Digests

During the 45-day ban on public works preceding the May 11, 1992 synchronized elections, the Provincial Government of Camiguin, under Governor Antonio Gallardo, undertook numerous locally-funded and foreign-assisted public works projects. Private respondent Pedro P. Romualdo, the incumbent Congressman and a candidate for re-election, filed a petition for injunction, prohibition, and mandamus before the Regional Trial Court of Mambajao, Camiguin, docketed as Special Civil Action No. 465. He alleged the projects violated the election ban and other laws, and were being prosecuted to corrupt voters. The respondent judge issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) enjoining the projects.

The Commission on Elections possesses exclusive original jurisdiction over actions seeking to enforce or prevent violations of the Omnibus Election Code, including those framed as taxpayer's suits, thereby precluding Regional Trial Courts from taking cognizance of such matters.

In 1985, the Provincial Assessor of Zambales assessed realty tax on Benguet Corporation's tailings dam and the land submerged under it, classifying them as taxable improvements. Benguet Corporation appealed the assessment to the Board of Assessment Appeals of Zambales, which dismissed the appeal in 1988 for failure to pay the taxes due during its pendency. The petitioner then appealed to the Central Board of Assessment Appeals (CBAA), which, in 1990, reversed the dismissal but affirmed on the merits that the properties were subject to realty tax. The petitioner subsequently filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court.

A tailings dam used in mining operations constitutes a taxable "improvement" under the Real Property Tax Code because it is a construction adhered to the soil, permanent in character relative to the mining operation, and enhances the property's value and utility. The valuation method and market value applied by the assessor are entitled to respect absent a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion.

Petitioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago was charged before the Sandiganbayan with violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. No. 3019). An order of arrest was issued with bail set at P15,000.00. Petitioner, citing injuries from a vehicular accident, filed an urgent motion requesting acceptance of a cash bond and dispensation with her personal appearance. The Sandiganbayan granted the motion, and petitioner posted the cash bond. Subsequently, petitioner publicly announced her intention to travel to the United States for study and speaking engagements. Acting on this information, the Sandiganbayan issued a hold departure order sua sponte, directing that petitioner not be allowed to leave the country.

A court may prohibit an accused who is on bail from leaving the country as a valid restriction on the right to travel, such prohibition being a necessary consequence of the bail bond's condition that the accused hold herself amenable to all court orders and processes.

Mari Musa was charged with selling two wrappers of marijuana to a poseur-buyer, Sgt. Amado Ani, Jr., of the Narcotics Command (NARCOM) in Zamboanga City on December 14, 1989. The sale occurred during a planned buy-bust operation. Following his arrest, NARCOM agents also found and seized a plastic bag containing marijuana in his kitchen. The Regional Trial Court convicted him, leading to this appeal.

The testimony of a poseur-buyer in a buy-bust operation is sufficient to sustain a conviction for the illegal sale of prohibited drugs, even if the corroborating testimony of a back-up officer is based on observing an exchange of items from a distance without positively identifying the drugs. The "plain view" doctrine does not justify the warrantless seizure of an object whose incriminating nature is not immediately apparent without further intrusion.

Bagong Buhay Trading imported 80 bales of screen net, declared as 500 rolls weighing 12,777 kilograms under Tariff Heading No. 39.06-B (35% ad valorem). Acting on information that the shipment was nylon mosquito nets, customs authorities re-examined the cargo and found it consisted of 1,600 rolls weighing 13,600 kilograms. The Collector of Customs re-classified the goods as "synthetic (polyethylene) woven fabric" under Tariff Heading No. 51.04-B (100% ad valorem), reassessed the duties, and ordered forfeiture due to alleged misdeclaration in quantity and value.

Forfeiture of imported articles under Section 2530(m) of the Tariff and Customs Code requires proof of actual fraud or intentional deception by the importer, not mere misdeclaration traceable to a foreign supplier, and the correct tariff classification must be determined by expert chemical analysis when the composition of the goods is in dispute.

On October 1, 1988, a passenger jeepney plying the Punta-Quiapo route in Manila was held up by five armed men who pretended to be passengers. During the robbery, the assailants divested passengers of their valuables and fatally stabbed one of them, Venancio Estacio. The accused, Rolando de la Cruz y Gomez, was subsequently identified and charged with the special complex crime of robbery with homicide.

A conviction for robbery with homicide may be sustained on the positive identification of the accused by credible eyewitnesses, and an alibi fails when the accused cannot demonstrate physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. The proper penalty for robbery with homicide, absent the death penalty, is reclusion perpetua, not life imprisonment.

Petitioner Benjamin T. Loong filed his certificate of candidacy for Regional Vice-Governor of the Mindanao Autonomous Region on January 15, 1990. The election was held on February 17, 1990. Private respondent Nurshussein Ututalum, a rival candidate, filed a petition to disqualify Loong (SPA No. 90-006) on March 5, 1990, alleging false representation as to Loong's age. The COMELEC Second Division denied Loong's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the petition was timely filed under a reasonable-time-from-discovery standard, citing Frivaldo v. COMELEC and Sections 6 and 7 of Republic Act No. 6646. Loong was proclaimed elected on July 3, 1990, prompting the filing of this certiorari petition.

