Reset

There are 537 results on the current subject filter

Public Interest Center, Inc. vs. Elma

30th June 2006

ak754720
526 Phil. 550 , G.R. No. 138965
Primary Holding
The concurrent appointments of an individual as Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (CPLC) are unconstitutional because the two offices are incompatible, violating the prohibition against holding multiple offices under Section 7, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution.
Background
The case arose from the appointment of Magdangal B. Elma to two significant government positions: first as Chairman of the PCGG and subsequently, during his tenure there, as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel. This dual appointment raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and violations of constitutional provisions designed to prevent officials from holding multiple public offices, particularly given the distinct and potentially overlapping or conflicting responsibilities of the two roles.
Constitutional Law I

Estrada vs. Escritor

22nd June 2006

ak431336
492 SCRA 1 , 525 Phil. 110 , A.M. No. P-02-1651
Primary Holding
The State failed to demonstrate a compelling interest that would justify infringing upon the respondent's fundamental right to the free exercise of her religion, and failed to show that the means adopted was the least restrictive; therefore, the respondent's conjugal arrangement, sanctioned by her religious beliefs and practices as a Jehovah's Witness, cannot be penalized as disgraceful and immoral conduct, and she is entitled to an exemption based on her right to religious freedom.
Background
The case arose from a sworn letter-complaint filed by Alejandro Estrada against Soledad Escritor, a court interpreter, alleging that her living arrangement with Luciano Quilapio, Jr.—a man married to another woman—constituted disgraceful and immoral conduct tarnishing the image of the judiciary. Escritor, a widow whose own husband was previously estranged, admitted the cohabitation but claimed it conformed to the religious doctrines and practices of the Jehovah's Witnesses, formalized through a "Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness" approved by her congregation, as Quilapio faced legal impediments to remarriage. This created a conflict between state laws penalizing such relationships and Escritor's constitutional right to religious freedom.
Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law
Freedom of Religion

Mirasol, et al. vs. Department of Public Works and Highways and Toll Regulatory Board

8th June 2006

ak762874
523 Phil. 713 , G.R. NO. 158793
Primary Holding
The authority to regulate, restrict, or prohibit access to limited access facilities (tollways) under Republic Act No. 2000, originally vested in the Department of Public Works and Communications, was transferred to the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) by Executive Order 546 in 1979; consequently, subsequent issuances by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) regulating such access are void for lack of authority, while regulations issued by the predecessor department prior to the transfer remain valid if consistent with the Constitution.
Background
The case arose from the implementation of various administrative orders and regulations issued over several decades by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and its predecessors, aiming to regulate traffic on limited access highways, commonly known as tollways or expressways. Specifically, these issuances involved restrictions and prohibitions on the use of motorcycles on these facilities, prompting challenges from motorcycle riders regarding the issuing body's authority and the constitutionality of the restrictions.
Constitutional Law II
Liberty of Abode

David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo

3rd May 2006

ak973659
489 SCRA 160 , 522 Phil. 705 , G.R. No. 171396 , G.R. No. 171409 , G.R. No. 171485 , G.R. No. 171483 , G.R. No. 171400 , G.R. No. 171489 , G.R. No. 171424
Primary Holding
The President has the constitutional power to declare a state of national emergency and call out the Armed Forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence under Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution. However, such a declaration does not authorize the President to (1) issue decrees, (2) direct the AFP to enforce laws unrelated to suppressing lawless violence, (3) impose prior restraint on the press, or (4) take over privately-owned public utilities or businesses affected with public interest without legislative authority under Section 17, Article XII of the Constitution. General Order No. 5 is constitutional in providing a standard for the AFP and PNP to implement PP 1017, but its reference to undefined "acts of terrorism" is unconstitutional.
Background
On February 24, 2006, amidst alleged conspiracies by political opposition, leftist insurgents (NDF-CPP-NPA), and military adventurists to overthrow the government, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued PP 1017, declaring a state of national emergency. This declaration cited threats to the democratic Philippine State, including plots to unseat or assassinate the President, magnified by certain media segments, and actions adversely affecting the economy and national security. On the same day, G.O. No. 5 was issued to implement PP 1017, directing the AFP and PNP to suppress acts of terrorism and lawless violence. These issuances followed a series of events, including the escape of Magdalo Group members, discovery of "Oplan Hackle I" (a plot for bombings and assassinations), recapture of Lt. San Juan with subversive documents, alleged defection plans within the PNP-SAF, and confessions by military officers about plans to join anti-Arroyo protests.
Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law

Senate of the Philippines vs. Ermita

20th April 2006

ak395231
488 SCRA 1 , 522 Phil. 1 , G.R. No. 169777 , G.R. No. 169659 , G.R. No. 169660 , G.R. No. 169667 , G.R. No. 169834 , G.R. No. 171246
Primary Holding
Executive Order No. 464 is unconstitutional in part: Sections 2(b) and 3 are void because they allow executive officials to evade congressional inquiries without a specific and properly invoked claim of executive privilege by the President or the Executive Secretary (by order of the President), thereby unduly infringing upon the legislative power of inquiry. Section 1 is valid when construed to apply only to the Question Hour (Art. VI, Sec. 22, Constitution), and Section 2(a) is valid as an internal guideline for the executive department concerning information that may be considered privileged.
Background
The case arose from various Senate inquiries into matters of public concern, including the North Luzon Railways (NorthRail) Project, the "Gloriagate Scandal" involving alleged electoral fraud and wiretapping, and the fertilizer fund scam. Several executive officials invited to these hearings declined to attend, citing E.O. 464, which President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued on September 28, 2005. This prompted multiple petitioners, including the Senate, legislators, and public interest groups, to challenge the constitutionality of E.O. 464 before the Supreme Court.
Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction

Star Paper Corporation vs.Simbol

12th April 2006

ak657436
521 Phil. 364 , G.R. No. 164774
Primary Holding
A company policy prohibiting spouses from working in the same company (no-spouse policy) is illegal and constitutes marital discrimination unless the employer can prove that the policy is founded on a reasonable business necessity and that the qualification is reasonably related to the essential operation of the job involved.
Background
Petitioner Star Paper Corporation implemented a policy in 1995 stating that if two employees marry each other, one must resign. This policy also barred the hiring of new applicants who had relatives up to the third degree of relationship already employed by the company. The case arose when three regular employees, Ronaldo D. Simbol, Wilfreda N. Comia, and Lorna E. Estrella, were affected by this policy or related circumstances leading to their separation from the company.
Obligations and Contracts

Office of the Court Administrator vs. Floro, Jr.

31st March 2006

ak855285
486 SCRA 66 , 520 Phil. 591 , A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460 , A.M. No. 99-7-273-RTC , A.M. No. RTJ-06-1988
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court ruled to relieve Judge Florentino V. Floro, Jr. of his functions as Judge of RTC Branch 73, Malabon City due to a medically disabling condition of the mind that rendered him unfit to discharge judicial functions, while awarding him back wages for 3 years on equitable grounds.
Background
The case centers on Judge Florentino V. Floro Jr.'s fitness to serve as a judge of the Regional Trial Court. After withdrawing his first application in 1995 due to concerning psychological evaluations, he reapplied in 1998 and was appointed despite similar psychological concerns, mainly due to his impressive academic background. Upon his own request for an audit in March 1999, various issues about his conduct came to light, leading to his preventive suspension by July 1999, merely eight months into his position. The Office of the Court Administrator filed administrative charges against him, encompassing 13 different allegations ranging from procedural violations to fundamental concerns about his mental fitness, particularly given his proclaimed beliefs in psychic powers, dwarf friends, and unusual practices like wearing colored robes in court. The case became a landmark decision addressing the intersection of mental fitness, judicial temperament, and the limits of personal beliefs in judicial service.
Philosophy of Law

Executive Secretary vs. Southwing Industries, Inc.

20th February 2006

ak861204
518 Phil. 103 , G.R. No. 164171 , G.R. No. 164172 , G.R. No. 168741
Primary Holding
Article 2, Section 3.1 of Executive Order No. 156, prohibiting the importation of used motor vehicles, is valid and constitutional in its application to the Philippine territory outside the secured area of the Subic Bay Freeport, but it is ultra vires and void in its application to the presently secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area (the "Secured Area" of the Subic Bay Freeport as defined in EO 97-A), because such application exceeds the President's delegated authority and unreasonably modifies the freeport status established by RA 7227.
Background
On December 12, 2002, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued Executive Order No. 156, "Providing for a Comprehensive Industrial Policy and Directions for the Motor Vehicle Development Program and its Implementing Guidelines." Article 2, Section 3.1 of EO 156 prohibited the importation into the country, inclusive of the Subic Bay Freeport, of all types of used motor vehicles, subject to limited exceptions. This was intended to rationalize the importation of used motor vehicles and enhance the competitiveness of the domestic motor vehicle manufacturing industry. Respondents, entities operating within the Subic Bay Freeport and engaged in the business of importing and trading used motor vehicles, challenged this provision.
Constitutional Law I

Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. PLDT

15th December 2005

ak383011
478 SCRA 61 , 514 Phil. 255 , G.R. No. 140230
Primary Holding
PLDT’s “in lieu of all taxes” franchise clause exempts only direct taxes on its franchise/earnings, not indirect taxes like VAT; however, advance sales and compensating taxes collected during 1992–1994 were erroneous and refundable.
Background
PLDT sought a tax refund/credit for indirect taxes paid on imported equipment, citing Section 12 of RA 7082. The BIR and lower courts disagreed on whether the franchise’s “in lieu of all taxes” clause covered indirect taxes.
Statutory Construction

Agulto vs. Tecson

29th November 2005

ak349241
476 SCRA 395 , 512 Phil. 760 , G.R. No. 145276
Primary Holding
Service of notice of pre-trial on the counsel of record (or on the party if they have no counsel) is mandatory under Section 3, Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; failure to serve such notice renders the pre-trial and all subsequent proceedings null and void for violating the party's right to due process, and constitutes grave abuse of discretion correctible by certiorari.
Background
Respondent William Z. Tecson filed an action for damages against petitioners Rolando Agulto, Maxima Agulto, Cecille Tenorio, and Maribel Mallari in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City, alleging malicious prosecution.
Civil Procedure I
Pre-trial

Pimentel, Jr. vs. Exec. Secretary Ermita

13th October 2005

ak992362
509 Phil. 567 , G.R. No. 164978
Primary Holding
The President of the Philippines has the constitutional and statutory power to appoint department secretaries in an acting capacity without the consent of the Commission on Appointments, even while Congress is in session, as such appointments are temporary measures to fill vacancies and ensure the continuous performance of executive functions.
Background
The case arose after President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo appointed several individuals as acting secretaries of various executive departments in August 2004, while the 13th Congress was in its regular session and the Commission on Appointments had already been constituted. Petitioners, who are members of the Senate, questioned the legality of these appointments, arguing they bypassed the confirmation process required by the Constitution.
Constitutional Law I

