Talaan ng mga Kaso | Ang Kaalaman

Filter by Subject

Text Search

There are 668 results on the current subject filter

Title	IDs & Reference #s	Background	Primary Holding	Subject Matter
Koh vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (23rd September 1986)	AK423446 144 SCRA 259 , 228 Phil. 258 , G.R. NO. 71388	The dispute originated from an erroneous bank transaction where respondent First Interstate Bank of California, due to a computer mistake, issued a cashier's check for US-$8,500.00 to petitioner Maria Monserrat R. Kor, instead of the US-$500.00 actually remitted by her father.	A dismissal of a case based on non-compliance with a "Notice of Case Status" issued by a court's officer-in-charge, which requires parties to manifest their intent regarding modes of discovery, is null and void and does not constitute res adjudicata, as such notice is not a lawful order of the court contemplated under Rule 17, Section 3 of the Rules of Court.	Civil Procedure I Discovery
Javier vs. Commission on Elections (22nd September 1986)	AK367573 144 SCRA 194 , 228 Phil. 193 , G.R. Nos. L-68379-81	The 1984 Antique elections were marred by violence, including the killing of petitioner Evelio Javier’s supporters. Javier challenged irregularities in the canvass, but COMELEC’s Second Division dismissed his claims and proclaimed Arturo Pacificador winner. Javier’s assassination in 1986 and the Batasang’s abolition under the post-Marcos Freedom Constitution rendered the case moot.	The COMELEC Second Division lacked jurisdiction to decide pre-proclamation controversies involving Batasang Pambansa members, as such cases must be heard en banc under the 1973 Constitution.	Constitutional Law II
Van Dorn vs. Romillo, Jr. (8th October 1985)	AK986888 No. L-68470 , 139 SCRA 139	Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn, a Filipino citizen, and private respondent Richard Upton, a US citizen, were married in Hongkong in 1972 and established their residence in the Philippines. They had two children. In 1982, they obtained a divorce decree from a court in Nevada, USA, where Upton acknowledged that they had no community property. Subsequently, Van Dorn remarried. A year after the divorce, Upton filed a lawsuit in the Philippines, claiming that a business owned by Van Dorn was conjugal property and seeking an accounting and the right to manage it.	An absolute divorce obtained abroad by an alien spouse is valid and binding in the Philippines, and it effectively terminates the marital bond from the perspective of the alien spouse; consequently, the alien spouse loses the standing to sue the Filipino spouse in the Philippines for rights arising from the marriage, such as the management or division of alleged conjugal property.	Persons and Family Law Article 15, Civil Code
Galman vs. Pamaran (30th August 1985)	AK797659 138 SCRA 294 , Nos, L-71208-09 , Nos. L-71212-13	The assassination of Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. on August 21, 1983, led to the creation of the Agrava Fact-Finding Board under P.D. 1886. The Board investigated the incident and gathered testimonies, including those from suspects. Legal questions arose during subsequent trials regarding the admissibility of evidence obtained under mandatory compulsion by the Board.	This case arises from the assassination of former Senator Benigno S. Aquino Jr. in 1983 at Manila International Airport. The primary issue concerns the admissibility of testimonies and evidence provided by suspects before the Agrava Fact-Finding Board, especially in light of their constitutional right against self-incrimination and the immunity granted under Presidential Decree No. 1886. The Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of the testimonies and evidence submitted to the Agrava Board, reinforcing constitutional protections against self-incrimination.	Statutory Construction
Floresca vs. Philex Mining Corporation (30th April 1985)	AK256751 136 SCRA 141 , G.R. No. 30642	The case arose from a tragic mining accident where several employees of Philex Mining Corporation died. At the time, two distinct legal frameworks governed compensation for work-related injuries and deaths. The Workmen's Compensation Act (WCA) provided a system of limited, no-fault liability, ensuring that employees or their heirs received swift but modest compensation regardless of who was at fault. In contrast, the Civil Code allowed for actions based on tort (quasi-delict) or breach of contract, which could result in significantly higher awards for actual, moral, and exemplary damages, but required the claimant to prove the employer's fault or negligence. This created a legal conflict over which remedy was proper, particularly in cases where an employer's negligence was the direct cause of the accident.	An injured worker or their heirs have a choice of remedies between availing of the limited, no-fault compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act or suing for greater damages under the Civil Code where the injury or death is caused by the employer's gross negligence; however, these remedies are mutually exclusive. An initial choice to receive compensation under the Act will not bar a subsequent civil suit for damages if that choice was based on ignorance or a mistake of fact, such as being unaware of the employer's culpable negligence at the time.	Persons and Family Law
Jain vs. Intermediate Appellate Court and People (28th September 1984)	AK063159 132 SCRA 359 , 217 Phil. 347 , No. L-63129	Wayne Jain was accused of theft based on informations filed by the City Fiscal for allegedly stealing sugar canes. The prosecution argued that Jain, in conspiracy with a watchman, fraudulently substituted train receipts to misrepresent ownership and claim proceeds from sugar canes owned by Tomasa Bermejo.	The crime of theft, under Philippine law, requires physical taking or apoderamiento of the personal property of another; substituting train receipts to fraudulently claim ownership of sugar canes does not constitute theft because there was no physical taking of the canes themselves.	Philosophy of Law
