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 PETITIONERS CLAIM THEY CANNOT BE ACCUSED OF ESTAFA UNDER THE OLD AGREEMENT BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY NOVATED OR SUPERSEDED BY A NEW AGREEMENT.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”.