A petition to deny due course to or cancel a certificate of candidacy on the ground of false representation must be filed within twenty-five (25) days from the filing of the certificate, as prescribed by Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881). A procedural rule issued by the COMELEC that extends this period cannot supersede the clear mandate of a legislative enactment.

Petitioner Salvador D. Briboneria filed a complaint for Annulment of Document and Damages against private respondent Gertrudes B. Mag-isa. He alleged that he and his wife were the registered owners of a parcel of land in Marikina. He claimed his wife, without his knowledge or authorization, executed a Deed of Absolute Sale conveying the property to Mag-isa. Mag-isa, in her answer, admitted the sale but contended the wife acted as the petitioner's attorney-in-fact pursuant to a Special Power of Attorney (SPA), and that the petitioner had knowledge and consent to the sale.

A request for admission under Rule 26 of the Rules of Court is not a proper discovery device if it merely reproduces or reiterates the allegations in the pleadings, and such a request must be served directly upon the adverse party, not upon counsel, for a failure to answer to result in an implied admission.

Antonio A. Mecano, a Director II of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), was hospitalized for cholecystitis from March 26 to April 7, 1990. He filed a claim for reimbursement of P40,831.00 in medical and hospitalization expenses with the NBI, invoking Section 699 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1917, which allows department heads to authorize payment for sickness "caused by or connected directly with the performance of some act in the line of duty." The claim was endorsed favorably by the NBI Director and the Department of Justice Committee on Physical Examination. However, the COA denied the claim, contending that the entire RAC of 1917 was repealed by the Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292).

A prior statute is not repealed by a later general codification unless the later law expressly repeals it or covers the entire subject matter with the clear intent to substitute, and an irreconcilable conflict exists. The Administrative Code of 1987, with its general repealing clause, did not impliedly repeal Section 699 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1917, as the 1987 Code did not restate the provision on sickness benefits but also did not cover the same subject matter in a conflicting manner.

Appellants Santiago Evaristo and Noli Carillo were arrested on August 23, 1988, in Mendez, Cavite, after police officers on routine patrol heard successive bursts of gunfire. The officers pursued a man, Barequiel Rosillo, who was seen firing a gun, to the vicinity of Evaristo's house. There, they encountered the slightly inebriated appellants and subsequently seized firearms from Carillo's person and from within Evaristo's house, leading to their indictment for illegal possession of firearms.

The warrantless seizure of firearms is valid under the plain view doctrine when the officer is lawfully present in the location and the discovery is inadvertent, and the prohibition against unlawful possession under P.D. No. 1866 extends to all firearms, whether functional or not, and even to parts thereof.

Charles Hankins, an American citizen, was alleged to have owned a large tract of pastureland in Odiongan, Romblon. Upon his death in 1937, his estate, including the land, was partitioned among his heirs. His grandchildren, Samuel and Edgar Buyco (private respondents), eventually acquired shares in the property through inheritance and donation. They became naturalized American citizens in 1972 and 1975, respectively. In 1976, they filed an application for registration of a 319.4788-hectare parcel of land, claiming ownership through inheritance and donation, and alternatively invoking confirmation of an imperfect title based on possession since time immemorial.

An applicant for confirmation of imperfect title over public land must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) the land is alienable and disposable, and (2) they have been in open, continuous, exclusive, and notorious possession and occupation thereof under a bona fide claim of acquisition of ownership for the period prescribed by law. Failure to establish either element is fatal to the application.

Private respondent Asia Pacific Airways, Inc. had an outstanding fuel debt to petitioner Caltex (Philippines), Inc. To settle this, Asia Pacific executed a Deed of Assignment in favor of Caltex, assigning its receivables from a government refund. The Treasury Warrant issued pursuant to this assignment exceeded the stated principal debt. Asia Pacific demanded the excess, but Caltex retained a portion (P510,550.63) as interest and service charges on the overdue account, citing the terms of their agreement. Asia Pacific then filed a collection suit.

A Deed of Assignment that expressly includes liability for "applicable interest charges on overdue account" and future fuel deliveries, and whose terms are interpreted in light of the parties' subsequent conduct, does not constitute a dacion en pago that totally extinguishes the underlying obligation.

On March 6, 1983, an accident involving an Isuzu ten-wheeler truck resulted in triple homicide, multiple physical injuries, and property damage. The truck was registered in the name of petitioner BA Finance Corporation but was, at the time, under a lease agreement with Rock Component Philippines, Inc. and was being driven by Rogelio Villar y Amare, an employee of Lino Castro. The victims (private respondents) filed a civil action for damages against the driver, petitioner, Lino Castro, and Rock Component.

The registered owner of a motor vehicle is primarily responsible to the public for damages caused by the vehicle's operation, and this liability cannot be escaped by proving that the vehicle was, at the time, in the possession or under the control of a lessee or other third party. The registered owner's recourse is to seek indemnification from the actual possessor or user of the vehicle.