Cayetano vs. Leonidas (30th May 1984)	AK102084 214 Phil. 460 , 129 SCRA 522 , No. L-54919	Adoracion C. Campos was an American citizen and a permanent resident of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who died in Manila in 1977 while on a temporary visit. Her father, Hermogenes Campos, initially took possession of her entire estate by executing an Affidavit of Adjudication, claiming to be her sole compulsory heir. However, a will executed by Adoracion in the United States, which had already been probated in Pennsylvania, was later presented for reprobate in the Philippines by her sister, Nenita Campos Paguia.	The intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, including the order of succession and the amount of successional rights, is governed exclusively by the national law of the decedent pursuant to Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code; consequently, Philippine laws on legitimes do not apply to the estate of a foreign national whose own national law does not provide for such compulsory inheritance.	Wills and Succession Subject and Object of Succession
Heirs of Jose Amunategui vs. Director of Forestry (29th November 1983)	AK724137 126 SCRA 69 , 211 Phil. 260 , No. L-27873 , No. L-30035	The case originated from an application for land registration filed in the Court of First Instance of Capiz for Lot No. 885. Several oppositions were filed, including one from the Director of Forestry, who argued the land was forest land. The Court of First Instance partially granted the application to private litigants, but this was appealed.	Possession of forest lands, regardless of duration, cannot ripen into private ownership. Forest lands remain in the public domain and are not subject to registration for private individuals unless there is a positive act from the government declassifying them as agricultural or disposable land.	Property and Land Law
City Government of Quezon City vs. Ericta (24th June 1983)	AK611870 207 Phil. 648 , 122 SCRA 759 , No. L-34915	Quezon City enacted an ordinance regulating private cemeteries, including a provision (Section 9) requiring a 6% set-aside for pauper burials. This provision was not initially enforced, but seven years later, the City Council resolved to enforce it, directing the City Engineer to stop land transactions in cemeteries not complying with the 6% requirement. Himlayang Pilipino, Inc., a cemetery operator, challenged the ordinance in court.	Section 9 of Ordinance No. 6118, S-64 of Quezon City is unconstitutional and void as it constitutes an invalid exercise of police power amounting to confiscation of property without due process or just compensation, rather than a valid regulation.	Constitutional Law II Police Power
Garcia-Padilla vs. Enrile (20th April 1983)	AK516942 206 Phil. 392 , G.R. No. 61388	The case arose following the official lifting of Martial Law in the Philippines via Proclamation No. 2045 on January 17, 1981. However, this same proclamation continued the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus with respect to persons detained for crimes of insurrection, rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or proposal to commit such crimes, and for all other crimes committed in furtherance thereof. The arrests and detentions in this case occurred under this legal framework, amidst ongoing government efforts to suppress perceived threats to national security.	The President's decision to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in cases of invasion, insurrection, rebellion, or imminent danger thereof, when public safety requires it, is a political question beyond judicial inquiry; consequently, a Presidential Commitment Order (PCO) issued for offenses covered by such suspension renders the detention legal and valid, and the right to bail is deemed suspended for the duration of the emergency for those detained for such offenses.	Constitutional Law I
People vs. Narvaez (20th April 1983)	AK862181 121 SCRA 389 , 206 Phil. 314 , Nos. L-33466-67	Narvaez, a settler in South Cotabato, was embroiled in a land dispute with Fleischer and Company. He had been leasing a portion of the land in contention, but the company sought to remove him and other settlers. The deceased victims, Davis Fleischer and Flaviano Rubia, were secretary-treasurer and assistant manager of Fleischer & Co. respectively, and were fencing the land when Narvaez shot them.	Narvaez is guilty of two counts of homicide, not murder, due to incomplete self-defense and mitigating circumstances. His sentence is reduced to four months of arresto mayor, and he is ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased with a reduced amount of damages, leading to his immediate release given his lengthy pre-trial detention.	Property and Land Law
Sarmiento vs. Juan (28th January 1983)	AK679362 120 SCRA 403 , 205 Phil. 335 , No. L-56605	The underlying case (Civil Case No. 126113 in the Court of First Instance of Manila) was initiated by private respondent Belfast Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. against petitioner Andres C. Sarmiento and his father, Benjamin R. Sarmiento, Sr., seeking indemnification under an Indemnity Agreement related to a bail bond.	A trial court commits grave abuse of discretion when it denies a motion for postponement of pre-trial based on a party's sudden illness (even if initially lacking a medical certificate but later substantiated under oath) and declares that party in default, especially when the opposing party also failed to make a valid appearance (i.e., counsel appeared without special authority); the requirement for pre-trial to be held "after the last pleading has been filed" can be interpreted to mean after the period for filing the last pleading has expired, and failure to answer a compulsory counterclaim does not necessarily prevent pre-trial.	Civil Procedure I Pre-trial
