DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PETITIONER PERFORMED POORLY IN HER WORK. SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO CREATE A NEW CENTER OR DISBURSE LOAN. FURTHER, SHE DEFIED COMPANY RULES. THERE IS THEREFORE GROUND TO TERMINATE HER PROBATIONARY EMPLOYMENT EVEN BEFORE THE PROBATIONARY PERIOD HAS NOT YET EXPIRED.

IS PETITIONER ENTITLED TO SALARY FOR THE REMAINING PERIOD OF HER PROBATIONARY EMPLOYMENT?

SHE IS NOT ENTITLED BECAUSE OF THE VALIDITY OF HER DISMISSAL PREDICATED ON HER FAILURE TO MEET THE STANDARDS MADE KNOWN TO HER.

PETITIONER PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE WAS NOT ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THE PURPOSE SOUGHT BY THE EMPLOYER WITHIN THE TRIAL PERIOD. CAN EMPLOYER TERMINATE HER SERVICES.

YES, THE EMPLOYER IS NOT PRECLUDED FROM TERMINATING THE PROBATIONARY EMPLOYMENT ON JUSTIFIABLE GROUND.

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’S TITLE PERTAINS TO A DIFFERENT PROPERTY AND WAS REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF ANOTHER PERSON AND WAS ALREADY CANCELLED. THUS, HE HAS NO LEGAL OR EQUITABLE TITLE OVER THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THUS HIS COMPLAINT MUST BE DISMISSED.

…………………………………

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES IN ORDER THAT THE COMPLAINT FOR QUIETING OF TITLE MAY PROSPER?

FIRST, THAT THE PLAINTIFF HAS LEGAL TITLE OR EQUITABLE INTEREST ON THE PROPERTY. SECOND THAT THE CLAIM OVER THE PROPERTY IS INVALID.

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?

A CIVIL CASE WAS FILED AGAINST PETITIONER FOR P4M PLUS. THEN RESPONDENT FILED A CRIMINAL BP 22 CASE AGAINST PETITIONER FOR BOUNCED CHECKS WITH FACE VALUE OF P1.2M. IN THE CIVIL CASE RESPONDENT MANIFESTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF P1.2M BE DEDUCTED FROM HIS CLAIM SINCE HE INTENDS TO RECOVER THE P1.2M IN THE BP 22 CASE. WAS THERE FORUM SHOPPING ON THE PART OF RESPONDENT?

NO BECAUSE THE COURT IN THE CIVIL CASE WAS INFORMED ABOUT THE FILING OF THE CRIMINAL CASE.

WHAT IS THE RULE ON LEGAL INTEREST?

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”.