Private respondent F.F. Cruz & Co., Inc. filed a complaint for a sum of money against Manacop Construction Co., Inc. for failure to pay a subcontract cost. A writ of preliminary attachment was issued, leading to the attachment of a parcel of land in Quezon City owned by Florante F. Manacop, the corporation's president. The complaint was later amended to substitute the corporation with Manacop individually, alleging he was doing business under the corporate name. Manacop then filed an omnibus motion to quash the writ, which was denied by the trial court and, subsequently, by the Court of Appeals.

A property occupied as a family residence prior to the effectivity of the Family Code is deemed constituted as a family home only from the Code's effectivity date (August 3, 1988) and is not exempt from attachment for debts incurred before that date. A writ of preliminary attachment may be validly issued at the commencement of an action, even before the defendant is served with summons.

American Home Assurance Co. (AHAC) issued three successive all-risk insurance policies to Makati Tuscany Condominium Corporation covering its building for the periods 1982-1983, 1983-1984, and 1984-1985. For each policy, the total premium was P466,103.05. AHAC accepted installment payments for the first two policies. For the 1984-1985 policy, the petitioner paid two installments totaling P152,000.00 but refused to pay the balance of P314,103.05. AHAC filed a collection suit. The petitioner defended by claiming the policies were invalid under Sec. 77 of the Insurance Code (P.D. 612) due to non-full payment of premiums and counterclaimed for a refund of all premiums paid.

An insurance contract is valid and binding despite the payment of premiums in installments where the insurer, through its conduct, demonstrates an intent to be bound and accepts such payments, as the principle of estoppel precludes it from later denying the contract's validity.

Complainant Pete M. Pico’s brother, a minister of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, was murdered on 10 January 1991. The Office of the Provincial Fiscal filed a murder information against Eddie Villegas on 3 July 1991, recommending no bail. The case was docketed in the Regional Trial Court of La Carlota City under Criminal Case No. 667. Respondent Judge Alfonso V. Combong issued an arrest warrant on 17 July 1991, explicitly noting “no bail recommended” and forwarding it to the PNP for service. Before the warrant was served or a return filed, the accused’s counsel filed a motion for bail, which respondent Judge granted on the same day, 2 August 1991, setting a P50,000.00 bond and ordering release without a hearing or prosecution notice. The prosecution learned of the release only on 6 August 1991 and moved for a hearing on 9 August 1991. Respondent Judge later rescheduled the arraignment, citing lack of proof of arrest or detention.

The Court held that a judge commits serious misconduct and grave abuse of discretion by granting bail to an accused charged with a non-bailable offense without first ascertaining that the applicant is in lawful custody, without conducting the statutorily mandated hearing, and without allowing the prosecution to prove the strength of the evidence of guilt. Such acts violate the procedural safeguards governing provisional liberty and deprive the State of due process.

Private respondent Juan A. Alegre's wife sent two rush telegrams via petitioner RCPI's Manila office on March 17, 1989, announcing a death and interment. The telegrams, addressed to recipients in Bohol and Ilocos Norte, were not delivered on the expected dates. Alegre filed a complaint with the NTC, alleging poor service and requesting punitive sanctions.

The National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) has no jurisdiction to impose administrative fines on a public service utility for rendering deficient or inadequate service to a consumer, because such power is not expressly granted or necessarily implied from the statutes defining its functions, namely the Public Service Act (C.A. 146) and Executive Order No. 546.

Private respondent K.T. Lim was charged before the Regional Trial Court of Manila with violation of B.P. 22 for issuing a postdated check (Philippine Trust Company Check No. 117383) in the amount of P143,000.00 as partial payment of a pre-existing obligation, which check was subsequently dishonored due to insufficiency of funds. Lim moved to quash the Information, arguing that B.P. 22 was unconstitutional and that the check he issued was a memorandum check, which he characterized as a promissory note and thus civil in nature. The trial court granted the motion to quash, ruling that B.P. 22 was unconstitutional. The People, through the Solicitor General, appealed to the Supreme Court.

A memorandum check, defined as a check in ordinary form with the word "memorandum," "memo," or "mem" written across its face, is covered by Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (the Bouncing Checks Law) because it is a bill of exchange drawn on a bank payable on demand. The law punishes the mere issuance of a worthless check, and the purpose for which it was issued or any private understanding that it not be presented for payment is immaterial to the offense.

Petitioner Rustan Pulp & Paper Mills, Inc. (Rustan) operated a pulp and paper mill. In 1968, it entered into a contract of sale with private respondent Romeo A. Lluch, whereby Lluch would supply pulp wood raw materials to Rustan's plant. The contract contained a clause (paragraph 7) stipulating that the buyer (Rustan) had the right to stop delivery when its supply became sufficient, subject to giving the seller sufficient notice.

A contractual condition that makes the fulfillment of an existing obligation purely dependent upon the will of one of the obligors is a void potestative condition and is considered not written.