Marcia vs. Court of Appeals (27th January 1983)	AK812962 G.R. No. 34529 , 205 Phil. 147 , 120 SCRA 193	The case originated from a vehicular collision on December 23, 1956, in Lubao, Pampanga, between a passenger bus operated by Victory Liner, Inc. and driven by Felardo Paje, and a jeep driven by Clemente Marcia. The collision resulted in the death of Clemente Marcia and physical injuries to the petitioners, Edgar Marcia and Renato Yap, who were passengers in the jeep. This led to the filing of both a criminal action against the bus driver and a separate civil action for damages by the injured parties against the driver and the bus company.	An acquittal of an accused in a criminal case for reckless imprudence, which is based on a final judicial declaration that the fact from which civil liability may arise did not exist, bars a subsequent civil action for damages arising from the same incident.	Persons and Family Law
Macias vs. Araula (20th July 1982)	AK051208 115 SCRA 135 , 200 Phil. 524 , A.M. No. 1895-CFI	The case arose in the context of intense local political rivalry in Dauin, Negros Oriental, following the April 7, 1978 elections. Respondent Judge Araula's wife was the incumbent Mayor and KBL Chairman in Dauin, while the complainant and his witnesses were associated with the opposing Pusyon Bisaya party. The charges stemmed from incidents occurring shortly before and after these elections, reflecting the bitter political division and personal animosity between the factions, particularly involving the Judge's family and Atty. Rudy Enriquez, a relative and political opponent.	While the evidence presented was insufficient to establish prohibited partisan political activity (electioneering) or grave misconduct/oppression under the high standard of proof required in administrative cases against judges, a judge's conduct must nonetheless be free from the appearance of impropriety, and actions that could be misinterpreted as partisan, even if well-intentioned (like explaining election mechanics at a political rally), warrant admonishment under the Canons of Judicial Ethics.	Constitutional Law I
Puyat vs. De Guzman, Jr. (25th March 1982)	AK217409 198 Phil. 420 , G.R. No. 51122	The case arose from a contested election of the Board of Directors of International Pipe Industries Corporation (IPI) on May 14, 1979, which led to a quo warranto proceeding (SEC Case No. 1747) filed by the "Acero Group" against the "Puyat Group" before the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Assemblyman Estanislao A. Fernandez, after initially attempting to appear as counsel for the Acero Group and facing objection, purchased a nominal number of IPI shares and then sought to intervene in the SEC case as a stockholder.	A Member of the Batasang Pambansa is prohibited from appearing as counsel before any administrative body, and this prohibition extends to indirect appearances, such as intervening in a case under the guise of protecting a minimal stockholding acquired shortly before and for the purpose of such intervention, when the true intent is to participate in the proceedings in a capacity akin to counsel.	Constitutional Law I
Macadangdang vs. Court of Appeals (23rd November 1981)	AK972092 108 SCRA 314 , 195 Phil. 174 , G.R. No. L-38287	Antonio and Filomena Macadangdang married in 1946 and amassed significant wealth through various businesses in Davao. They separated in 1965 following the deterioration of their relationship and allegations of Antonio's illicit affairs. In 1971, Filomena filed a complaint for legal separation. The trial court granted the separation in 1973 but did not immediately divide the property due to the lack of an inventory, reserving this for a later decision. Antonio did not appeal this initial decision but later contested the court's jurisdiction to appoint an administrator, claiming the main case was not yet final.	A trial court judgment granting legal separation is final and appealable immediately upon issuance, even if it reserves the actual liquidation and division of conjugal properties for a later supplemental decision, because the dissolution of the property regime is a mandatory legal consequence of the decree under Article 106 of the Civil Code and the partition is merely incidental to the main judgment.	Persons and Family Law Legal separation
Yuvienco vs. Dacuycuy (27th May 1981)	AK311310 192 Phil. 183 , G.R. No. 55048	Petitioners expressed willingness to sell a property in Tacloban City to private respondents (occupants of the property) for P6,500,000, provided respondents decided by July 31, 1978. Respondents replied, agreeing to buy and asking petitioners' representative to "proceed Tacloban to negotiate details." A subsequent meeting occurred where petitioners' representative presented a prepared contract with payment terms (balance within 30 days) that differed from what respondents allegedly expected (balance within 90 days), leading to the non-signing of the contract and the present suit for specific performance.	For a contract of sale of real property to be enforceable under the Statute of Frauds, particularly when payment is to be made in installments, the note or memorandum must contain all essential elements of the contract, including the specific terms of payment; a mere indication of the total price without the agreed manner of payment is insufficient if the intent is not a cash sale. Furthermore, an acceptance of an offer that includes a call to "negotiate details" is not an absolute acceptance required for the perfection of a contract under Article 1319 of the Civil Code.	Obligations and Contracts
