME COURT AFFIRMED C.A. INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW ON EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (PD 626) MUST BE LIBERAL IN FAVOR OF THE WORKER.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE RULING OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL AS TO WHETHER THE CONTRACT WAS VALIDLY TERMINATED, WHETHER THE VARIATION ORDERS WERE PROVEN OR WHETHER PETITIONER COMPLIED WITH THE SCOPE OF WORKS MUST NOT BE REVIEWED BY THE COURTS. THERE IS NO LAW GRANTING THE JUDICIARY AUTHORITY TO REVIEW THE MERITS OF AN ARBITRAL AWARD.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONER WAS ABSOLVED OF HER SOLIDARY LIABILITY TO RETURN THE DISALLOWED AMOUNT BECAUSE SHE DID NOT ACT IN BAD FAITH. THOSE THAT SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE MUST HAVE ACTED IN EVIDENT BAD FAITH, WITH MALICE, OR THEY WERE GROSSLY NEGLIGENT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR OFFICIAL DUTIES.

Madera also added that these badges of good faith should be considered first before holding these officers, whose participation in the disallowed transaction was in the performance of their official duties, liable; and that the presence of any of these factors in a case may tend to uphold the presumption of good faith in the performance of official functions accorded to the officers involved.33 Badges of good faith could be appreciated in favor of petitioner. No prior disallowance of the same benefit has been issued against ICAB. Also, there is no precedent disallowing a similar case in jurisprudence. As a matter of fact, the only other COA disallowance petition involving ICAB was a case also entitledAbejo v. Commission on Audit, and docketed as G.R. No. 254570. Said case was resolved by the Court on 29 January 2021, and it pertains to an entirely different incentive. Considering the foregoing, the Court chooses to uphold petitioner’s presumption of good faith.

WHAT ARE THE RULES ON EXEMPTING GOVT OFFICIALS FROM RETURNING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DISALLOWED IN AUDIT?

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.