Petitioner Maynard R. Peralta was appointed as a Trade-Specialist II at the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) on September 25, 1989. Having no accumulated leave credits, DTI deducted from his first salary payment amounts corresponding to his absences on September 29 and October 20, 1989. Crucially, the deduction included the salaries for the Saturdays and Sundays immediately following those Fridays of absence, pursuant to a CSC policy embodied in a 1965 ruling and subsequent handbooks. Petitioner questioned the legal basis for this deduction, leading to a formal challenge before the CSC and ultimately to the Supreme Court.

A government employee, whether or not possessing accumulated leave credits, is entitled to salary for Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, and cannot be declared absent or have pay deducted for those days solely because the employee was on leave without pay on an immediately preceding or succeeding workday. The CSC's contrary policy was declared an erroneous interpretation of R.A. No. 2625.

Merrill Lynch Futures, Inc. (ML FUTURES), a Delaware-based futures commission merchant, entered into a Futures Customer Agreement with the Spouses Lara in 1983. Through its Philippine-based agent, Merrill Lynch Philippines, Inc. (MLPI), the spouses transmitted orders to trade futures contracts on U.S. exchanges. After several years of trading, a net loss was incurred. ML FUTURES sought to collect the resulting balance from the spouses, who refused to pay, alleging the transactions were void because MLPI lacked the requisite Philippine license.

A party who has knowingly contracted with and received benefits from an unlicensed foreign corporation is estopped from later challenging that corporation's legal capacity to sue in Philippine courts.

CMS Logging, Inc. (CMS), a forest concessionaire, appointed D.R. Aguinaldo Corporation (DRACOR) as its exclusive export and sales agent for all logs it produced for a five-year period, with DRACOR to receive a 5% commission. During the agency, CMS discovered that DRACOR used a Japanese firm, Shinko Trading Co., Ltd., as a sub-agent, for which Shinko received a separate commission of U.S. $1.00 per 1,000 board feet from the Japanese buyers. CMS contended this constituted double compensation for DRACOR and sued to recover the amount. Subsequently, CMS sold and shipped logs directly to Japanese firms without DRACOR's intervention.

An agency is revoked by operation of law when the principal directly manages the business entrusted to the agent by dealing directly with third persons. Such revocation extinguishes the agent's right to compensation for transactions the principal undertakes independently, absent proof the principal acted to evade commission payments.

The President of the Philippines issued a series of executive orders in 1990 and 1991 imposing additional ad valorem duties on all imported articles, later adjusting the rates and eventually imposing a specific special duty on crude oil and petroleum products. The petitioner, a member of the House of Representatives, challenged the validity of these executive orders, claiming they usurped Congress's exclusive constitutional power to enact revenue measures and violated the statutory limits of the President's delegated authority.

The President's delegated authority under Section 401 of the Tariff and Customs Code to adjust tariff rates and impose additional duties is not strictly limited to the protection of local industries; it may be exercised for revenue-generation purposes and in furtherance of the broader national economy and general welfare.

Ramon Bolanos was charged with murder for the stabbing death of Oscar Pagdalian. The incident occurred after a drinking spree involving the accused, the victim, and a third companion, Claudio Magtibay, which lasted until the early morning hours of June 23, 1990. Police officers responding to the report discovered the victim's body at a marble supply establishment in Balagtas, Bulacan.

An extrajudicial confession made by a person under custodial investigation, without the assistance of counsel and without a valid written waiver of that right in the presence of counsel, is inadmissible in evidence against him. Where such an inadmissible confession is the primary evidence of guilt, and the remaining evidence is insufficient for conviction, the accused must be acquitted.

Luz M. Zaldivia was charged with quarrying for commercial purposes without a mayor's permit, a violation of a municipal ordinance of Rodriguez, Rizal. The offense was allegedly committed on May 11, 1990. A referral-complaint was received by the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor on May 30, 1990, but the corresponding information was filed with the Municipal Trial Court only on October 2, 1990. The petitioner moved to quash the information, arguing the crime had prescribed.

For violations of municipal ordinances governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure, the prescriptive period under Act No. 3326 is interrupted only by the filing of the complaint or information directly in court, not by the filing of a complaint with the prosecutor's office for preliminary investigation.

Following the May 11, 1992 national elections, petitioner Francisco I. Chavez filed an urgent petition before the COMELEC. This stemmed from the prior disqualification of candidate Melchor Chavez by the Supreme Court. Petitioner alleged that due to the COMELEC's failure to effectively disseminate the disqualification order, many votes cast solely for "Chavez" were declared stray or invalidated by Boards of Election Inspectors (BEIs) instead of being credited to him. He sought a recount in over 80,000 precincts to credit these votes to himself, which he claimed could affect the ranking of the 24 senatorial winners. The COMELEC dismissed his petition, prompting him to file the instant petition for prohibition and mandamus before the Supreme Court, seeking to halt the proclamation of the 24th senator until his claims were resolved.

A petition that seeks the reopening of ballot boxes and the re-appreciation of ballots, rather than the correction of manifest errors apparent on the face of election documents, constitutes a prohibited pre-proclamation controversy in elections for Senator, and the exclusive remedy is a regular election protest before the Senate Electoral Tribunal.