Manila Gas Corporation vs. Court of Appeals (30th October 1980)	AK184426 100 SCRA 602 , G.R. No. L-44190	Manila Gas Corporation, a public utility, supplied gas to the residence and 46-door apartment complex of Isidro M. Ongsip, a prominent businessman. After new appliances were installed in 1965, the gas meter readings remained unusually low, registering zero consumption in May and June 1966. This discrepancy prompted Manila Gas to investigate, leading to the discovery of an alleged illegal "jumper" or by-pass valve, which became the basis for the ensuing legal conflict.	A public utility corporation that files a baseless criminal complaint for qualified theft against a customer with malicious intent to vex and humiliate, and subsequently disconnects the customer's service without the required prior notice in breach of contract and in bad faith, is liable for moral and exemplary damages; however, the amount of such damages may be reduced by the court based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the financial capacity of the utility and any mitigating actions or faults of the customer.	Persons and Family Law
Azarcon vs. Vallarta (28th October 1980)	AK487327 100 SCRA 450 , 188 Phil. 481 , No. L-43679	The contested land was originally owned by Dr. Jose V. Cajucom, who sold it in two separate transactions. First, to the Vallartas' predecessors in 1932, and later to the Azarcons in 1959. Both parties subsequently obtained titles, leading to conflicting claims of ownership over the same property.	The Original Certificate of Title held by the Vallartas is valid and superior, while the Free Patent Title held by the Azarcons is declared null and void and ordered cancelled.	Property and Land Law
Ceniza vs. COMELEC (28th January 1980)	AK528318 95 SCRA 763 , 180 Phil. 597 , G.R. No. 52304	Following the enactment of the 1973 Constitution emphasizing local government autonomy, the Interim Batasan Pambansa passed Batas Blg. 51 in preparation for the January 30, 1980 local elections. This law introduced a classification system for cities based on annual income (P40 million threshold) into "highly urbanized" and "component" cities. This classification determined whether the registered voters of a city could participate in the election of officials of the province where the city is geographically located, leading to challenges from voters in affected cities like Cebu and Mandaue.	The classification of cities into highly urbanized and component cities based on annual income under Batas Pambansa Blg. 51, which determines whether their residents can vote for provincial officials, is based on substantial distinctions germane to the constitutional mandate of promoting local autonomy and does not violate the equal protection clause or the right of suffrage.	Constitutional Law II Equal Protection
Parish Priest of Roman Catholic Church of Victoria, Tarlac vs. Rigor (30th April 1979)	AK907180 89 SCRA 493 , 178 Phil. 400 , 75 OG No. 38 , No. L-22036	Father Pascual Rigor, a Catholic priest, died in 1935 leaving a will that distributed his estate among his sisters and a cousin, but included a controversial legacy involving four parcels of riceland. This legacy was conditioned upon a male relative pursuing a career in the priesthood, with the Parish Priest of Victoria, Tarlac, acting as administrator during intervals when no qualified legatee was available. For nearly twenty years following the probate of the will, the ricelands remained in the possession of the legal heirs because no nephew or relative of Father Rigor came forward to claim the legacy by enrolling in the seminary.	A testamentary disposition in favor of a "nearest male relative" who would study for the priesthood is deemed inoperative if no such relative exists or has manifested the required intent at the time of the testator's death, as successional rights vest at the moment of death and require the heir or legatee to be living and qualified at that specific time.	Wills and Succession Subject and Object of Succession
Vda. de Laig vs. Court of Appeals (21st November 1978)	AK844009 86 SCRA 641	The dispute originated from a double sale of a parcel of land originally owned by Petre Galero. Galero first engaged the services of Atty. Benito Laig to recover the property in a civil case. After winning the case and after the decision became final, Galero transferred the entire property to Atty. Laig—one-half by sale and the other half as contingent attorney's fees. Years later, Galero, with the assistance of Atty. Jose L. Lapak, fraudulently obtained a new owner's duplicate title and sold the same property to Carmen Verso. This second sale was registered by the Register of Deeds, Atty. Baldomero M. Lapak, who was the father of Atty. Jose L. Lapak. This prompted the heirs of Atty. Laig to file a suit to annul the second sale and for reconveyance, leading to the present protracted legal battle.	The prohibition under Article 1491, paragraph 5 of the Civil Code, which prevents lawyers from acquiring by purchase the property and rights which are the object of litigation in which they take part, applies only during the pendency of the litigation. A sale of such property to the lawyer after the judgment has become final and the property is no longer in litigation is valid.	Persons and Family Law
Arenas vs. City of San Carlos (Pangasinan) (5th April 1978)	AK735400 82 SCRA 318 , 172 Phil. 306 , No. L-34024	Isidro G. Arenas, serving as City Judge of San Carlos City, claimed entitlement to a higher salary based on Republic Act No. 5967. The city government refused to pay the differential, citing that the law mandates the judge's salary to be lower than the mayor's. Arenas filed a mandamus petition, which was dismissed by the Court of First Instance.	The Supreme Court held that the proviso in Republic Act No. 5967, which states that a city judge's salary must be at least P100 less than that of the city mayor, qualifies the general provision establishing city judges' salaries.	Statutory Construction
Arianza vs. Workmen’s Compensation Commission (28th February 1978)	AK230860 81 SCRA 698 , 171 Phil. 616 , No. L-43352	Arianza worked for Central Azucarera de la Carlota, Inc. from 1960, performing various physically demanding tasks, including packing and piling bagasse and working as a water tender in the fire-room. He developed liver cirrhosis, which he claimed was aggravated by his work conditions. His claim was initially dismissed by the Workmen’s Compensation Commission but was later reversed by the Supreme Court.	The Supreme Court held that Arianza’s liver cirrhosis, though not directly caused by his employment, was aggravated by his working conditions, making it compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.	Philosophy of Law
Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp. vs. Hontanosas (31st August 1977)	AK095815 168 Phil. 608 , G.R. No. L-35951	The dispute originated from a collection suit filed by Allied Overseas Commercial Co., Ltd. (Allied) against Ben Uy Rodriguez in the CFI of Manila, where Allied obtained a writ of preliminary attachment secured by a bond from Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp. (Pioneer). Although the Manila case was dismissed for improper venue, Rodriguez subsequently filed a separate action in the CFI of Cebu against Pioneer and Allied (later including Allied's assignee, Hadji Esmayaten Lucman) to claim damages for the alleged wrongful and malicious attachment.	A claim for damages arising from a wrongful preliminary attachment must be prosecuted in the same court where the attachment bond was filed and the writ of attachment was issued, pursuant to Rule 57, Section 20 of the Rules of Court; prosecuting such a claim in a separate action before a different court is improper and that court lacks jurisdiction.	Civil Procedure I Pre-trial
Cruz vs. J. M. Tuason and Co., Inc. (29th April 1977)	AK142238 167 Phil. 261 , G.R. No. L-23749	The case arose from claims over a large tract of land. The Deudor family, asserting rights based on an "informacion posesoria," allegedly engaged Faustino Cruz to make improvements on a portion of this land. Subsequently, J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and Gregorio Araneta, Inc. (defendants-appellees), who were the registered owners, purportedly engaged Cruz to act as an intermediary to settle a civil case (Civil Case No. Q-135) with the Deudors concerning 50 quiñones of land, promising him 3,000 square meters as compensation. A compromise agreement was indeed reached between the Deudors and the defendants.	A motion for reconsideration that merely reiterates arguments already considered and resolved by the court is pro-forma and does not suspend the reglementary period for filing an appeal; consequently, an appeal filed beyond this period must be dismissed as the assailed order has become final and executory.	Obligations and Contracts
Bagatsing vs. Ramirez (17th December 1976)	AK142723 74 SCRA 306 , 165 Phil. 909 , G.R. No. L-41631	June 12–15, 1974: Manila’s Municipal Board enacted and Mayor Bagatsing approved Ordinance No. 7522, imposing fees on public market stalls. February 17, 1975: The Federation of Manila Market Vendors sued to invalidate the ordinance, claiming non-compliance with the City Charter’s publication rules. August 29, 1975: The Court of First Instance (Manila) nullified the ordinance for lacking pre-enactment publication.	Tax ordinances are governed by the Local Tax Code’s publication requirements (post-approval only), overriding the Revised City Charter’s stricter pre- and post-enactment rules.	Statutory Construction
Bonilla vs. Barcena (18th June 1976)	AK926241 71 SCRA 491 , 163 Phil. 516 , 72 OG 9257 , G.R. No. 41715	The dispute began when Fortunata Barcena filed a civil action to quiet title over several parcels of land in Abra against Leon Barcena and others. While the case was active and after an amended complaint had been filed, the defendants sought to terminate the proceedings by arguing that the plaintiff's death rendered the case moot as a dead person lacks the legal personality to maintain a suit.	An action to quiet title over property survives the death of the plaintiff; therefore, the trial court must allow the substitution of the deceased party by their heirs or legal representatives rather than dismissing the case for lack of legal personality.	Wills and Succession Opening of Succession
Purugganan vs. Paredes (21st January 1976)	AK605464 69 SCRA 69 , 161 Phil. 91 , No. L-23818	Plaintiff Purugganan owned lots burdened by a registered easement of drainage in favor of Defendant Paredes' adjacent property. Paredes constructed a house that exceeded the easement's specifications, causing rainwater to improperly drain onto Purugganan's property. Purugganan sued to enforce the easement, while Paredes claimed her house was pre-existing and not in violation.	A summary judgment was correctly rendered because the defendants-appellants violated the conditions of a registered easement of drainage and failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact that would necessitate a full trial. Furthermore, any prescriptive easement of light and view was extinguished by the registration of the servient estate under the Torrens System without such easement being annotated.	Property and Land Law
Padua vs. Robles (29th August 1975)	AK406269 66 SCRA 485 , No. L-40486	On January 1, 1969, a taxi owned by Bay Taxi Cab, driven by Romeo Punzalan, hit and killed 10-year-old Normandy Padua in Olongapo City. The victim's parents (Paulino and Lucena Padua) filed a civil case against Punzalan and the Bay Taxi Cab (Civil Case No. 427-O), while Punzalan faced criminal charges for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide (Criminal Case No. 1158-O). The civil court ruled in favor of the Paduas, ordering Punzalan to pay damages but absolving Bay Taxi Cab. The criminal court later convicted Punzalan and sentenced him to imprisonment, stating that his civil liability had already been determined in Civil Case No. 427-O. However, when the Paduas attempted to execute the civil judgment, Punzalan was found to be insolvent. They then filed a separate action (Civil Case No. 1079-O) to enforce Robles’ subsidiary liability. The lower court dismissed the case, ruling that there was no cause of action. The Paduas appealed, and the Court of Appeals referred the case to the Supreme Court due to the legal question involved.	The Supreme Court ruled that Robles, as the employer of the negligent driver Punzalan, was subsidiarily liable for the civil indemnity awarded to the Paduas under the judgment in the criminal case, in accordance with Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code. The dismissal by the lower court was set aside, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.	Philosophy of Law
Lim vs. Ponce de Leon (29th August 1975)	AK198759 66 SCRA 299 , G.R. No. L-22554	Jikil Taha sold a motor launch to Alberto Timbangcaya. A year later, Timbangcaya filed a criminal complaint, alleging that Taha had forcibly retaken the launch. Based on this, Fiscal Francisco Ponce de Leon initiated a criminal case for robbery against Taha. In the interim, Taha had sold the same motor launch to Delfin Lim. The fiscal, upon learning of the launch's location and its subsequent sale to Lim, ordered its seizure as evidence in the pending criminal case, leading to the present civil suit for damages.	A public officer, such as a provincial fiscal, has no authority to order the seizure of private property without a valid search warrant, even if the property is the corpus delicti of a crime. A violation of the constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures by a public officer gives rise to civil liability for damages under Article 32 of the New Civil Code, and the officer's good faith is not a valid defense.	Persons and Family Law Article 32, New Civil Code
People vs. Licera (22nd July 1975)	AK629032 G. R. No. L-39990 , 65 SCRA 270	The case arose from a legal uncertainty created by two conflicting Supreme Court decisions regarding the illegal possession of firearms. The earlier doctrine, established in _People vs. Macarandang_, interpreted Section 879 of the Revised Administrative Code to include secret agents appointed by governors as "peace officers" exempt from firearm licensing requirements. A later case, _People vs. Mapa_, explicitly overturned this interpretation. The accused, Rafael Licera, was appointed as a secret agent and apprehended for possessing a firearm while the _Macarandang_ doctrine was still in effect, but was tried and convicted after the _Mapa_ doctrine had been established.	A new judicial doctrine in the field of penal law that abrogates a previous one must be applied prospectively and cannot be given retroactive effect if it would be prejudicial to an accused who acted in reliance on the old doctrine.	Persons and Family Law
Aquino, Jr. vs. Enrile (17th September 1974)	AK831150 59 SCRA 183 , 158-A Phil. 1 , No. L-35546 , No. L-35538 , No. L-35539 , No. L-35540 , No. L-35547 , No. L-35556 , No. L-35567 , No. L-35571 , No. L-35573	The case primarily revolved around the legality of arresting individuals without a court order, based solely on martial law powers. The petitioners argued that the martial law proclamation was unconstitutional, and that the arrests violated due process. The respondents maintained that the arrests were necessary for national security given the ongoing rebellion.		Constitutional Law I
Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers' Union (12th September 1974)	AK917809 158 Phil. 60 , G.R. No. L-2524	The case arose from a conflict between an employee's religious beliefs prohibiting labor union membership and a collective bargaining agreement's closed shop provision. Benjamin Victoriano, an employee of Elizalde Rope Factory Inc. and a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo, a religious sect prohibiting its members from joining labor organizations, was compelled by a closed shop agreement between his employer and the Elizalde Rope Workers' Union to be a member of the Union. Following the enactment of R.A. No. 3350, which exempts such individuals from closed shop provisions, Victoriano resigned from the Union. The Union then demanded his dismissal from the company, leading to the legal challenge.	Republic Act No. 3350, which amends Section 4(a)(4) of the Industrial Peace Act (R.A. No. 875) by exempting members of religious sects prohibiting affiliation with labor organizations from the coverage of closed shop agreements, is constitutional. It validly protects the fundamental right to freedom of religion without unduly infringing upon other constitutional rights or established legal principles.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Religion
Republic vs, Vda. de Castellvi (15th August 1974)	AK859862 58 SCRA 336 , 157 Phil. 329 , No. L-20620	The Republic needed to expand the Basa Air Base and initiated expropriation proceedings against Carmen M. Vda. de Castellvi and Maria Nieves Toledo-Gozun, landowners of adjacent properties. The Republic had previously leased Castellvi’s land since 1947. Disagreement arose over the just compensation, with landowners claiming a much higher value (P15.00 per square meter) compared to the Republic's initial valuation (P0.20 per square meter).	The Supreme Court held that the "taking" of the properties occurred upon the filing of the expropriation complaint in 1959, not in 1947 when the Republic initially leased Castellvi's land. The just compensation for the expropriated lands, classified as residential, was fixed at P5.00 per square meter. The Republic was ordered to pay interest on the compensation from the time of deposit of provisional value and from the actual taking in possession.	Constitutional Law II Eminent Domain
Cabanas vs. Pilapil (25th July 1974)	AK516159 58 SCRA 94 , 157 Phil. 97 , No. L-25843	The case arose from a dispute over the custody of insurance proceeds intended for a minor beneficiary. The deceased, Florentino Pilapil, had named his brother Francisco as the trustee for his daughter Millian's insurance benefits. However, Millian's mother, Melchora Cabanas, sought to obtain the proceeds, arguing that as the child's mother and guardian, she was entitled to administer the funds.		Constitutional Law I
Astorga vs. Villegas (30th April 1974)	AK503127 56 SCRA 714 , No. L-23475	The case originated from the passage of House Bill No. 9266, which sought to define the powers of the Manila Vice-Mayor. After its passage, controversy erupted when it was discovered that the version signed into law did not include substantial amendments made by Senator Tolentino on the Senate floor.	The Supreme Court declared Republic Act 4065 invalid as it was not properly enacted into law, ruling that when there is a conflict between the enrolled bill and the legislative journal records, the latter may be consulted to determine whether a bill was duly enacted.	Statutory Construction
People vs. Jabinal (27th February 1974)	AK908521 55 SCRA 607 , G.R. No. L-30061	The legal context of this case revolves around the interpretation of firearm laws, specifically the exemption for "peace officers." Initially, in the cases of _People vs. Macarandang_ (1959) and _People vs. Lucero_ (1958), the Supreme Court held that individuals appointed as secret agents with duties related to maintaining peace and order were considered "peace officers" and thus exempt from the requirement of a license to possess firearms. This interpretation was abruptly overturned in 1967 by the ruling in _People vs. Mapa_, which adopted a strict and literal interpretation of the law, holding that secret agents are not included in the list of exempted persons and are therefore liable for illegal possession. The present case arose from an act committed in 1964, when the old, more lenient doctrine was still in effect, but was decided by the trial court in 1968, after the new, stricter doctrine was established.	When a judicial doctrine is overruled and a new one is adopted, the new doctrine should be applied prospectively and should not retroactively prejudice parties who had relied on the old doctrine and acted on the faith thereof, especially in the construction and application of criminal laws.	Persons and Family Law
Republic vs. Villasor (28th November 1973)	AK095335 54 SCRA 83 , 153 Phil. 356 , No. L-30671	The case arose from an arbitration award against the Republic of the Philippines. When the respondents sought to execute the judgment, they obtained an order from Judge Villasor declaring the decision final and executory. This led to the issuance of an alias writ of execution and notices of garnishment against funds of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The Republic then filed this petition to challenge the validity of the order and execution.		Constitutional Law I
Miller vs. California (21st June 1973)	AK558260 413 U.S. 15	The case arose from a re-examination by the Supreme Court of the standards for regulating obscenity, an area that had caused significant legal difficulty and a lack of consistent majority opinions in previous cases. The Court sought to provide more concrete guidelines for states to regulate pornographic materials, particularly when disseminated to unwilling recipients or juveniles, while still protecting First Amendment rights for serious expression.	The Court established a new three-part test for obscenity: (a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Court also held that "contemporary community standards" are those of the local or state community, not a national standard.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
Javellana vs. The Executive Secretary (31st March 1973)	AK643524 50 SCRA 30 , 151-A Phil. 35 , 69 OG 7975 , No. L-36142	Following the declaration of Martial Law and the drafting of a new Constitution by the 1971 Constitutional Convention, President Marcos submitted the proposed constitution for ratification via Citizens Assemblies, bypassing a traditional plebiscite. This prompted several legal challenges questioning the process and the President's authority.	The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the petitions, with a majority finding the issues either moot or not properly raised. The Court was divided on whether the 1973 Constitution had been validly ratified, but a majority considered it effectively in force.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II
De Borja vs. Vda. de Borja (18th August 1972)	AK452926 150-B Phil. 486 , G.R. No. L-28040 , G.R. No. L-28568 , G.R. No. L-28611	Francisco de Borja was first married to Josefa Tangco, who died in 1940. Following her death, Francisco married Tasiana Ongsingco. When Francisco died in 1954, a bitter conflict arose between his son from the first marriage, Jose, and his widow, Tasiana, leading to eighteen pending court cases. The dispute primarily concerned the administration and distribution of the estates of both Josefa and Francisco, as well as the ownership of the Hacienda Jalajala.	An heir may validly sell or compromise their undivided hereditary share in a decedent's estate even before the probate of the will, as successional rights are transmitted and vested from the moment of the decedent's death pursuant to Article 777 of the Civil Code.	Wills and Succession Opening of Succession
Commissioner of Customs vs. Court of Tax Appeals (31st January 1972)	AK064106 43 SCRA 192 , 150 Phil. 222 , No. L-33471	Eusebio Dichoco’s shipment of 438 packages of foodstuffs was seized by customs for lacking a Central Bank release certificate. The CTA initially allowed release under bond, reversed itself, then reinstated the bond order. The Commissioner of Customs challenged this via certiorari.	Importations violating Central Bank circulars are “prohibited importations” under Section 102(k) of the Tariff and Customs Code and cannot be released under bond pursuant to Section 2301.	Statutory Construction