Guingguing vs. Court of Appeals

30th September 2005

ak025163
508 Phil. 193 , G.R. No. 128959
Primary Holding
A publication containing truthful information about criminal cases filed against a public figure, even if it tends to cause dishonor or discredit, is not libelous if it was not published with actual malice—that is, with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not—as such publication falls within the bounds of constitutionally protected freedom of speech and expression concerning matters of public interest.
Background
The case arose from a criminal complaint for libel filed by Cirse "Choy" Torralba, a broadcast journalist with programs on radio stations DYLA and DYFX in Cebu City, which aired over a large portion of the Visayas and Mindanao. The complaint was against Segundo Lim, who paid for an advertisement, and Ciriaco "Boy" Guingguing, the editor-publisher of the Sunday Post, a weekly newspaper circulated in Bohol, Visayas, and Mindanao, where the advertisement was published.
Constitutional Law II
Freedom of Expression

Abakada Guro Party List vs. Ermita

1st September 2005

ak134713
469 SCRA 14 , 506 Phil. 1 , G.R. No. 168056 , G.R. No. 168207 , G.R. No. 168461 , G.R. No. 168463 , G.R. No. 168730
Primary Holding
Republic Act No. 9337 is constitutional; its enactment did not violate the procedural requirements of the Constitution regarding the origination of revenue bills or the amendment process, and its substantive provisions, including the President's standby authority to increase the VAT rate and the limitations on input tax credits, do not constitute undue delegation of legislative power, nor do they violate the due process, equal protection, uniformity, or progressivity clauses of the Constitution.
Background
The enactment of Republic Act No. 9337 stemmed from the government's need to address a mounting budget deficit and generate significant revenue to stabilize the country's fiscal situation. The law aimed to restructure the Value-Added Tax (VAT) system by expanding its base, increasing the rate (with a standby authority for the President to raise it further), and introducing measures intended to improve tax administration and collection efficiency as part of a broader fiscal reform agenda.
Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction

Misamis Occidental II Cooperative, Inc. vs. David

25th August 2005

ak092221
468 SCRA 63 , 505 Phil. 181 , G.R. No. 129928
Primary Holding
A preliminary hearing on affirmative defenses pleaded in an answer, as provided under Section 5, Rule 16 of the old Rules of Court (now Section 6, Rule 16 of the 1997 Rules), is not mandatory but rests upon the sound discretion of the trial court; its denial is not correctible by certiorari absent grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
Background
Respondent Virgilio S. David, a supplier of electrical hardware, entered into a transaction with petitioner Misamis Occidental II Electric Cooperative, Inc. (MOELCI II) concerning the supply of a 10 MVA Power Transformer. A dispute arose regarding the nature of the document governing the transaction and MOELCI II's alleged failure to pay the agreed price, leading David to file a suit for specific performance and damages.
Civil Procedure I
Motion

Coconut Oil Refiners Association, Inc. vs. Torres

29th July 2005

ak371894
465 SCRA 47 , 503 Phil. 42 , G.R. No. 132527
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court ruled that portions of Executive Order No. 97-A and related issuances were unconstitutional for allowing tax-free removal of goods from the Subic Special Economic Zone to other parts of the Philippines and extending incentives to Clark Special Economic Zone without statutory basis.
Background
Republic Act No. 7227 (Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992) aimed to convert former U.S. military bases into productive economic zones to promote development in Central Luzon. It created the Subic Special Economic Zone (SSEZ) with tax incentives but did not explicitly extend these privileges to other zones like Clark. Several executive issuances, including Executive Orders No. 80 and 97-A, sought to implement these incentives in both SSEZ and CSEZ, prompting legal challenges from businesses outside these zones.
Statutory Construction

Sen. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Office of the Executive Secretary

6th July 2005

ak539131
501 Phil. 303 , G.R. No. 158088
Primary Holding
The President of the Philippines possesses the discretionary power to ratify treaties, including the decision of whether and when to submit a signed treaty to the Senate for concurrence; this act is not a ministerial duty compellable by a writ of mandamus.
Background
The Philippines, through its Charge d' Affaires, signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on December 28, 2000. The Rome Statute establishes the ICC to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, and its provisions require ratification, acceptance, or approval by signatory states for it to become binding. Petitioners, concerned with human rights and the enforcement of international criminal law, urged the executive department to transmit the signed Statute to the Senate for its concurrence to complete the ratification process.
Constitutional Law I

Herrera vs. Alba

15th June 2005

ak188258
460 SCRA 197 , 499 Phil. 185 , G.R. No. 148220
Primary Holding
DNA paternity testing is a valid and admissible method to establish filiation in paternity suits, provided that proper procedures are followed, and it does not violate the right against self-incrimination.
Background
DNA paternity testing is a valid and admissible method to establish filiation in paternity suits, provided that proper procedures are followed, and it does not violate the right against self-incrimination.
Philosophy of Law