Petitioner Adolfo Caubang was the incumbent mayor of Baganga, Davao Oriental, and a part-owner of the Banganga Mutual Association (BMA), an unlicensed stevedoring service. In 1974, following a suggestion from the Collector of Customs, BMA merged with the East Coast Arrastre Stevedoring Services, Inc. (ECASSI) to form the Baganga Consolidated Arrastre Stevedoring Services, Inc. (BCASSI). The incorporators executed Articles of Incorporation and elected Baltazar Pagaduan as treasurer, who signed a Treasurer's Affidavit. Petitioner was entrusted with bringing the incorporation documents and P2,500 in paid-up capital to Manila for SEC registration. The SEC subsequently approved the registration, issuing a Certificate of Incorporation. However, the Statement of Assets and Liabilities submitted as a registration requirement contained a forged signature of Pagaduan.

The possessor and user of a falsified public document is presumed to be the forger thereof, and this presumption applies when the possession and use are unexplained, as the crime of falsification of a public document punishes the violation of public faith and the destruction of truth solemnly proclaimed, irrespective of intent to gain or actual damage.

In April 1983, petitioner Oriel Magno, representing Ultra Sources International Corporation, sought to establish a car repair shop but lacked funds for equipment. He approached Corazon Teng, Vice President of Mancor Industries (a distributor of such equipment), who referred him to LS Finance and Management Corporation for credit facilities. The financing was conditioned on a warranty deposit equivalent to 30% of the equipment's value (P29,790.00). Unable to pay, Magno requested the finance company's officer, Joey Gomez, to find a third-party lender. Unbeknownst to Magno, Teng herself advanced the deposit as a short-term loan. A leasing agreement was executed between Magno and LS Finance, and Magno issued postdated checks, which were later delivered by Gomez to Teng. After some checks cleared, four checks were held by Teng due to insufficient funds. When the lease was terminated due to Magno's non-payment of rentals, the equipment was repossessed. The four checks were later deposited and dishonoured ("account closed"), leading to four criminal charges under BP 22.

A check issued to secure a "warranty deposit" that the issuer never received as actual value or credit does not satisfy the element of being issued "on account or for value" under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, and its subsequent dishonour does not give rise to criminal liability.

Clemente G. Guerrero, President of the Rural Bank of Salinas, Inc., owned 473 shares in the bank. On June 10, 1979, he executed a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) authorizing his wife, Melania A. Guerrero, to sell, dispose of, or mortgage his shares. Pursuant to this SPA, Melania executed two Deeds of Assignment: one on February 27, 1980, assigning 472 shares to Luz Andico, Wilhelmina Rosales, and Francisco Guerrero, Jr., and another on June 22, 1980 (two days before Clemente's death), assigning the remaining one share to Francisco Guerrero, Sr. When Melania presented these deeds to the bank for registration and the issuance of new certificates, the bank refused.

A corporation's duty to register a transfer of shares in its stock and transfer book, upon presentation of a deed of assignment executed by the owner or his attorney-in-fact, is ministerial. Where the corporation refuses without justifiable cause, the transferee may compel registration through a petition for mandamus before the Securities and Exchange Commission, which has original and exclusive jurisdiction over such intracorporate controversy. The pendency of a separate civil action questioning the validity of the underlying deed of assignment does not stay the ministerial duty to register.

Remedios Mejia Vda. de Tiosejo died in 1972, leaving a will executed in April 1972. Her brother-in-law, Jesus Fran, filed a petition for probate. The private respondents, sisters of the deceased, initially filed a manifestation requesting time to study the petition but later filed a "Withdrawal of Opposition" expressly stating they had no objection to the will's allowance. The will was admitted to probate on November 13, 1972, and Fran was appointed executor. Subsequently, a project of partition based on the will was submitted and approved by the court on September 10, 1973, after which the proceedings were declared closed. Private respondent Concepcion M. Espina filed a certification stating she received a copy of the project of partition and the notice of hearing and had no objection to its approval. Private respondent Maria M. Gandiongco signed the project of partition itself.

A probate judgment that has become final and executory is immutable and may not be disturbed by a mere motion for reconsideration filed well beyond the reglementary period, as the court loses jurisdiction to alter or set it aside.

Daniel Jovellanos entered into a "Lease and Conditional Sale Agreement" with Philamlife on September 2, 1955 for a house and lot in Quezon City. At that time, he was married to Leonor Dizon, with whom he had three children (petitioners). Leonor died in 1959. Daniel married Annette H. Jovellanos in 1967, and they had two children (private respondents). The property was fully paid for on January 8, 1975, when Philamlife executed a deed of absolute sale in Daniel's favor. On the following day, Daniel donated all his rights to the petitioners. Daniel died in 1985, precipitating a dispute over the property's ownership between his children from his two marriages.

In a contract to sell with a pactum reservati dominii, full ownership of the property vests in the buyer only upon complete payment of the purchase price. Where such payment is completed during a subsequent marriage, the property becomes part of the conjugal partnership of that marriage, subject to reimbursement for advances made from other funds.

