J.A.B. Bulao & Associates

CASE 2018-0016: COLEGIO MEDICO-FARMACEUTICO DE FILIPINAS, INC. VS. LILY LIM AND ALL PERSON CLAIMING UNDER HER (G.R. NO. 212034, 02 JULY 2011, DEL CASTILLO, J.) (SUBJECT/S: UNLAWFUL DETAINER; CAN PRESIDENT OF A CORPORATION SEND DEMAND LETTER WITHOUT BOARD APPROVAL?) (BRIEF TITLE: COLEGIO MEDICO-FARMACEUTICO VS. LIM)

DISPOSITIVE:

“WHEREFORE, the Petition is hereby GRANTED. The assailed June 13, 2013 Decision and the April 7, 2014 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G .R. SP No. 114856 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 11, dated May 13, 2010 is hereby REINSTATED and AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that the amount of reasonable compensation for the use of the subject property be increased to 1155,000.00 as stipulated in the Contract of Lease. In addition, the award of actual damages shall earn interest at the rate of 12% per annum from March 5, 2008, the date of extrajudicial demand, to June 30, 2013. From July 1, 2013 until full satisfaction of the monetary award, the rate of interest shall be six percent ( 6%) per annum.

SO ORDERED.”

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

CAN THE PRESIDENT OF A CORPORATION SEND DEMAND LETTER WITHOUT BOARD RESOLUTION?

YES.

“In the absence of a charter or byr-1law provision to the contrary, the president is presumed to have the authority to act within the domain of the general objectives ofits business and within the scope of his or her usual duties.”

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

“In this case, the issuance of the demand letter dated March 5, 2008 to collect the payment of unpaid rentals from respondent and to demand the latter to vacate the subject property was done in the ordinary course of business, and thus, within the scope of the powers of Del Castillo. In fact, it was his duty as President to manage the affairs of petitioner, which included the collection of receivables. Article IV, Section 2 of the By-laws of petitioner expressly states that the President has the power to:

xx xx

1. Exercise general [supervision], control and direction of the business and affairs of the Colegio;

xx xx

1. Execute in behalf of the Colegio, bonds, mortgages, and all other contracts and agreements which the Colegio may enter into.

xx xx

1. Exercise or perfonn such other duties as are incident to his office or such powers and duties as the Board may from time to time [prescribe]. 33

Accordingly, even without a board resolution, Del Castillo had the power and authority to issue the demand letter dated March 5, 2008.

In any case, even if, for the sake of argument, Del Castillo acted beyond the scope of his authority in issuing the demand letter dated March 5, 2008, the subsequent issuance of the Board Resolution dated May 13, 2008 cured any defect possibly arising therefrom as it was a clear indication that the Board agreed to, consented to, acquiesced in, or ratified the issuance of the said demand letter.”

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

 SCD-2018-0016-Colegio Medico-Farmaceutico De Filipinas, Inc. Vs. Lily Lim and all person claiming under her

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

CASE 2018-0015: LEAH B. TADAY VS. ATTY. DIONISIO B. APOYA, JR., (A.C. NO. 11981,  JULY 3, 2018,  PER CURIAM) SUBJECT/S: DISBARMENT (BRIEF TITLE: TADAY VS ATTY APOYA JR)

 DISPOSITIVE:

“WHEREFORE, the Court adopts the recommendation of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors and finds Atty. Dionisio B. Apoya, Jr. GUILTY of violating Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 2, Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. He is DISBARRED from the practice of law and his name ordered stricken off the Roll of Attorneys, effective immediately.

Let a copy of this Decision be furnished to the Office of the Bar Confidant to be entered into Atty. Dionisio B. Apoya, Jr. ‘s records. Copies shall likewise be furnished the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Office of the Comi Administrator for circulation to all courts concerned.

SO ORDERED.”

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

“In this case, respondent committed unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful conduct, and lessened the confidence of the public in the legal system. Instead of being an advocate of justice, he became a perpetrator of injustice. His reprehensible acts do not merit him to remain in the rolls of the legal profession. Thus, the ultimate penalty of disbarment must be imposed upon him.”

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

SCD-2018-0015-Leah B. Taday Vs. Atty. Dionisio B. Apoya, Jr. 

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

CASE 2018-0014: REPUBLIC VS. MA LOURDES P.A. SERENO (G.R. NO. 237428, 19 JUNE 2018, TIJAM J.) (RESOLUTION ON THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION) SUBECT/S; MEANING OF INTEGRITY) (BRIEF TITLE: REPUBLIC VS SERENO)

DISPOSITIVE:

‘WHEREFORE, respondent Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno’s Ad Cautelam Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED with FINALITY for lack of merit. No further pleadings shall be entertained. Let entry of judgment be made immediately.

The Court REITERATES its order to the Judicial and Bar Council to commence the application and nomination process for the position of the Chief Justice without delay. The ninety-day (90) period83 for filling the vacancy shall be reckoned from the date of the promulgation of this Resolution.

SO ORDERED.”

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT IS INTEGRITY?

Integrity contemplates both adherence to the highest moral standards and obedience to laws and legislations.

RESPONDENT ARGUES THAT HER ALLEGED FAILURE TO FILE SALNs DOES NOT MEAN SHE HAS NO INTEGRITY BECAUSE THE SALN LAWS ARE MALUM PROHIBITUM AND DO NOT CONCERN ADHERENCE TO MORAL AND ETHICAL PRINCIPLES. IS RESPONDENT CORRECT?

RESPONDENT IS NOT CORRECT.

“Respondent’s argument, however, dangerously disregards that the filing of SALN is not only a requirement under the law, but a positive duty required from every public officer or employee, first and foremost by the Constitution. 80 The SALN laws were passed in aid of the enforcement of the Constitutional duty to submit a declaration under oath of one’s assets, liabilities, and net worth. This positive Constitutional duty of filing one’s SALN is so sensitive and important that it even shares the same category as the Constitutional duty imposed upon public officers and employees to owe allegiance to the State and the Constitution. 81 As such, offenses against the SALN laws are not ordinary offenses but violations of a duty which every public officer and employee owes to the State and the Constitution. In other words, the violation of SALN laws, by itself, defeats any claim of integrity as it is inherently immoral to violate the will of the legislature and to violate the Constitution.

Integrity, as what this Court has defined in the assailed Decision, in relation to a judge’s qualifications, should not be viewed separately from the institution he or she represents. Integrity contemplates both adherence to the highest moral standards and obedience to laws and legislations. Integrity, at its minimum, entails compliance with the law.

In sum, respondent has not presented any convincing ground that would merit a modification or reversal of Our May 11, 2018 Decision. Respondent, at the time of her application, lacked proven integrity on account of her failure to file a substantial number of SALNs and also, her failure to submit the required SALNs to the JBC during her application for the position.. . .”

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

SCD-2018-0014-Republic of the Philippines Vs. Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno

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