Portic vs. Cristobal

22nd April 2005

ak058410
456 SCRA 577 , 496 Phil. 456 , G.R. No. 156171
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that the agreement was a contract to sell, and because the vendee failed to fully pay the purchase price, ownership of the property did not transfer to her. Consequently, the action for quieting of title filed by the vendors was deemed proper and not prescribed as they remained in possession and legal owners of the property.
Background
Spouses Portic sold property to Anastacia Cristobal under an agreement that included conditions about payment of a balance. A dispute arose when Cristobal registered the title in her name despite allegedly not fully paying the balance, and Spouses Portic sought to quiet title, claiming the sale was void due to non-payment.
Property and Land Law

National Housing Authority vs. Court of Appeals

13th April 2005

ak266478
456 SCRA 17 , 495 Phil. 693 , G.R. NO. 148830
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court set aside the Court of Appeals' decision and remanded the case to the trial court to order a joint survey by NHA and MSBF to determine the precise metes and bounds of the seven-hectare usufruct granted to MSBF, ensuring contiguity and inclusion of MSBF's major existing facilities as much as possible within that area, while also ensuring MSBF respects the seven-hectare limit and vacates any area exceeding it.
Background
President Marcos issued Proclamation No. 481 reserving a 120-hectare NHA-owned land for the National Government Center (NGC). Later, Proclamation No. 1670 segregated seven hectares from the NGC and granted MSBF usufructuary rights over it, to be determined by future survey. MSBF occupied an area exceeding seven hectares and leased a portion to BGC. NHA, under Memorandum Order No. 127 which revoked the reserved status of the remaining 50 hectares, sought to demolish BGC's facilities, leading BGC to file for injunction.
Property and Land Law

City of Manila vs. Laguio, Jr.

12th April 2005

ak416215
455 SCRA 308 , 495 Phil. 289 , G.R. No. 118127
Primary Holding
Ordinance No. 7783 is an invalid exercise of police power because it violates the constitutional rights to due process and equal protection and exceeds the regulatory powers granted to the City of Manila under the Local Government Code.
Background
Malate Tourist Development Corporation (MTDC) questioned the validity of Ordinance No. 7783, which included motels and inns among the prohibited establishments in the Ermita-Malate area, arguing it was unconstitutional and beyond the City Council's powers.
Constitutional Law II Statutory Construction
Police Power

Soria vs. Desierto

31st January 2005

ak603974
450 SCRA 339 , 490 Phil. 749 , G.R. Nos. 153524-25
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court upheld the time-honored practice of non-interference in preliminary investigations conducted by prosecutory bodies absent grave abuse of discretion, affirming that Sundays, holidays, and election days are excluded in computing the periods prescribed in Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
Criminal Law II

Civil Service Commission vs. Belagan

19th October 2004

ak604656
440 SCRA 578 , 483 Phil. 601 , G.R. No. 132164
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that the Civil Service Commission's findings were supported by substantial evidence, and while Belagan was guilty of grave misconduct, his long service and unblemished record warranted a modified penalty of one-year suspension without pay instead of dismissal.
Background
Dr. Allyson Belagan, a Superintendent of DECS in Baguio City, was accused of sexual harassment by Magdalena Gapuz, a private school teacher, and Ligaya Annawi, a public school teacher. Gapuz alleged that Belagan kissed her during an inspection of her school premises, while Annawi accused him of multiple instances of sexual harassment and other administrative malfeasances. The DECS conducted an investigation and found Belagan guilty, leading to his dismissal. The CSC affirmed the DECS decision regarding Gapuz but dismissed Annawi's complaint. The Court of Appeals reversed the CSC's decision, prompting the CSC to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Philosophy of Law

Duncan Association of Detailman-PTGWO vs. Glaxo Wellcome Philippines, Inc

17th September 2004

ak533184
481 Phil. 687 , G.R. No. 162994
Primary Holding
A company policy prohibiting employees from marrying employees of competitor companies, aimed at preventing conflicts of interest and protecting trade secrets, is a valid exercise of management prerogative and does not violate the equal protection clause or the right to marry, provided it is reasonable and applied impartially.
Background
The case arose from the highly competitive pharmaceutical industry where companies like Glaxo Wellcome Philippines, Inc. (Glaxo) and Astra Pharmaceuticals (Astra) are direct competitors. Glaxo implemented a policy, reflected in its employment contracts and Employee Code of Conduct, requiring employees to disclose relationships with employees of competitor companies and, if a conflict of interest is perceived, to explore solutions including transfer or resignation. This policy was intended to safeguard Glaxo's trade secrets, marketing strategies, and other confidential information.
Obligations and Contracts

Baloloy vs. Hular

9th September 2004

ak688555
438 SCRA 80 , 481 Phil. 398 , G.R. No. 157767
Primary Holding
The petition is granted. The decisions of the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court are reversed and set aside. The complaint of the respondent is dismissed. The respondent failed to implead indispensable parties and failed to prove his claim of ownership by preponderance of evidence sufficient to overcome the petitioners' Torrens title.
Background
Alfredo Hular claimed ownership of land originally owned by his father, Astrologo Hular, part of Lot No. 3347. He alleged that Iluminado Baloloy fraudulently secured a Free Patent and OCT over Lot No. 3353, which included a portion of his father's land (later found to be 1,405 square meters, not 287 sqm as initially thought). Hular sought to quiet title, nullify the Baloloy's OCT, and reconveyance, citing prior ownership and acquisitive prescription. Baloloys, heirs of Iluminado, argued their title's sanctity and Hular's lack of cause of action.
Property and Land Law