Respondent Atty. Irineo L. Bunyi was the counsel for Mrs. Constancia Mascarinas in three ejectment cases (Civil Case Nos. 81, 83, and 88) before the Municipal Court of Esperanza, Agusan del Sur, presided over by Acting Municipal Judge Vicente Galicia. Complainant Cesar L. Lantoria was the manager of Mrs. Mascarinas's farm, which was the subject of the ejectment suits. The defendants in those cases were declared in default.

A lawyer's act of preparing draft decisions for a judge in a pending case where the lawyer is counsel constitutes an attempt to exert personal influence on the court, which is conduct unbecoming a lawyer and an officer of the court, warranting disciplinary action.

Lucille B. Sendon was charged in three separate Informations with illegal recruitment in large scale. The prosecution alleged that on separate dates in October 1988 in Iriga City, the accused, representing herself as a legitimate labor recruiter and without any authority or license from the Department of Labor and Employment, convinced complainants Bernie de Villa, Arnel V. Ibias, and Gerardo P. Escano to work abroad in Oman. She collected sums of P15,000.00, P16,500.00, and P7,000.00 from them, respectively, purportedly for plane tickets and processing fees. The promised employment and departure dates never materialized, and the accused failed to return the money despite demands.

The elements of illegal recruitment in large scale are established when the accused, without a license or authority, undertakes any act of recruitment and placement against three or more persons individually or as a group. The trial court's findings on witness credibility, when supported by evidence, are entitled to great weight and respect on appeal.

Peter Cosalan was the General Manager of BENECO, an electric cooperative. After assuming his position, he received several Audit Memoranda from the Commission on Audit (COA) detailing serious financial irregularities and mismanagement within the cooperative. Upon initiating the remedial measures recommended by the COA, the BENECO Board of Directors adopted a series of resolutions that progressively stripped Cosalan of his allowances, suspended him indefinitely, and ultimately terminated his services. The Board did not provide any notice of charges or a hearing, nor did it secure the prior approval of the National Electrification Administration (NEA) as required by its charter and loan agreement.

Directors or officers of a corporation who act in bad faith, without lawful cause, and in violation of procedural due process in dismissing an employee may be held jointly and severally liable with the corporation for damages under Section 31 of the Corporation Code, even if they purported to act in their official capacity.

Spouses Manuel and Jesusa Salang held Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-29018 over a 1,652-square-meter parcel of land in Calapacuan, Subic, Zambales. Portions of this titled land were occupied by the nine petitioners, who had been in possession for a considerable period. The Salangs filed an action for recovery of possession (accion reivindicatoria) against the petitioners in the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City.

The registered owner of land under the Torrens system has an imprescriptible right to recover possession from any person occupying it without right, and such title cannot be defeated by claims of acquisitive prescription, laches, or allegations that the land is part of the public domain, as the decree of registration is conclusive and binding upon all persons.

In 1946, Proceso Bautista applied for a fishpond permit over a parcel of public land and occupied and improved the area, although his application was later rejected. In 1948, Ester Barza filed a separate application for a portion of the same land, which had by then been released by the Bureau of Forestry for fishpond purposes. An administrative dispute ensued.

A final administrative decision granting a fishpond application creates an enforceable right to possess the public land, and the grantee's failure to immediately reimburse the prior occupant for improvements does not render the decision stale, especially when the occupant wrongfully refused payment.

Pursuant to Metropolitan Manila Commission Ordinance No. 79-02, the Mayor of Caloocan City designated certain streets, including Heroes del '96 Street, as sites for flea markets and issued licenses to private stallholders. A resident of Heroes del '96 Street, Francisco U. Dacanay, sought the removal of the stalls. A prior action for prohibition (Civil Case No. C-12921) filed by stallholders against the city was dismissed by the Regional Trial Court, which upheld the city's authority to demolish the stalls, declaring the streets to be of public dominion and outside the commerce of man. Following a change in city administration, the new mayor did not enforce the demolition decision, prompting Dacanay to file the present petition for mandamus.

Public streets are property for public use and are outside the commerce of man; they cannot be the subject of lease or any other contract that would deprive the public of its right to use them for their intended purpose. Any permit, license, or ordinance purporting to authorize private commercial use of such streets is null and void.

Both petitioner American Home Assurance Company and respondent National Marine Corporation were foreign corporations licensed to do business in the Philippines. Cheng Hwa Pulp Corporation shipped 5,000 bales of bleached kraft pulp from Taiwan to Manila aboard respondent's vessel. The consignee, Mayleen Paper, Inc., insured the shipment with petitioner. Upon arrival, 122 bales were found damaged or lost. After the consignee's demand against the carrier went unheeded, petitioner, as insurer, paid the consignee P31,506.75 for the loss and was subrogated to its rights.

The liability of a common carrier for loss or damage to goods is governed primarily by the Civil Code's provisions on extraordinary diligence, and the limitations under the Code of Commerce's "law of averages" do not apply where the loss is caused by the carrier's negligence.