Lapuz vs. Eufemio (31st January 1972)	AK747709 150 Phil. 204 , G.R. No. L-30977	The case arose from a marital dispute where the wife sought legal separation due to her husband's abandonment and cohabitation with another woman, while the husband countered that their marriage was void due to his prior existing marriage. The legal proceedings were interrupted when the wife died in a car accident, raising the legal question of whether her heirs could continue the lawsuit to secure the dissolution of the conjugal partnership and the forfeiture of the husband's share of the profits.	An action for legal separation is purely personal in nature and abates upon the death of one of the spouses; it does not survive the death of the plaintiff even if property rights are involved, as those rights are mere effects of a decree of legal separation which cannot be rendered after death has already dissolved the marriage.	Persons and Family Law
Tumalad vs. Vicencio (30th September 1971)	AK332768 41 SSCRA 143 , 148-B Phil. 625 , No. L-30173	Defendants-Appellants executed a chattel mortgage over their house, built on rented land, to Plaintiffs-Appellees to secure a loan. Upon default, Plaintiffs-Appellees extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgage and purchased the house at auction. Plaintiffs-Appellees then filed an ejectment case against Defendants-Appellants in the municipal court to recover possession and collect rent.	A house constructed on rented land can be validly constituted as personal property and subject to a chattel mortgage if the parties to the contract agree to treat it as such. Furthermore, the mortgagor is not obligated to pay rent to the purchaser during the one-year redemption period following an extrajudicial foreclosure sale, unless the purchaser legally obtains possession through proper court procedures and posting of a bond.	Property and Land Law
Cohen vs. California (7th June 1971)	AK728188 403 U.S. 15	The case arose during the Vietnam War era, a period of significant social and political unrest in the United States, particularly concerning the military draft. Cohen's act of wearing the jacket was a form of protest against the draft and the war, reflecting a common sentiment among dissenters at the time. The public display of such an expletive in a courthouse, a public forum, brought to the forefront the conflict between an individual's right to free expression and the state's interest in maintaining public order and decency.	A state cannot, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, criminalize the public display of a single offensive expletive when that display does not incite immediate violence, is not directed at a specific individual in a personally abusive manner, is not obscene in the legal sense, and does not intrude upon substantial privacy interests in an intolerable way; the emotive function of speech is also protected.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
Matabuena vs. Cervantes (31st March 1971)	AK202413 38 SCRA 284 , 148 Phil. 295 , No. L-28771	The case arose from a gap in the Civil Code, which explicitly prohibited donations between legally married spouses but was silent regarding donations between partners in a common-law relationship. The dispute centered on whether the policy behind the law—preventing the stronger party from exercising undue influence over the weaker party—should extend to irregular unions, thereby nullifying a land donation made by a man to his partner prior to their eventual marriage.	The statutory prohibition against donations between spouses during marriage (Article 133 of the Civil Code) applies with equal force to donations between persons living together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage, based on public policy considerations and the need to prevent undue influence in such relationships.	Persons and Family Law Property relations; Art. 87
Edu vs. Ericta (24th October 1970)	AK811997 35 SCRA 481 , 146 Phil. 469 , No. L-32096	Respondent Teddy Galo challenged the Reflector Law and Administrative Order No. 2 (requiring vehicles to install reflectors) as violations of due process and non-delegation. The lower court issued a preliminary injunction against the order, prompting the petitioner to seek Supreme Court review.	The Reflector Law (RA 5715) and Administrative Order No. 2 are constitutional, as they reasonably advance public safety under the state’s police power and adhere to non-delegation principles.	Statutory Construction
Gongon vs. Court of Appeals (30th April 1970)	AK161579 32 SCRA 412 , G.R. No. L-24421	The case arose from the government's acquisition of the Tambobong Estate in Malabon, Rizal, from the Roman Catholic Church on December 31, 1947, under Commonwealth Act No. 539. This law authorized the President to acquire private lands and subdivide them for resale to bona fide tenants, occupants, or other qualified individuals. The lot in question, Lot 18-B, Block 23, was part of this estate. Amada Aquino was the original lessee, who then sublet the property to Matias Gongon in 1934. When the government began reselling the lots, both Aquino (as lessee) and Gongon (as occupant) filed applications to purchase the same lot, leading to a legal conflict over who had the preferential right.	The preferential right to purchase a lot under Commonwealth Act No. 539, which gives preference first to "bona fide tenants" and second to "occupants," is not absolute and must be interpreted in line with the constitutional principle of social justice. Where the parties are not on an equal footing, as when the lessee is a non-occupant and already a landowner while the sublessee is the actual occupant and landless, equity and justice demand that the preferential right be granted to the actual occupant to fulfill the law's purpose of giving land to the landless.	Persons and Family Law
Sta. Maria vs. Lopez (18th February 1970)	AK782342 31 SCRA 637 , No. L-30773	Sta. Maria was appointed Dean of the College of Education at UP for a five-year term. Due to student protests and demands for his resignation, UP President Salvador P. Lopez transferred him to a Special Assistant role. Sta. Maria argued this was a removal without cause or due process.	The transfer of Sta. Maria from his deanship to a Special Assistant role was a removal from office without due process, violating his constitutional right to security of tenure. The Court ordered his reinstatement as Dean.	Philosophy of Law