People vs. Comadre

8th June 2004

ak679022
431 SCRA 366 , 475 PHIL. 293 , G.R. No. 153559
Primary Holding
A single act, such as detonating a hand grenade, that results in death (Murder) and injuries (Attempted Murder) constitutes a complex crime under Article 48 of the RPC, punishable with the penalty for the most serious crime (Murder) applied in its maximum period; when both treachery and explosion attend the killing, explosion qualifies the crime to Murder if it was the principal means employed, while treachery is considered a generic aggravating circumstance. Conspiracy must be proven by positive acts of cooperation beyond mere presence or relationship, and absent such proof, co-accused cannot be held liable.
Background
The case arose from an incident where victims were having a drinking session on the terrace of a house when the appellants allegedly stopped in front, and one of them, Antonio Comadre, lobbed a hand grenade onto the roof, which subsequently exploded, causing death and injuries.
Criminal Law II
Murder

Ong vs. Mazo

4th June 2004

ak982901
431 SCRA 56 , 474 Phil. 807 , G.R. No. 145542
Primary Holding
A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 filed after the effectivity of A.M. No. 00-2-03-SC benefits from the fresh 60-day period counted from the notice of denial of the motion for reconsideration, even if the original period under the prior rule (Circular No. 39-98) had partially lapsed; furthermore, denying a party the use of written interrogatories based on the outdated notion that it constitutes a "fishing expedition" is a grave abuse of discretion correctible by certiorari, as modes of discovery are liberally granted to enable parties to obtain relevant facts and expedite proceedings.
Background
The case originated from a vehicular accident where a passenger bus owned by petitioner Elena S. Ong and driven by Iluminado J. Caramoan allegedly bumped a jeep owned and driven by respondent Elvira C. Lanuevo, who had respondent Charito A. Tomilloso as a passenger. This incident led respondents Lanuevo and Tomilloso to file a complaint for damages against Ong and Caramoan.
Civil Procedure I
Discovery

Tecson vs. Commission on Elections

3rd March 2004

ak663881
424 SCRA 277 , 468 Phil. 421 , G.R. No. 161434 , G.R. No. 161634 , G.R. No. 161824
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court's jurisdiction as the sole judge of presidential election contests under Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution is limited to post-election disputes and cannot be invoked to rule on a candidate's qualifications before the election; challenges to a candidate's qualifications based on alleged material misrepresentation in the certificate of candidacy fall under the COMELEC's jurisdiction pursuant to Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, reviewable by the Supreme Court via certiorari, where the petitioner must prove not just falsity but deliberate misrepresentation.
Background
The cases arose in the lead-up to the May 10, 2004 national elections, following the filing of a certificate of candidacy for President by respondent Ronald Allan Kelley Poe, also known as Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ), wherein he declared himself a natural-born Filipino citizen.
Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law

Tolentino vs. Commission on Elections

21st January 2004

ak379108
420 SCRA 438 , 465 Phil. 385 , G.R. No. 148334
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that the special election to fill the Senate vacancy was validly held, and COMELEC’s failure to give formal notice did not invalidate the election. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit.
Background
Following the appointment of Senator Teofisto Guingona as Vice-President in 2001, a Senate vacancy arose. The Senate passed a resolution calling for a special election to fill the vacancy, to be held simultaneously with the May 14, 2001, regular elections. The 13th placer in the senatorial race would serve the unexpired term. Petitioners challenged the validity of the special election, arguing that COMELEC failed to comply with legal requirements.
Philosophy of Law

People vs. Suzuki

23rd October 2003

ak996295
414 SCRA 43 , G.R. No. 120670
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that routine airport security procedures constitute a valid exception to the constitutional protection against warrantless searches and seizures. Persons may lose this protection due to reduced privacy expectations associated with air travel. When these procedures reveal contraband, and the accused is caught in flagrante delicto, both the warrantless search and subsequent arrest are valid. However, in imposing penalties for drug possession, courts must apply the lesser of two indivisible penalties when there are no aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Background
The case stems from an airport security check at Bacolod Airport where the defendant, a Japanese national, was found in possession of marijuana concealed in a box of "Bongbong's piaya." The case raises important questions about the constitutionality of airport security searches and the rights of individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Criminal Law II

Allied Domecq Phil., Inc. vs. Villon

12th August 2003

ak813262
439 SCRA 667 , 482 Phil. 894 , G.R. No. 156264
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that pursuant to Section 21 of Republic Act No. 7227, only the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to issue a restraining order or preliminary injunction against the implementation of projects for the conversion of former military reservations into alternative productive uses, which includes the operations of duly registered enterprises within the Clark Special Economic Zone like respondent Clark Liberty.
Background
Petitioner ADPI held an exclusive distributorship agreement for "Fundador" brandy in the Philippines, granted by the Spanish manufacturer Pedro Domecq, S.A. ADPI obtained the necessary Certificate of Registration from the Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD) for the product. Subsequently, the Bureau of Customs issued a circular requiring importers of "Fundador" brandy to present a valid BFAD certificate. Respondent Clark Liberty, a duty-free shop in the Clark Special Economic Zone (CSEZ), imported a significant quantity of "Fundador" brandy without such a certificate.
Civil Procedure I