The 1987 Constitution, in Section 16 of Article VII, delineates the President's appointing power and specifies which appointments require confirmation by the Commission on Appointments (CA). In 1989, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 6715, which amended the Labor Code. Its Section 13 provided that the Chairman and Commissioners of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) "shall all be appointed by the President, subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments." President Corazon C. Aquino subsequently appointed the respondents as NLRC Chairman and Commissioners without submitting their nominations to the CA for confirmation. Petitioner Peter John D. Calderon filed a petition for prohibition, challenging the validity of these appointments for non-compliance with the confirmation requirement of R.A. 6715.

Congress may not, by statute, require confirmation by the Commission on Appointments for presidential appointments to offices not enumerated in the first sentence of Section 16, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution. Such a legislative requirement unconstitutionally amends the specific and limited grant of confirmation power to the CA and infringes on the President's appointing power as delineated by the Constitution.

Retired Justices of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals received pensions under Republic Act No. 910, as amended by Republic Act No. 1797, which provided for the automatic adjustment of pensions whenever the salaries of incumbent Justices were increased. In 1975, President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 644, which purported to repeal the automatic adjustment feature. However, PD 644 was not published until 1983, years after its issuance. In a 1991 Administrative Matter, the Supreme Court ruled that PD 644 never became effective law due to invalid publication, and thus RA 1797 remained in force. Consequently, Congress included provisions in the 1992 General Appropriations Act (GAA) to fund the adjusted pensions pursuant to the Court's resolution. The President vetoed these specific provisions, citing the need for standardized compensation and objecting to distinct privileges for a select group.

The President's line-item veto power under Article VI, Section 27(2) of the Constitution applies only to distinct and severable "items" of appropriation, not to "provisions" that prescribe conditions or methods for the use of funds. A veto that strikes down provisions rather than items, and which seeks to nullify a final judicial decision and an existing statute, violates the separation of powers and the fiscal autonomy of the Judiciary.

P.D. 1980 designated parcels of land in Cavite as the Cavite Export Processing Zone (CEPZ). The petitioner, Export Processing Zone Authority (EPZA), acquired a portion of this land. Prior to EPZA's possession, private individuals, including the private respondents, had entered and cultivated the land without permission. In 1981, EPZA provided financial assistance to some occupants who signed quitclaims. In 1991, private respondents filed a complaint with the CHR, alleging that EPZA, accompanied by police, bulldozed the area despite an alleged presidential order for postponement, handcuffed a respondent, and threatened others. The CHR issued orders enjoining EPZA and others from further demolition and harassment pending investigation.

The Commission on Human Rights has no jurisdiction to issue a writ of preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order. Its constitutional power is limited to investigation, fact-finding, and providing legal measures or aid; it does not include the judicial or quasi-judicial function of adjudicating controversies or issuing ancillary writs, which require authority to apply the law to facts and render a final, binding decision.

Private respondent Agus Development Corporation owned a parcel of land in Manila, which it leased to petitioner Rita Caleon for a monthly rental. Caleon constructed a four-door apartment building on the leased land. Without obtaining the written consent of Agus Development Corporation, Caleon subleased two of the apartment units to third parties. Upon discovering the sublease, the lessor demanded that Caleon vacate the premises. When Caleon failed to comply, Agus Development Corporation filed an ejectment complaint before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, invoking Section 5 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 25, which allows ejectment for unauthorized subleasing.

The lease of a building or apartment inherently includes the lease of the lot on which it is constructed; consequently, the unauthorized subleasing of the building constitutes an unauthorized sublease of the land, which is a ground for judicial ejectment under Batas Pambansa Blg. 25. The retroactive application of this law to pre-existing lease contracts is constitutional, as it falls within the State's police power to regulate rentals and protect public welfare, and does not violate the non-impairment clause of the Constitution.

In preparation for the May 11, 1992 national and local elections, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) issued Resolution No. 2347. The resolution, pursuant to its constitutional and statutory powers, classified decals and stickers as lawful election propaganda but mandated that they "may be posted only in any of the authorized posting areas" designated by the COMELEC. This effectively prohibited their display on "mobile" places, whether public or private, such as cars and other moving vehicles. Petitioner Blo Umpar Adiong, a senatorial candidate, assailed this prohibition as a violation of statutory law and the Constitution.

A COMELEC regulation prohibiting the posting of campaign decals and stickers on private vehicles and other mobile places is an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of speech. Such a prohibition fails the "clear and present danger" test, as it does not address a substantive evil justifying the curtailment of a preferred freedom, and is void for overbreadth for unnecessarily stifling fundamental personal liberties.

Petitioner Fidencio Y. Beja, Sr. was a Terminal Supervisor of the Philippine Ports Authority (PPA). Two administrative cases for grave dishonesty and misconduct were filed against him by the PPA General Manager. The first was closed for lack of merit. The second, docketed as Administrative Case No. PPA-AAB-1-049-89, was endorsed by the PPA General Manager to the DOTC Administrative Action Board (AAB) for action. The AAB found Beja guilty and ordered his dismissal. Beja challenged the AAB's jurisdiction and the validity of his preventive suspension, arguing that the PPA Board of Directors was the proper disciplining authority.