Senate Blue Ribbon Committee vs. Majaducon

29th July 2003

ak802239
455 Phil. 61 , G.R. No. 136760 , G.R. NO. 138378
Primary Holding
A Regional Trial Court has no jurisdiction to prohibit the Senate or its committees from conducting inquiries in aid of legislation, as this would violate the principle of separation of powers; furthermore, the use of terms like "gross ignorance of the law" in pleadings challenging a judge's order, without malice, does not automatically constitute indirect contempt, especially when such terms are descriptive of alleged errors in applying fundamental legal principles.
Background
The case arose from two Senate Resolutions: No. 157, directing an inquiry into alleged coup d'etat plans related to probing AFP fund irregularities, and No. 160, directing an inquiry into alleged mismanagement of AFP-Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS) funds. These resolutions were referred to the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee and the Committee on National Defense and Security for investigation.
Constitutional Law I

Republic vs. Sandiganbayan

21st July 2003

ak422271
407 SCRA 10 , 454 Phil. 504 , G.R. No. 104768
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court adjudicated that the PCGG lacked the requisite jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute Major General Ramas and Elizabeth Dimaano, as Ramas did not meet the definitional criteria of a "subordinate" of former President Ferdinand Marcos under Executive Orders Nos. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A. The Court affirmed that such jurisdiction rightly resides with the Office of the Ombudsman and the Office of the Solicitor General.
Background
In the aftermath of the 1986 EDSA Revolution, President Corazon Aquino established the PCGG to spearhead the recovery of assets unlawfully acquired during the Marcos regime. The AFP Anti-Graft Board, under the PCGG's directive, initiated an inquiry into the financial dealings of Major General Ramas, uncovering properties and assets allegedly disproportionate to his lawful income. The investigation extended to Elizabeth Dimaano, purportedly Ramas' mistress, in whose possession substantial monetary sums and military-grade equipment were discovered. This led to a forfeiture petition grounded on the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and the Forfeiture Law (RA No. 1379).
Philosophy of Law

Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Michel J. Lhuillier Pawnshop, Inc

15th July 2003

ak922816
406 SCRA 178 , 453 Phil. 1043 , G.R. No. 150947
Primary Holding
Pawnshops are excluded from the definition of “lending investors” under Section 116 of the NIRC, rendering BIR’s assessment for deficiency percentage tax void.
Background
The BIR sought to impose a 5% lending investor’s tax on pawnshops through administrative issuances (RMO No. 15-91 and RMC No. 43-91). Michel J. Lhuillier Pawnshop challenged the assessment, arguing pawnshops were distinct from lending investors and the BIR overstepped its rulemaking authority.
Statutory Construction

Lawrence vs. Texas

26th June 2003

ak906927
539 U.S. 558
Primary Holding
A Texas statute making it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as the liberty protected by the Constitution includes the right for adults to engage in private, consensual homosexual activity without government intervention; consequently, _Bowers v. Hardwick_, 478 U.S. 186, is overruled.
Background
The case arose within the legal and social context of state laws criminalizing sodomy, often referred to as "crimes against nature" or "deviate sexual intercourse." Seventeen years prior, in _Bowers v. Hardwick_, the Supreme Court had upheld a Georgia sodomy law applied to homosexual conduct, finding no fundamental right to engage in such activity. Since _Bowers_, legal and social perspectives continued to evolve, with many states repealing their sodomy laws or ceasing enforcement against private, consensual adult conduct, and subsequent Court decisions like _Romer v. Evans_ casting doubt on laws motivated by animus towards homosexuals.
Constitutional Law II
Equal Protection

Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. COMELEC

25th June 2003

ak413799
452 Phil. 899 , G.R. No. 147589 , G.R. No. 147613
Primary Holding
In party-list elections, votes cast for organizations that are subsequently disqualified for failing to meet the statutory and jurisprudential requirements must be deducted from the "total votes cast for the party-list system" for the purpose of determining the two-percent threshold required to win a seat in the House of Representatives, as mandated by Section 10 of RA 7941, which states that votes for those "not entitled to be voted for shall not be counted."
Background
The case emerged from the complexities of the 2001 party-list elections, following the Supreme Court's June 26, 2001 Decision that established eight-point guidelines for party-list qualification. Numerous party-list groups participated, leading to disputes over qualification, the computation of votes, the determination of the two-percent threshold, and the allocation of seats, necessitating further clarification from the Court on how to apply the party-list law (RA 7941) and its previous rulings.
Constitutional Law I

Buena Obra vs. Social Security System

9th April 2003

ak528677
401 SCRA206 , 449 Phil. 200 , G.R. No. 147745
Primary Holding
The Court held that (1) the claim was filed within a “reasonable time” due to the SSS’s failure to process her EC claim earlier, and (2) myocardial infarction was work-related under ECC Resolution No. 432 due to job strain.
Background
Juanito Buena Obra, a dump truck driver for 24 years, died of a heart attack at work in 1988. His widow filed for SSS death benefits but learned about EC benefits a decade later. The SSS/ECC rejected her claim, alleging prescription and lack of work connection.
Statutory Construction

Coronel vs. Constantino

7th February 2003

ak326196
445 Phil. 97 , G.R. No. 121069
Primary Holding
A sale by a co-owner of the entire co-owned property is valid only with respect to the seller's pro-indiviso share, and the sale of the shares of other co-owners without their authority or legal representation is unenforceable; mere silence or inaction of such other co-owners, without proof of their awareness of the unauthorized sale and a voluntary, knowing adoption of the act, does not constitute ratification.
Background
The subject property, consisting of two parcels of land (Cadastral Lots Nos. 5737 and 5738) in Sta. Monica, Hagonoy, Bulacan, was originally owned by Honoria Aguinaldo. Upon Honoria's death, one-half (1/2) of the property was inherited by petitioner Emilia Meking Vda. de Coronel together with her sons, petitioner Benjamin, Catalino, and Ceferino, all surnamed Coronel. The other half was inherited by respondents Florentino Constantino and Aurea Buensuceso. The dispute arose from the sale of the portion inherited by Emilia and her sons.
Obligations and Contracts

Dadole vs. Commission on Audit

3rd December 2002

ak714832
441 Phil. 537 , G.R. No. 125350
Primary Holding
Local Budget Circular No. 55, issued by the Department of Budget and Management, is null and void because it overstepped the President's power of general supervision over local government units by imposing a specific monetary limit on additional allowances not found in the enabling law (R.A. 7160), and because it was not published as required for administrative rules intended to enforce or implement existing law.
Background
For several years, RTC and MTC judges in Mandaue City had been receiving monthly additional allowances from the city government through appropriation ordinances. In 1991, this amount was P1,500. In 1994, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) issued Local Budget Circular No. 55 (LBC 55), which limited such additional allowances from provinces and cities to P1,000.00 per month. This circular led to the Mandaue City Auditor issuing notices of disallowance for the amounts received by the petitioner judges in excess of P1,000 and requiring reimbursement.
Constitutional Law I

Francisco vs. Herrera

21st November 2002

ak748349
440 Phil. 841 , G.R. No. 139982
Primary Holding
A contract entered into by a party whose capacity to consent is vitiated by senile dementia is not void ab initio but merely voidable; such a contract is susceptible to ratification, which can be implied through actions such as accepting and retaining the benefits of the contract, thereby rendering it perfectly valid.
Background
Eligio Herrera, Sr., the father of respondent Pastor Herrera, was the owner of two parcels of land located in Cainta, Rizal. In 1991, Eligio Sr. sold these properties to the petitioner, Julian Francisco, through two separate transactions. Subsequently, the children of Eligio Sr., including the respondent, contested these sales, primarily arguing that the agreed purchase price was grossly inadequate and, more significantly, that Eligio Sr. was suffering from senile dementia at the time of the sales, which allegedly rendered him incapable of giving valid consent to the contracts.
Obligations and Contracts

Yau vs. Manila Banking Corporation

11th July 2002

ak716089
384 SCRA 340 , 433 Phil. 701 , G.R. No. 126731 , G.R. No. 128623
Primary Holding
A court (RTC Cebu) cannot interfere with property under the *custodia legis* (custody of the law) of a co-equal court (RTC Makati) by ordering the cancellation and transfer of title of such property; however, a judgment creditor who purchases property subject to a prior attachment at an execution sale has a sufficient legal interest to intervene in the action where the attachment was issued to protect their rights.
Background
Esteban Yau obtained a final judgment against Ricardo Silverio, Sr. from RTC Cebu. The only known asset of Silverio was a proprietary share in Manila Golf and Country Club. This share, however, was already subject to preliminary attachments obtained by Manilabank in separate collection cases against Silverio pending before RTC Makati. This created a conflict when Yau, after purchasing the share at the execution sale ordered by RTC Cebu, sought to have the title transferred to his name.
Civil Procedure I
Intervention

Matibag vs. Benipayo

2nd April 2002

ak305174
429 Phil. 554 , G.R. No. 149036
Primary Holding
Ad interim appointments to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) are permanent appointments that take effect immediately upon qualification and are not considered temporary or acting appointments prohibited by Article IX-C, Section 1(2) of the Constitution; furthermore, the renewal of such ad interim appointments when by-passed by the Commission on Appointments does not violate the constitutional prohibition on reappointment, as this prohibition applies only to appointees who have been previously confirmed by the Commission on Appointments and have served a term or part thereof.
Background
The case arose following changes in the leadership of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Petitioner Ma. J. Angelina G. Matibag, who held a temporary appointment as Director IV of the COMELEC's Education and Information Department (EID), was reassigned to the Law Department by newly appointed ad interim COMELEC Chairman Alfredo L. Benipayo. This reassignment, coupled with the ad interim appointments and their subsequent renewals for Chairman Benipayo and Commissioners Borra and Tuason by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, prompted Matibag to challenge the constitutionality and legality of these appointments and her reassignment, citing concerns over COMELEC's independence and alleged violations of constitutional prohibitions.
Constitutional Law I

Commission on Audit of the Province of Cebu vs. Province of Cebu

29th November 2001

ak875038
371 SCRA 196 , 422 Phil. 519 , G.R. No. 141386
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that salaries and personnel-related benefits of teachers appointed for extension classes may be charged to the SEF, but college scholarship expenses cannot.
Background
The case arose from Notices of Suspension issued by the Commission on Audit (COA) to Cebu Province after it charged teacher salaries and scholarship expenses to its SEF. The province filed a petition for declaratory relief with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which ruled in favor of Cebu Province. COA elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
Statutory Construction

Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan

19th November 2001

ak529893
369 SCRA 394 , 421 Phil. 290 , G.R. No. 148560
Primary Holding
Republic Act No. 7080, the Plunder Law, as amended by RA 7659, is constitutional and does not suffer from the vice of vagueness, nor does it violate the accused's rights to due process and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. The law provides ascertainable standards and well-defined parameters for the crime of plunder.
Background
Petitioner Joseph Ejercito Estrada, the highest-ranking official to be prosecuted under RA 7080 (Plunder Law), faced charges before the Sandiganbayan for allegedly amassing ill-gotten wealth during his presidency. This case arose from his efforts to quash the Information against him by challenging the constitutionality of the Plunder Law itself, which defines and penalizes the crime of plunder.
Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction
Freedom of Expression

Benedicto vs. Court of Appeals

4th September 2001

ak713363
364 SCRA 334 , 416 Phil. 722 , G.R. No. 125359
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court ruled that the repeal of Circular No. 960 did not extinguish petitioners' criminal liability as saving clauses preserved pending cases. It also held that jurisdiction was proper in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), and claims of prescription, exemption, and immunity were unmeritorious.
Background
The case arose from multiple criminal charges filed against Benedicto and Rivera for failing to report foreign exchange earnings as required by Central Bank Circular No. 960. The petitioners argued that their liability was extinguished due to the circular's repeal and other defenses such as prescription and immunity under a compromise agreement with the government.
Statutory Construction

DM. Consunji, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals

20th April 2001

ak928097
357 SCRA 249 , G.R. No. 137873
Primary Holding
An employee's dependent who has claimed and received benefits from the State Insurance Fund under the Labor Code is not barred from subsequently suing the employer for damages under the Civil Code if the initial choice of remedy was made without knowledge of the employer's negligence or of the existence of the alternative remedy, as such ignorance negates a knowing and intelligent waiver.
Background
The case arose from a fatal workplace accident on November 2, 1990, where Jose Juego, a construction worker for petitioner D.M. Consunji, Inc. (DMCI), died after falling 14 floors when the platform he was on collapsed. The incident prompted his widow, Maria Juego, to seek compensation. This led to a legal conflict over whether her initial claim for statutory death benefits under the Labor Code prevented her from later seeking higher damages from the employer through a civil lawsuit based on negligence.
Persons and Family Law

Estrada vs. Desierto

2nd March 2001

ak430917
353 SCRA 452 , 406 Phil. 1 , G.R. Nos. 146710-15 , G.R. No. 146738
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court held that Joseph Ejercito Estrada had effectively resigned as President of the Philippines on January 20, 2001, and that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had validly assumed the presidency.
Background
Joseph Estrada’s presidency began in 1998 with broad public support but was marred by corruption allegations, including his involvement in illegal gambling operations (jueteng). A series of political and public upheavals culminated in his impeachment trial, which was aborted after senators voted to suppress key evidence. Massive public protests followed, leading to the withdrawal of military and police support for Estrada and the ascension of Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
Constitutional Law I

De Rama vs. Court of Appeals

28th February 2001

ak337670
405 Phil. 531 , G.R. No. 131136
Primary Holding
The constitutional prohibition against "midnight appointments" found in Article VII, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution applies only to a President or Acting President and does not extend to appointments made by local elective officials. Furthermore, once an appointment is issued, accepted, and the appointee assumes office, they acquire a legal right to the position, protected by due process, and such appointment cannot be unilaterally revoked by the appointing authority or their successor without just cause and adherence to procedural requirements, with the Civil Service Commission having the authority to review and recall appointments only on specific grounds.
Background
Upon assuming office as Mayor of Pagbilao, Quezon, petitioner Conrado L. de Rama sought to recall the appointments of fourteen municipal employees. These appointments were made by the outgoing mayor, Ma. Evelyn S. Abeja, in the period leading up to the end of her term and after the election of de Rama. The core of the dispute revolved around the petitioner's belief that these were "midnight appointments" and were therefore invalid, leading him to request their recall from the Civil Service Commission.
Constitutional Law I

Mirasol vs. Court of Appeals

1st February 2001

ak360928
351 SCRA 44 , 403 Phil. 760 , G.R. No. 128448
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that the trial court improperly ruled on the constitutionality of P.D. No. 579 without proper notice to the Solicitor General, that the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil does not apply, and that the dacion en pago and foreclosure were valid.
Background
The Mirasols, as sugarland owners, had their sugar production financed by PNB. P.D. No. 579 authorized PHILEX to purchase export sugar, with PNB financing the purchases. Disputes arose regarding the accounting of sugar sale proceeds, leading to litigation.
Constitutional Law II

Cruz vs. Secretaryof Environment and Natural Resources

6th December 2000

ak614139
347 SCRA 128 , 400 Phil. 904 , G.R. No. 135385
Primary Holding
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, ruling that the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) is constitutional by virtue of the tied vote (7-7). Because no majority ruling was reached, the law remained valid.
Background
The case was brought by legal scholars and constitutionalists who questioned whether indigenous groups could hold ownership rights over natural resources traditionally deemed as part of the State’s patrimony under the Regalian Doctrine. The petitioners sought a declaration of unconstitutionality for various provisions of the IPRA, arguing that they violated the 1987 Constitution’s provisions on State ownership of public lands and natural resources.
Philosophy of Law

Del Mar vs. Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation

29th November 2000

ak276548
346 SCRA 485 , 400 Phil. 307 , G.R. No. 138298 , G.R. No. 138982
Primary Holding
PAGCOR’s franchise under PD 1869 only covers gambling casinos, not jai-alai. Its operation of jai-alai without a legislative franchise is illegal.
Background
PAGCOR began operating jai-alai in 1999 based on legal opinions from the DOJ, OSG, and OGCC. Petitioners contested this, alleging PAGCOR exceeded its franchise. The cases were consolidated due to overlapping constitutional and statutory issues.
Statutory Construction
« 1-50 51-100 101-150 151-200 201-250 251-300 301-350 351-400 401-450 451-500 501-537 »