An attached government agency, such as the Philippine Ports Authority, possesses a larger measure of independence from its parent department, including primary disciplinary jurisdiction over its personnel below the rank of Assistant General Manager, which must be exercised internally before any appeal to the department head is made.

Claudio J. Teehankee, Jr. was charged with frustrated murder for shooting Maureen Navarro Hultman. After the prosecution rested its case and before the defense could file a demurrer to evidence, the victim died. The prosecution then moved to file an amended information charging consummated murder. The trial court admitted the amended information. At arraignment, Teehankee refused to plead, alleging lack of preliminary investigation for the new charge. The court entered a plea of not guilty, appointed a counsel de oficio when his counsel refused to participate, and proceeded with trial. Teehankee then filed this special civil action challenging these orders.

An amendment to a criminal information that merely changes the stage of execution of the same offense—from frustrated to consummated murder—is a formal amendment, not a substantial one, and does not necessitate a new preliminary investigation.

The petitions were filed in anticipation of the May 1992 national and local elections. Petitioners challenged Section 11(b) of R.A. No. 6646, which, in conjunction with Sections 90 and 92 of the Omnibus Election Code (B.P. Blg. 881), established a system where the COMELEC procures newspaper space and radio/television time ("Comelec space" and "Comelec time") and allocates these free of charge, equally and impartially, among all candidates. The challenged provision made it unlawful for any mass media entity to sell or give free of charge such space or time for campaign purposes to anyone other than the COMELEC. The stated objective was to equalize the campaign playing field by preventing financially affluent candidates from dominating media exposure through their larger campaign funds.

A statutory prohibition on mass media from selling or donating print space or air time for campaign or political purposes, except to the COMELEC for its "Comelec space" and "Comelec time," constitutes a valid regulation—not censorship—during the election period. Such a measure is a constitutional exercise of the COMELEC's power to supervise or regulate media franchises to ensure equal opportunity, time, and space for all candidates, pursuant to Article IX(C)(4) of the 1987 Constitution, and does not constitute an impermissible abridgment of freedom of expression.

Imelda L. Salazar was employed by Globe-Mackay Cable and Radio Corporation (GMCR) as a general systems analyst. An internal investigation into a manager, Delfin Saldivar, revealed his involvement in anomalous transactions and the theft of company property. The investigation also implicated Salazar for witnessing the partnership papers of a supplier and for knowing the whereabouts of a stolen airconditioning unit found in the apartment she shared with Saldivar. GMCR placed Salazar under preventive suspension and, after she failed to submit an explanation, dismissed her.

An employee unjustly dismissed is entitled to reinstatement and full backwages as a matter of right, and the "strained relations" doctrine applies only as a narrow exception where the employee holds a position of trust and confidence.

The petitioner, Sunville Timber Products, Inc., held a Timber License Agreement (TLA) authorizing it to conduct logging operations in a 29,500-hectare concession area in Zamboanga del Sur. In 1987, private respondents Isidro Gilbolingo and Robustiano Bugtai filed a petition with the DENR for the cancellation of the TLA, alleging serious violations of its conditions and forestry laws. Subsequently, they filed a separate civil complaint for injunction with damages against the petitioner in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pagadian City, docketed as Civil Case No. 2732, raising the same allegations of unlawful logging activities causing environmental harm like river siltation and flooding.

The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that a party must first avail of all administrative processes to resolve a controversy falling under the jurisdiction of an administrative agency before seeking judicial intervention, unless the case falls under specific recognized exceptions. The determination of whether a Timber License Agreement and forestry laws have been violated involves factual issues and the application of specialized expertise that properly belongs to the DENR, and the private respondents failed to prove that their case fell under any exception to the doctrine.

Evangeline Leda filed a petition for disbarment against Atty. Trebonian Tabang, alleging he had made a false statement in his bar application by declaring himself single, had used his legal knowledge to contract a marriage he later claimed was invalid, and had deceived her into signing an affidavit of desistance in a prior administrative matter. The respondent countered that his marriage to the complainant was void ab initio for failure to comply with the requisites of Article 76 of the Civil Code, and that he honestly believed himself to be single when he applied for the bar.

A lawyer's good moral character is a condition precedent not only for admission to the bar but also for continued membership therein; making a gross misrepresentation of a material fact in a bar application and adopting conflicting and deceitful positions before the Court constitute grounds for suspension from the practice of law.

The 1987 Constitution mandates the establishment of a single police force, national in scope and civilian in character, to be administered and controlled by a national police commission (Art. XVI, Sec. 6). This provision aimed to correct the pre-existing structure where the police force was integrated with the military (the Philippine Constabulary), which eroded its civilian character. Congress enacted R.A. No. 6975 to implement this mandate, creating the Philippine National Police (PNP) under a reorganized Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) and defining the powers of the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM).

A national police commission created by statute to administer and control a national police force is not an independent constitutional commission but is subject to the President's power of executive control, which may be exercised through a Department Secretary under the Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency.