Syllabi-SC-decisions-by Justice de Castro-2015 Bar

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS

There is no irreconcilable conflict or repugnancy between Section 28 of R.A. No. 7279 and P.D. No.
1315 and No. 1472, rather, they can be read together and harmonized to give effect to their
provision. It should be stressed that Section 28 of R.A. No. 7279 does not totally and absolutely
prohibit eviction and demolition without a judicial order as in fact it provides for exceptions.
Pursuant to established doctrine, the three (3) statutes should be construed in the light of the
objective to be achieved and the evil or mischief to be suppressed by the said laws, and they should
be given such construction as will advance the object, suppress the mischief and secure the benefits
intended. It is worthy to note that the three laws (P.D. No. 1315, P.D. No. 1472 and R.A. No. 7279)
have a common objective to address the housing problems of the country by establishing a
comprehensive urban development and housing program for the homeless. For this reason, the
need to harmonize these laws all the more becomes imperative. - Caridad Magkalas vs. National
Housing Authority, G.R. No. 138823, September 17, 2008
CONFLICT OF LAWS
In an action for enforcement of foreign judgment, the Court has limited review over the decision
rendered by the foreign tribunal. The Philippine courts cannot pass upon the merits of the case
pursuant to the incorporation clause of the Constitution, unless there is proof of want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. - Bank of
the Philippine Islands Securities Corporation vs. Edgardo V. Guevara, G.R. No. 167052, March
11, 2015
HUMAN RELATIONS
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Expounding on this provision in a recent case, we have held that the principle of unjust enrichment
essentially contemplates payment when there is no duty to pay, and the person who receives the
payment has no right to receive it.
In light of the overpayment, it seems specious for petitioner to claim that it has suffered damages
from respondents refusal to pay its Progress Billing, which had been proven to be excessive and
inaccurate. Bearing in mind the law and jurisprudence on unjust enrichment, we hold that
petitioner is indeed liable to return what it had received beyond the actual value of the work it had
done for respondent. - R.V. Santos Company, Inc. vs. Belle Corporation, G.R. Nos. 159561-62,
October 3, 2012
PERSONS
PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY
There is no requirement that the defendant/respondent spouse should be personally examined by
a physician or psychologist as a condition sine qua non for the declaration of nullity of marriage

based on psychological incapacity. - Marietta C. Azcueta vs. Republic of the Philippines and the
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 180668, May 26, 2009
Article 36 of the Family Code is not to be confused with a divorce law that cuts the marital bond at
the time the causes therefore manifest themselves. It refers to a serious psychological illness
afflicting a party even before the celebration of the marriage. It is a malady so grave and so
permanent as to deprive one of awareness of the duties and responsibilities of the matrimonial
bond one is about to assume. Judicial precedents regarding the evidentiary requirements in
psychological incapacity cases that must be applied. Jose Reynaldo B. Ochosa vs. Bona J. Alano
and Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 167459, January 26, 2011
PROPERTY RELATIONS OF THE SPOUSES (FAMILY CODE)
When the sale is made before the effectivity of the Family Code, the applicable law is the Civil Code.
Article 173 of the Civil Code provides that the disposition of conjugal property without the wife's
consent is not void but merely voidable. - Heirs Of Domingo Hernandez, Sr., namely: Sergia V.
Hernandez (Surviving Spouse), Domingo V. Hernandez, Jr., and Maria Leonora Wilma
Hernandez vs. Plaridel Mingoa, Sr., Dolores Camisura, Melanie Mingoa, and Quezon City
Register of Deeds, G.R. No. 146548, December 18 2009
PROPERTY
OWNERSHIP
A Torrens title cannot be attacked collaterally, and the issue on its validity can be raised only in an
action expressly instituted for that purpose. A collateral attack is made when, in another action to
obtain a different relief, the certificate of title is assailed as an incident in said action. Spouses
Decaleng only sought the dismissal of the complaint of PEC-EDNP plus the grant of their
counterclaim for the payment of moral damages, exemplary damages, litigation expenses, and
attorneys fees. They conspicuously did not pray for the annulment or cancellation of Certificate of
Title No. 1. Evidently, the Spouses Decalengs attack on the validity, as well as the existence of
Certificate of Title No. 1 is only incidental to their defense against the accion publiciana and accion
reinvindicatoria instituted by PEC-EDNP, hence, merely collateral. - Sps. Ambrosio Decaleng
(substituted by his heirs) and Julia "Wanay" Decaleng vs. Bishop of the Missionary District of
the Philippine Islands of Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America,
otherwise known as the Philippine Episcopal Church, G.R. No. 171209, June 27, 2012
ACCESSION
The accessory follows the principal. The right of accession is recognized under Article 440 of the
Civil Code which states that the ownership of property gives the right by accession to everything
which is produced thereby, or which is incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or
artificially. - Maria Torbela, represented by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino, et al. vs. Spouses
Andres T. Rosario, et al., G.R. No. 140528, December 7, 2011
QUIETING OF TITLE

Vidal filed an action for quieting of title with regard to the land she inherited from
Francisco Cacho. However, Teofilo opposed contended that there is no title to be disturbed
in the first place. The court ruled that this action indisputably an action for quieting of title,
a special proceeding wherein the court is precisely tasked to determine the rights of the
parties as to a particular parcel of land, so that the complainant and those claiming under
him/her may be forever free from any danger of hostile claim. - Republic of the Philippines
vs. Hon. Mamindiara P. Mangotara, et al., G.R. No. 170375, July 7, 2010
The Syjucos' title, shows that it originated from OCT No. 994 registered on May 3, 1917 while
Bonficacio's title shows that that it likewise originated from OCT No. 994, but registered on April
19, 1917. This case affirmed the earlier finding that there is only one OCT No. 994, the registration
date of which had already been decisively settled as 3 May 1917 and not 19 April 1917 and
categorically concluded that OCT No. 994 which reflects the date of 19 April 1917 as its
registration date is null and void. - Imelda Syjuco, et al., vs. Felisa D. Bonifacio and VSD Realty
& Corporation, G.R. No. 148748, January 14, 2015
For an action to quiet title to prosper, two indispensable requisites must concur: (1) the plaintiff or
complainant has a legal or equitable title or interest in the real property subject of the action; and
(2) the deed, claim, encumbrance, or proceeding claimed to be casting a cloud on his title must be
shown to be in fact invalid or inoperative despite its prima facie appearance of validity or legal
efficacy. - Herminio M. De Guzman, for himself and as Attorney-In-Fact of Nilo M. De Guzman,
Angelino De Guzman, Josefino M. De Guzman, Estrella M. De Guzman, Teresita De Guzman,
Elsa Margarita M. De Guzman, Evelyn M. De Guzman, Ma. Nimia M. De Guzman, Antolin M. De
Guzman, and Ferdinand M. De Guzman vs. Tabangao Realty Incorporated, G.R. No. 154262,
February 11, 2015
POSESSION
It is a time-honored legal precept that after the consolidation of titles in the buyers name, for
failure of the mortgagor to redeem, entitlement to a writ of possession becomes a matter of right. Viola Cahilig et al., vs. Hon. Eustaquio G. Terencio et al., G.R. No. 164470, November 28, 2011
OBLIGATIONS
EXTINGUISHMENT OF OBLIGATIONS
Article 1391 of the Civil Code, which pertinently reads: The action for annulment shall be brought
within four years. In case of mistake or fraud, this period shall begin from the time of the discovery
of the same. - Spouses Renato and Florinda Dela Cruz vs. Spouses Gil and Leonila Segovia, G.R.
No. 149801, June 26, 2008
In general, a payment in order to be effective to discharge an obligation, must be made to the
proper person. Thus, payment must be made to the obligee himself or to an agent having authority,
express or implied, to receive the particular payment. Hence, absent any showing that the
respondent agreed to the payment of the contract price to another person, or that she authorized
Cruz to claim the check on her behalf, the payment, to be effective must be made to her. - Republic
of the Philippines, represented by the Chief of the Philippine National Police vs. Thi Thu
Thuy T. De Guzman, G.R. No. 175021, June 15, 2011
It is important to note at this point that in the determination of the nullity of a contract based on the
lack of consideration, the debtor has the burden to prove the same. Article 1354 of the Civil Code
provides that "although the cause is not stated in the contract, it is presumed that it exists and is
lawful, unless the debtor proves the contrary." - Union Bank of the Philippines vs. Spouses
Rodolfo T. Tiu and Victoria N. Tiu, G.R. Nos. 173090-91, September 7, 2011
CONTRACTS
ESSENTIAL REQUISISTES
When there is as of yet no meeting of the minds as to the subject matter or the cause or
consideration of the contract being negotiated, the same cannot be considered to have been
perfected. - MCA-MBF Countdown Cards Philippines Inc., Amable R. Aguiluz V, Amable C.
Aguiluz IX, Cielo C. Aguiluz, Alberto L. Buenviaje, Vicente Acsay and MCA Holdings and
Management Corporation vs. MBf Card International Limited and MBf Discount Card Limited,
G.R. No. 173586, March 14, 2012
KINDS OF CONTRACTS
SALVADOR A. FERNANDEZ vs. CRISTINA D. AMAGNA
G.R. No. 152614, September 30, 2009, J. Leonardo-De Castro
When the contract of lease does not provide for a definite period for its duration, the lease
shall be considered month to month if the rentals are paid on a monthly basis and when the lessee
fails to pay the monthly rental, the contract of lease shall be considered terminated.
ROLANDO T. CATUNGAL, JOSE T. CATUNGAL, JR., CAROLYN T. CATUNGAL and ERLINDA
CATUNGAL-WESSEL vs. ANGEL S. RODRIGUEZ
G.R. No. 146839, March 23, 2011, J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
This Court has distinguished between a condition imposed on the perfection of a contract
and a condition imposed merely on the performance of an obligation. While failure to comply with
the first condition results in the failure of a contract, failure to comply with the second merely gives
the other party the option to either refuse to proceed with the sale or to waive the condition.
INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS
As mandated by Article 1370 of the Civil Code, if the terms of the contract are clear and leave no
doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulations shall
control. The agreement is clear, plain and simple that it leaves no room for interpretation. It
explicitly provides that for the services of Zamora, as agent under the agreement, Multiwood agreed
to pay her in the amount equivalent to 10% of the face value of the invoice price, covering the letter
of credit or such other instrument representing the actual purchase price for the products sold or
shipped by Multiwood. - Heirs of Deceased Carmen Cruz-Zamora vs. Multiwood International
Inc., G.R. No. 146428, January 19, 2009
DEFECTIVE CONTRACTS
The proper basis for the nullity of the forged pacto de retro sale is Article 1318 of the Civil Code,
which enumerates the essential requisites of a valid contract, and not Article 1409 which
enumerates examples of void contracts in relation to Article 1505 which refers to an unenforceable
contract and is applicable only to goods. - Vicente Manzano, Jr. vs. Marcelino Garcia, G.R. No.
179323, November 28, 2011
Article 1305 of the Civil Code allows contracting parties to establish such stipulation, clauses, terms,
and conditions as they may deem convenient, provided, however, that they are not contrary to law,
morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
Pactum commissorium is among the contractual stipulations that are deemed contrary to law. It is
defined as "a stipulation empowering the creditor to appropriate the thing given as guaranty for the
fulfillment of the obligation in the event the obligor fails to live up to his undertakings, without
further formality, such as foreclosure proceedings, and a public sale." It is explicitly prohibited
under Article 2088 of the Civil Code. - Philnico Industrial Corporation vs. Privatization and
Management Office, G.R. No. 199420, August 27, 2014
RESCISSION OF CONTRACTS
The general rule is that he who alleges fraud or mistake in a transaction must substantiate his
allegation as the presumption is that a person takes ordinary care for his concerns and that private
dealings have been entered into fairly and regularly." One who alleges defect or lack of valid
consent to a contract by reason of fraud or undue influence must establish by full, clear and
convincing evidence such specific acts that vitiated a partys consent, otherwise, the latters
presumed consent to the contract prevails. - Fontana Resort and Country Club, Inc. and RN
Development Corp. vs. Spouses Roy S. Tan and Susan C. Tan, G.R. No. 154670, January 30,
2012
SALES
EXTINGUISHMENT OF SALE
The alleged nullity of the deed of conditional sale because the period of redemption had expired is
wrong. The right of legal redemption must be exercised within specified time limits. However, the
statutory period of redemption can be extended by agreement of the parties. Allowing a
redemption after the lapse of the statutory period, when the buyer at the foreclosure does not
object but even consents to the redemption, will uphold the policy of the law recognized in such
cases as Javellana v. Mirasol and Nuez, and in the more recent case of Tibajia, et al. v. Honorable
Court of Appeals, et al., which is to aid rather than defeat the right of redemption. - Republic of the
Philippines vs. Marawi-Marantao General Hospital Inc, and Atty. Macapanton K.
Mangodadatu, G.R. No. 158920, November 28, 2012
PARTNERSHIP
There is a co-ownership when an undivided thing or right belongs to different persons. It is a
partnership when two or more persons bind themselves to contribute money, property, or industry

to a common fund, with the intention of dividing the profits among themselves. A partner is entitled
only to his share as agreed upon, or in the absence of any such stipulations, then to his share in
proportion to his contribution to the partnership. - Federico Jarantilla, Jr. vs. Antonieta
Jarantilla, Buenaventura Remotigue, substituted by Cynthia Remotigue, Doroteo
Jarantilla and Tomas Jarantilla, G.R. No. 154486, December 1, 2010
AGENCY
Our law mandates an agent to act within the scope of his authority. The scope of an agents
authority is what appears in the written terms of the power of attorney granted upon him. Under
Article 1878(11) of the Civil Code, a special power of attorney is necessary to obligate the principal
as a guarantor or surety. In the case at bar, the principal could be held liable even if the agent
exceeded the scope of his authority only if the agents act of issuing the Surety Bond is deemed to
have been performed within the written terms of the power of attorney he was granted. However,
the Special Power of Attorney accorded to the agent in this case clearly states the limits of his
authority and particularly provides that in case of surety bonds, it can only be issued in favor of the
Department of Public Works and Highways, the National Power Corporation, and other government
agencies. - Country Bankers Insurance Corporation vs. Keppel Cebu Shipyard, Unimarine
Shipping Lines, Inc., Paul Rodriguez, Peter Rodriguez, Albert Hontanosas, and Bethoven
Quinain, G.R. No. 166044, June 18, 2012
TRUST
A trust may have a constructive or implied nature in the beginning, but the registered owners
subsequent express acknowledgement in a public document of a previous sale of the property to
another party, had the effect of imparting to the aforementioned trust the nature of an express
trust. - Maria Torbela, represented by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino et al vs. Spouses Andres T.
Rosario et al, G.R. No. 140528, December 7, 2011
A constructive trust is substantially an appropriate remedy against unjust enrichment. It is raised
by equity in respect of property, which has been acquired by fraud, or where although acquired
originally without fraud, it is against equity that it should be retained by the person holding it. Thus,
the payees, who acquired the retirement benefits under the GSIS RFP, are considered as trustees of
the disallowed amounts, as although they committed no fraud in obtaining these benefits, it is
against equity and good conscience for them to continue holding on to them. Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS), et al. vs. Commission On Audit (COA), Amorsonia B.
Escarda, Ma. Cristina D. Dimagiba, and Reynaldo P. Ventura, G.R. No. 162372, September 11,
2012
CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
LOAN
There is no express trust made if there is no clear and manifest intention to create such. If after
careful scrutiny of the document, it is clear that what was intended was the establishment of a lien

over the subject properties as a form of collateral, then the underlying agreement is a loan, not a
trust. - Philippine National Bank vs. Merelo B. Aznar, et al., G.R. No. 171805, May 30, 2011
REAL MORTGAGE
It has been settled that there is effective registration once the registrant has fulfilled all that is
needed of him for purposes of entry and annotation, so that what is left to be accomplished lies
solely on the register of deeds. As such, an entry of the certificate of sale was validly registered even
if the same was only annotated in the owners transfer certificates of titles. Particularly, the
purchaser in the auction sale cannot be faulted for the impossibility of annotation on the transfer
certificates of title which were supposed to be in the custody of the Registrar of Deeds, like in
instances when the same were previously razed in fire. Neither could such purchaser be blamed for
the fact that there were no reconstituted titles available during the time of inscription as it had
taken the necessary steps in having the same reconstituted but to no avail. Hence, the one-year
period of redemption commences to run from the said annotation and the failure of the mortgagors
to redeem during the said period entitles the purchaser to the writ of possession as a matter of
right. - National Housing Authority vs. Augusto Basa, Jr., Luz Basa and Eduardo S. Basa, G.R.
No. 149121, April 20, 2010
Foreclosure proceedings enjoy the presumption of regularity and that the mortgagor who alleges
absence of a requisite has the burden of proving such fact.
The publication of the notice of sale in the newspaper of general circulation alone is more than
sufficient compliance with the notice posting requirement of the law. By such publication, a
reasonably wide publicity had been effected such that those interested might attend the public sale,
and the purpose of the law had been thereby subserved. - Century Savings Bank vs. Spouses
Danilo T. Samonte and Rosalinda M. Samonte, G.R. No. 176212, October 20, 2010
If the proceeds of the sale are insufficient to cover the debt in an extrajudicial foreclosure of
mortgage, the mortgagee is entitled to claim the deficiency from the debtor. While Act No. 3135, as
amended, does not discuss the mortgagees right to recover the deficiency, neither does it contain
any provision expressly or impliedly prohibiting recovery. - BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. vs. Ma.
Arlyn T. Avenido & Pacifico A. Avenido , G.R. No. 175816, December 7, 2011
Gross inadequacy of price does not nullify an execution sale. In an ordinary sale, for reason of
equity, a transaction may be invalidated on the ground of inadequacy of price, or when such
inadequacy shocks ones conscience as to justify the courts to interfere; such does not follow when
the law gives the owner the right to redeem as when a sale is made at public auction, upon the
theory that the lesser the price, the easier it is for the owner to effect redemption. When there is a
right to redeem, inadequacy of price should not be material because the judgment debtor may reacquire the property or else sell his right to redeem and thus recover any loss he claims to have
suffered by reason of the price obtained at the execution sale. Thus, respondent stood to gain rather
than be harmed by the low sale value of the auctioned properties because it possesses the right of
redemption. - Bank Of The Philippine Islands, as Successor-In-Interest of Far East Bank &
Trust Company vs. Cynthia L. Reyes, G.R. No. 182769, February 1, 2012
While it is true that the annotation of the first mortgage to Villar on Galass TCT contained a
restriction on further encumbrances without the mortgagees prior consent, this restriction was
nowhere to be found in the Deed of Real Estate Mortgage. As this Deed became the basis for the

annotation on Galass title, its terms and conditions take precedence over the standard, stamped
annotation placed on her title. If it were the intention of the parties to impose such restriction, they
would have and should have stipulated such in the Deed of Real Estate Mortgage itself. Moreover,
Villars purchase of the mortgaged property did not violate the prohibition on pactum
commissorium. The power of attorney provision in favor of Villar did not provide that the
ownership over the subject property would automatically pass to Villar upon Galass failure to pay
the loan on time. What it granted was the mere appointment of Villar as attorney-in-fact, with
authority to sell or otherwise dispose of the subject property, and to apply the proceeds to the
payment of the loan. Finally, Villar did not obligate herself to replace the debtor in the principal
obligation upon his buying of the mortgaged property, and could not do so in law without the
creditors consent. Therefore, the obligation to pay the mortgage indebtedness remains with the
original debtors Galas and Pingol. - Pablo P. Garcia vs. Yolanda Valdez Villar, G.R. No. 158891,
June 27, 2012

DRAGNET CLAUSE
As a general rule, a mortgage liability is usually limited to the amount mentioned in the contract.
However, the amounts named as consideration in a contract of mortgage do not limit the amount
for which the mortgage may stand as security if, from the four corners of the instrument, the intent
to secure future and other indebtedness can be gathered. This stipulation is valid and binding
between the parties and is known as the "blanket mortgage clause" also known as the "dragnet
clause. - Ramona Ramos and the Estate of Luis T. Ramos vs. Philippine National Bank, Opal
Portfolio Investments (SPV-AMC), Inc. and Golden Dragon Star Equities, Inc., G.R. No. 178218,
December 14, 2011
JUST COMPENSATION
When the acquisition process under PD 27 remains incomplete and is overtaken by RA 6657, the
process should be completed under RA 6657, with PD 27 and EO 228 having suppletory effect only.
This means that PD 27 applies only insofar as there are gaps in RA 6657; where RA 6657 is
sufficient, PD 27 is superseded.
Moreover, the Court has allowed the grant of interest in expropriation cases where there is delay in
the payment of just compensation. In fact, the interest imposed in case of delay in payments in
agrarian cases is 12% per annum and not 6% as "the imposition x x x is in the nature of damages for
delay in payment which in effect makes the obligation on the part of the government one of
forbearance."
Finally, the constitutional limitation of "just compensation" is considered to be the sum equivalent
to the market value of the property, broadly described to be the price fixed by the seller in open
market in the usual and ordinary course of legal action and competition or the fair value of the
property as between one who receives, and one who desires to sell, if fixed at the time of the actual
taking by the government. Thus, if property is taken for public use before compensation is
deposited with the court having jurisdiction over the case , the final compensation must include
interest on its just value to be computed from the time the property is taken to the time when
compensation is actually paid or deposited with the court. In fine, between the taking of the
property and the actual payment, legal interests accrue in order to place the owner in a position as
good as (but not better than) the position he was in before the taking occurred. - Land Bank of the
Philippines vs. Emiliano R. Santiago, Jr., G.R. No. 182209, October 3, 2012
LEASE
LEASE OF RURAL AND URBAN LANDS
The well-entrenched principle is that a lease from month-to-month is with a definite period and
expires at the end of each month upon the demand to vacate by the lessor.
The subsequent acceptance by the lessor of rental payments does not, absent any circumstance that
may dictate a contrary conclusion, legitimize the unlawful character of their possession. - Cebu
Bionic Builders Supply, Inc. and Lydia Sia vs. Development Bank of the Philippines, Jose To
Chip, Patricio Yap and Roger Balila, G.R. No. 154366, November 17, 2010
In case the lessee chooses to renew the lease but there are no specified terms and conditions for the
new contract of lease, the same terms and conditions as the original contract of lease shall continue
to govern. - Manila International Airport Authority vs. Ding Velayo Sports Center, Inc , G.R. No.
161718, December 14, 2011
LAND TITLES AND DEEDS
JURISDICTION
It is well-settled that the DAR, through its adjudication arm, i.e., the DARAB and its regional and
provincial adjudication boards, exercises quasi-judicial functions and jurisdiction on all matters
pertaining to an agrarian dispute or controversy and the implementation of agrarian reform laws.
Pertinently, it is provided in the DARAB Revised Rules of Procedure that the DARAB has primary
and exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate, to determine and adjudicate all agrarian
disputes involving the implementation of the CARP and related agrarian reform laws. Such
jurisdiction shall extend to cases involving the issuance, correction and cancellation of Certificates
of Land Ownership Award (CLOAs) and Emancipation Patents which are registered with the Land
Registration Authority. - Pedro Gabriel et. al. vs. Murmuray Jamias et. al., G.R. No. 156482,
September 17, 2008
It is a basic rule that jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint. The peitioners
complaints did not contain any allegation that would, even in the slightest, imply that the issue to be
resolved in this case involved an agrarian dispute which would transfer the jurisdiction to
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB). In the action filed by the petitioner,
the issue to be resolved was who between the petitioner and the private respondents and their
purported predecessors-in-interest, have a valid title over the subject properties in light of the
relevant facts and applicable laws. The case thus involves a controversy relating to the ownership
of the subject properties, which is beyond the scope of the phrase "agrarian dispute." The
jurisdiction must then belong to the Regional Trial Court. - Bases Conversion Development
Authority vs. Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer of Pampanga, Register of Deeds of Angeles
City, Benjamin Poy Lorenzo, Lavernie Poy Lorenzo, Diosdado De Guzman, Rosemary Eng Tay
Tan, Leandro De Guzman, Benjamin G. Lorenzo, Antonio Manalo, and Socorro De Guzman,
G.R. Nos. 155322-29, June 27, 2012

TORRENS SYSTEM
Banks, their business being impressed with public interest, are expected to exercise more care and
prudence than private individuals in their dealings, even those involving registered lands. The rule
that persons dealing with registered lands can rely solely on the certificate of title does not apply to
banks. - Philippine Trust Company (also known as Philtrust Bank) vs. Hon. Court of Appeals
and Forfom Development Corporation, G.R. No. 150318, November 22, 2010
Banco Filipino is not an ordinary mortgagee, but is a mortgagee-bank, whose business is impressed
with public interest. A banking institution is expected to exercise due diligence before entering into
a mortgage contract. The ascertainment of the status or condition of a property offered to it as
security for a loan must be a standard and indispensable part of its operations. - Maria Torbela,
represented by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino et al vs. Spouses Andres T. Rosario et al, G.R. No.
140528, December 7, 2011
Under the Regalian doctrine embodied in our Constitution, land that has not been acquired from the
government, either by purchase, grant, or any other mode recognized by law, belongs to the State as
part of the public domain. Thus, it is indispensable for a person claiming title to a public land to
show that his title was acquired through such means
It is not enough for the PENRO or CENRO to certify that a land is alienable and disposable. The
applicant for land registration must prove that the DENR Secretary had approved the land
classification and released the land of the public domain as alienable and disposable, and that the
land subject of the application for registration falls within the approved area per verification
through survey by the PENRO or CENRO. In addition, the applicant for land registration must
present a copy of the original classification approved by the DENR Secretary and certified as a true
copy by the legal custodian of the official records. These facts must be established to prove that the
land is alienable and disposable. - Republic of the Philippines vs. Gloria Jaralve substituted
Alan Jess Jaralve Documento, Jr., Edgardo Jaralve, Serafin Uy, Jr., Shella Uy, Lagnada, Say AAng, International Nimfa Pantaleon Starg Lad and Development Corporation, Annie Tan,
Teotimo Cabarrubias, Jessica Daclan, Ma. Emma Ramas, Danilo Deen, and Eric Anthony Deen,
G.R. No. 175177, October 24, 2012
The real purpose of the Torrens system is to quiet title to land and to stop forever any question as
to its legality A Torrens title is generally a conclusive evidence of the ownership of the land
referred to therein.
Section 48 of Presidential Decree No. 1529, otherwise known as the Property Registration Decree,
explicitly provides that [a] certificate of title shall not be subject to collateral attack. It cannot be
altered, modified, or cancelled except in a direct proceeding in accordance with law. - Deogenes O.
Rodriguez vs. Hon. Court of Appeals and Philippine Chinese Charitable Association, Inc., G.R.
No. 184589, June 13, 2013
REGISTRATION
Current doctrine thus seems to be that entry alone produces the effect of registration, whether the
transaction entered is a voluntary or an involuntary one, so long as the registrant has complied
with all that is required of him for purposes of entry and annotation, and nothing more remains to

be done but a duty incumbent solely on the register of deeds. - Durawood Construction and
Lumber Supply, Inc. vs. Candice S. Bona, G.R. No. 179884, January 25, 2012
The Supreme Court had allowed substantial compliance with the requirement that an applicant for
land registration must prove that the DENR Secretary had approved the land classification and
released the land as alienable and disposable and was lenient with the application of the rule that a
CENRO Certification, by itself does not prove that the land is alienable and disposable. However,
such substantial compliance and leniency will not be allowed where the Land Registration
Authority (LRA) or the DENR oppose the application on the ground that the land subject thereof is
inalienable. - Republic of the Philippines vs. Lydia Capco De Tensuan, represented by Claudia
C. Aruelo, G.R. No. 171136, October 23, 2013
A party claiming ownership over a parcel of land cannot bank on the weakness and defects of the
title of the adverse party but rely on the strength of his claim. - CLT Realty Development
Corporation vs. Phil-Ville Development and Housing Corporation, Republic Of The
Philippines (through the OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL), and the Register of Deeds of
Metro Manila District III, Caloocan, G .R. No. 160728, March 11, 2015
1. The buyer of the property does not automatically becomes a party to the land registration case
after complying with the requirements of Sec. 22 of P.D 1529.
2. Section 108 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 authorizes a person having interest in a registered
property to ask for the amendment and alteration of a certificate of title or the entry of a new
certificate if "new interests not appearing upon the certificate have arisen or been created," "an
omission or error was made in entering a certificate or any memorandum thereon," or "upon any
other reasonable ground." - The Heirs of Eugenio Lopez, Sr. namely, Oscar M. Lopez, Manuel M.
Lopez and Presentacion L. Psinakis vs. The Honorable Francisco Querubin, In His Capacity As
Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Antipolo, Branch 74, The Heirs of Alfonso
Sandoval and his wife Rosa Ruiz, represented by their Attorney-In-Fact, Mrs. Imelda Rivera
G.R. No. 155405, March 18, 2015
The ministerial duty of the land registration court to issue a writ of possession ceases with respect
to actual possessors of the property under a claim of ownership. Heirs of Eugenio Lopez vs.
Alfonso Sandoval and Roman Ozaeta, Jr., G.R. No. 164092, March 18, 2015
Although the NCIP has the authority to issue temporary restraining orders and writs of injunction,
it was not convinced that private respondents were entitled to the relief granted by the
Commission. Proclamation No. 15 does not appear to be a definitive recognition of private
respondents ancestral land claim, as it merely identifies the Molintas and Gumangan families
as claimants of a portion of the Busol Forest Reservation, but does not acknowledge vested rights
over the same. Since it is required before the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction that
claimants show the existence of a right to be protected, this Court, previously, ultimately granted
the petition of the City Government of Baguio and set aside the writ of preliminary injunction
issued therein applying stare decisis. - The Baguio Regreening Movement, Inc. vs. Atty. Brain
Masweng G.R. No. 180882, February 27, 2013
INNOCENT PURCHASER FOR VALUE

The law does not require a person dealing with the owner of registered land to go beyond the
certificate of title as he may rely on the notices of the encumbrances on the property annotated on
the certificate of title or absence of any annotation. Here, petitioners adverse claim is annotated at
the back of the title coupled with the fact that they are in possession of the disputed property. To
[the Court], these circumstances should have put respondents on guard and required them to
ascertain the property being offered to them has already been sold to another to prevent injury to
prior innocent buyers. A person who deliberately ignores a significant fact which would create
suspicion in an otherwise reasonable man is not an innocent purchaser for value. It is a well-settled
rule that a purchaser cannot close his eyes to facts which should put a reasonable man upon his
guard, and then claim that he acted in good faith under the belief that there was no defect in the
title of the vendor. - Spouses Jesus Ching and Lee Poe Tin vs. Spouses Adolfo and Arsenia
Enrile, G.R. No. 156076, September 17, 2008
One can sell only what one owns or is authorized to sell, and the buyer can acquire no more right
than what the seller can transfer legally.
A person dealing with registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens certificate of title and to
dispense with the need of inquiring further except when the party has actual knowledge of facts
and circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious man to make such inquiry or when the
purchaser has knowledge of a defect or the lack of title in his vendor or of sufficient facts to induce a
reasonably prudent man to inquire into the status of the title of the property in litigation. Adoracion Rosales Rufloe, Alfredo Rufloe and Rodrigo Rufloe vs. Leonarda Burgos, Anita
Burgos, Angelito Burgos, Amy Burgos, Elvira Delos Reyes and Julian C. Tubig, G.R. No.
143573, January 30, 2009
It is a well-settled doctrine that one who deals with property registered under the Torrens system
need not go beyond the same, but only has to rely on the certificates of title, he is charged with
notice only of such burdens and claims as are annotated on the certificates. But, a buyer of real
property in possession of persons other than the seller must be wary and should investigate the
rights of those in possession, for without such inquiry the buyer can hardly be regarded as a buyer
in good faith and cannot have any right over the property.
A purchaser in good faith is one who buys property without notice that some other person has a
right to or interest in such property and pays its fair price before he has notice of the adverse claims
and interest of another person in the same property.
Laches is defined as the failure to assert a right for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time,
warranting a presumption that the party entitled to assert it has either abandoned or declined to
assert it. - The Heirs of Romana Saves, et al. vs. The Heirs of Escolastico Saves, et al., G.R. No.
152866, October 6, 2010
REMEDIES
Since the indefeasibility of a title does not attach to titles secured by fraud and misrepresentation, it
was as if no title at all was ever issued in this case to the petitioner and therefore this is hardly the
occasion to talk of collateral attack against a title. - Gregorio Araneta University Foundation vs.
The Regional Trial Court of Kalookan City, G.R. No. 139672, March 4, 2009

The general rule is that in the case of two certificates of title, purporting to include the same land,
the earlier in date prevails. Applying the principle Primus Tempore, Portior Jure (First in Time,
Stronger in Right), it was found that ALIs title was the valid one having been derived from the
earlier OCT. - Spouses Morris Carpo and Socorro Carpo vs. Ayala Land, Incorporated, G.R. No.
166577, February 3, 2010
An action for declaration of nullity of title and recovery of ownership of real property, or reconveyance, is a real action but it is an action in personam, for it binds a particular individual only
although it concerns the right to a tangible thing. Any judgment therein is binding only upon the
parties properly impleaded. The effect of the said judgment cannot be extended to BPI Family and
the spouses Chan by simply issuing an alias writ of execution against them. No man shall be affected
by any proceeding to which he is a stranger, and strangers to a case are not bound by any judgment
rendered by the court. In the same manner, a writ of execution can be issued only against a party
and not against one who did not have his day in court. - Emerita Muoz vs. Atty. Victoriano R.
Yabut, Jr. and Samuel Go Chan, G.R. No. 142676, June 6, 2011
The rights and claims vested by virtue of a decision of the Cadastral Court, adjudicating said lot to
different persons which was never implemented nor executed despite the lapse of more than thirty
years cannot prescribed for failure to fully execute the same. And an action for reconveyance of
registered land based on implied trust prescribes in ten years, the point of reference being the date
of registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of title over the property,
however, the ten-year prescriptive period applies only when the person enforcing the trust is not in
possession of the property. - Jose Fernando, Jr., Zoilo Fernando, Norma Fernando Banares,
Rosario Fernando Tangkencgo, Heirs of Tomas Fernando, represented by Alfredo V.
Fernando, Heirs of Guillermo Fernando, represented by Ronnie H. Fernando, Heirs of
Iluminada Fernando, represented by Benjamin Estrella and Heirs of Germogena Fernando
vs. Leon Acuna, Hermogenes Fernando, Heirs Of Spouses Antonio Fernando and Felisa
Camacho, represented by Hermogenes Fernando, G.R. No. 161030, September 14, 2011
As correctly pointed out by petitioner, we had emphasized in Republic v. Holazo that the term any
other document in paragraph (f) refers to reliable documents of the kind described in the
preceding enumerations and that the documents referred to in Section 2(f) may be resorted to only
in the absence of the preceding documents in the list. Therefore, the party praying for the
reconstitution of a title must show that he had, in fact, sought to secure such documents and failed
to find them before presentation of other documents as evidence in substitution is allowed. Thus,
we stated in Holazo that When Rep. Act No. 26, Section 2(f), or 3(f) for that matter, speaks of any
other document, it must refer to similar documents previously enumerated therein or documents
ejusdem generis as the documents earlier referred to. The documents alluded to in Section 3(f)
must be resorted to in the absence of those preceding in order the petitioner for reconstitution fails
to show that he had, in fact, sought to secure such prior documents (except with respect to the
owners duplicate copy of the title which it claims had been, likewise, destroyed) and failed to find
them, the presentation of the succeeding documents as substitutionary evidence is proscribed.
Republic of the Philippines vs. Conception Lorenzo, et al., G.R. No. 172338, November 10,
2012
NOTE: Registration of patents is Excluded from the 2015 Bar Examinations
A certificate of title issued pursuant to a homestead patent becomes indefeasible after one year, is
subject to the proviso that the land covered by said certificate is a disposable public land within

the contemplation of the Public Land Law. In this case, the subject property is part of the
Matchwood Forest Reserve and is inalienable and not subject to disposition. Being contrary to the
Public Land Law, the Homestead Patent and OCT issued in respondents name are void; and the
right of petitioner Republic to seek cancellation of such void patent/title and reversion of the
subject property to the State is imprescriptible. - Republic of the Philippines Bureau Of Forest
Development vs. Vicente Roxas and the Register of Deeds of Oriental Mindoro, G.R. No.
157988, December 11, 2013
PRESCRIPTION
When the plaintiff in such action is not in possession of the subject property, the action prescribes
in ten years from the date of registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of
title over the property. When the plaintiff is in possession of the subject property, the action, being
in effect that of quieting of title to the property, does not prescribe. - Heirs Of Domingo Valientes
vs. Hon. Reinerio (Abraham) B. Ramas, Acting Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 29, 9th Judicial
Region, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur and Vilma V. Minor, G.R. No. 157852, December 15,
2010
PUBLIC LAND ACT
The ultimate objective of the law is "to promote public policy, that is, to provide home and decent
living for destitutes, aimed at providing a class of independent small landholders which is the
bulwark of peace and order. - Barceliza P. Capistrano vs. Darryl Limcuando and Fe S. Sumiran,
G.R. No. 152413, February 13, 2009
Nowhere in Commonwealth Act No. 141 does it say that the right to repurchase under Section 119
thereof could not be extended by mutual agreement of the parties involved. Neither would
extending the period in Section 119 be against public policy as the evident purpose of the Public
Land Act, especially the provisions thereof in relation to homesteads, is to conserve ownership of
lands acquired as homesteads in the homesteader or his heirs. - Rodolfo Morla vs. Corazon
Nisperos Belmonte, et al., G.R. No. 171146, December 7, 2011
In the present case, it is settled that Homestead Patent was issued to Gerardo on January 12, 1951
and the Absolute Deed of Sale between Gerardo and Juan was executed on July 10, 1951, after a
lapse of only six months. Irrefragably, the alienation of the subject properties took place within the
five-year prohibitory period under Section 118 of the Public Land Act, as amended as such, the sale
by Gerardo to Juan is null and void right from the very start. As a void contract, the Absolute Deed
of Sale dated July 10, 1951 produces no legal effect whatsoever in accordance with the principle
quod nullum est nullum producit effectum, thus, it could not have transferred title to the subject
properties from Gerardo to Juan and there could be no basis for the issuance of TCT in Juans name.
A void contract is also not susceptible of ratification, and the action for the declaration of the
absolute nullity of such a contract is imprescriptible. To reiterate, Section 118 of the Public Land
Act, as amended, reads that, except in favor of the Government or any of its branches, units, or
institutions, or legally constituted banking corporations, lands acquired under free patent or
homestead provisions shall not be subject to encumbrance or alienation from the date of the
approval of the application and for a term of five years from and after the date of issuance of the
patent or grant. The provisions of law are clear and explicit. A contract which purports to alienate,
transfer, convey, or encumber an homestead within the prohibitory period of five years from the
date of the issuance of the patent is void from its execution. In a number of cases, this Court has

held that such provision is mandatory. Alejandro Binayug and Ana Binayug vs. Eugenio
Ugaddan, et al., G.R. No. 181623, December 5, 2012
TENANCY
While a tenant is not required to be physically present in the land at all hours of the day and night,
such doctrine cannot be stretched to apply to a case wherein the supposed tenant has chosen to
reside in another place so far from the land to be cultivated that it would be physically impossible
to be present therein with some degree of constancy as to allow the tenant to cultivate the same. Leonardo Tarona, Eugenia Tarona, Nita Tarona, Luis Tarona, Rosalinda Tarona, Apolonia
Tarona, Carlos Tarona, Lourdes Tarona and Rogelio Tarona vs. Court of Appeals (Ninth
Division), Gay T. Leao, Lemuel T. Leao, Noel T. Leao, Jedd Anthony Leao Cuison and
Jason Anthony Leao Cuison, G.R. No. 170182, June 18, 2009
TORTS AND DAMAGES
TORTFEASOR
When the proximate cause of the accident is the lack of the due care and prudence of the deceased,
the doctrine of vicarious liability will not apply. Absent any showing that the employer failed to
exercise due care and diligence in the selection and supervision of its employees, liability will not
attach to it. - Vallacar Transit vs. Jocelyn Catubig, G.R. No. 175512, May 30, 2011
MORAL DAMAGES
Moral damages are awarded to rape victims without need of proof other than the fact of rape under
the assumption that the victim suffered moral injuries from the experience she underwent. On the
other hand, when a crime is committed with an aggravating circumstance either as qualifying or
generic, an award of exemplary damages is justified under Article 2230 of the New Civil Code. People of the Philippines vs. Roger Tejero, G.R. No. 187744, June 20, 2012
EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE DAMAGES
The award of exemplary damages is justified if an aggravating circumstance, either qualifying or
generic, accompanies the crime. In the case at bar, the qualifying circumstance of evident
premeditation was duly alleged in the Information and proved during the trial. Therefore, the trial
court's award of the amount of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages to heirs of the victim, must be
reinstated. - People of the Philippines vs. Gary Alinao, G.R. No. 191256, September 18, 2013
ATTORNEYS FEES
The stipulation on attorneys fees contained in the said Promissory Note constitutes what is known
as a penal clause. A penalty clause, expressly recognized by law, is an accessory undertaking to
assume greater liability on the part of the obligor in case of breach of an obligation. The obligor
would then be bound to pay the stipulated indemnity without the necessity of proof on the
existence and on the measure of damages caused by the breach. It is well-settled that so long as
such stipulation does not contravene law, morals, or public order, it is strictly binding upon the
obligor. The attorneys fees so provided are awarded in favor of the litigant, not his counsel. It is

improper for both the RTC and the CA to increase the award of attorneys fees despite the express
stipulation contained in the said Promissory Note since it is not intended to be compensation for
respondents counsel but was rather in the nature of a penalty or liquidated damages. Soledad Leonor Pea Suatengco and Antonio Esteban Suatengco vs. Carmencita O. Reyes, G.R.
No. 162729, December 17, 2008
While the body of the Decision quoted the agreement of the parties stating the compensation as
20% contingent fee computed on the value to be recovered by favorable judgment on the cases. It is
basic that when there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or fallo of a Decision and the
opinion of the court contained in the text or body of the judgment, the former prevails over the
latter. This rule rests on the theory that the fallo is the final order while the opinion in the body is
merely a statement ordering nothing. - The Law Firm of Raymundo A. Armovit vs. Court of
Appeals and Bengson Commercial Building, Inc., G.R. No. 154559, October 5, 2011
Both the RTC and the Court of Appeals held DBP liable for attorneys fees and costs of suit because
said courts believed that DBP should have been more aggressive in pursuing its claim against
Central. In the absence of stipulation, attorneys fees may be recovered as actual or compensatory
damages under any of the circumstances provided for in Article 2208 of the Civil Code. Even if it
were true that DBP had a hand in the transfer of Traverses insurance coverage to Central, such act
is not sufficient to hold it solidarily liable with Central for the payment of attorneys fees and cost of
litigation under the above provision of the Civil Code. - Development Bank of the Philippines vs.
Traverse Development Corporation and Central Surety and Insurance Company, G.R. No.
169293, October 5, 2011
GRADUATION OF DAMAGES
The increase in the award of damages is predicated on the qualifying circumstances present in the
case and not on the penalty imposed. In case of moral damages, it need not be alleged and proved
as the emotional suffering of the heirs from the vicious killing of the victim cannot be denied. As
to the loss of earning capacity, the same need not be proved, as an exception, when the victim is
self-employed and earning less than the minimum wage under current labor laws or when
employed as a daily wage worker earning less than the minimum wage under current labor laws.
- People of the Philippines vs. Arnold Garchitorena Y Camba A.K.A. Junior; Joey Pamplona
A.K.A. Nato and Jessie Garcia Y Adorino, G. R. No. 175605, August 28, 2009
In criminal cases, the basis of the increase in the award of damages is the heinousness of the offense
and does not depend on the penalty that the convict shall suffer, therefore, the existence of the
mitigating circumstance of minority shall not produce the effect of reduction of damages. - People
of the Philippines vs. Richard O. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641, September 10, 2009
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF TAXATION
(Constitutional Limitations)
It is already well-settled that although the power to tax is inherent in the State, the same is not true
for the LGUs to whom the power must be delegated by Congress and must be exercised within the
guidelines and limitations that Congress may provide. In the case at bar, the sanggunian of the
municipality or city cannot enact an ordinance imposing business tax on the gross receipts of
transportation contractors, persons engaged in the transportation of passengers or freight by hire,
and common carriers by air, land, or water, when said sanggunian was already specifically
prohibited from doing so. Any exception to the express prohibition under Section 133(j) of the LGC
should be just as specific and unambiguous. Section 21(B) of the Manila Revenue Code, as amended,
is null and void for being beyond the power of the City of Manila and its public officials to enact,
approve, and implement under the LGC. - City of Manila, Hon. Alfredo S. Lim, as Mayor of the
City of Manila, et al. vs. Hon. Angel Valera Colet, as Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court of
Manila (Br. 43), et al., G.R. No. 120051, December 10, 2014
TAX CREDIT OR REFUND
The tax burden for an indirect tax may be shifted to another. However, the tax liability remains with
the statutory taxpayer. As such, it is the statutory taxpayer who is the proper party to question, or
claim a refund or tax credit of an indirect tax. - Silkair (Singapore) PTE. Ltd., vs. Commissioner
of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 184398, February 25, 2010
Under the old rule, whether a PEZA-registered enterprise was exempt or subject to VAT depended
on the type of fiscal incentives availed of by the said enterprise. If the PEZA-registered enterprise is
paying the 5% preferential tax in lieu of all other taxes, it cannot claim tax credit/refund for the
VAT paid on purchases. Conversely, if the taxpayer is availing of the income tax holiday, it can claim
VAT credit. However, upon the issuance by the BIR of RMC No. 74-99 on October 15, 1999, the
Cross Border Doctrine was clearly established. In effect, PEZA-registered enterprises are VATexempt and no VAT can be passed on to them. Thus, any sale by a supplier from the Customs
Territory to a PEZA-registered enterprise as export sale should not be burdened by output VAT;
hence, it is now impossible to claim for a tax credit/refund. - Toshiba Information Equipment
(Phils.), Inc. vs. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 157594, March 9, 2010
MERGER OR CONSOLIDATION OF CORPORATIONS
When the BIR had ruled that a purchase and sale agreement between two banks did not result in
their merger, and that the CIR had previously ruled that the same two banks are not merged, the
buyer bank is not liable for the deficiency DST of the seller bank. - Commissioner of Internal
Revenue vs. Bank of Commerce, G.R. No. 180529, November 13, 2013
DISSOLUTION OF A CORPORATION
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas placed Rural Bank of Tuba (RBTI) under receivership with the
Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation as the receiver. Accordingly, PDIC filed a petition for
assistance in the liquidation of RBTI which was approved by the trial court. As an incident of the
proceeding, BIR intervened as one of the creditors of RBTI. BIR contends that a tax clearance is
required before the approval of project of distribution of the assets of a bank. In denying their
contention, the Court held that Section 52(C) of the Tax Code of 1997 is not applicable to banks

ordered placed under liquidation by the Monetary Board, and a tax clearance is not a prerequisite
to the approval of the project of distribution of the assets of a bank under liquidation by the PDIC. Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation vs. Bureau Of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 172892,
June 13, 2013
VAT (Transitional Input Tax)
The BIR cannot issue a revenue regulation contrary to what the NIRC provides such when the said
regulation limits the coverage of the provision in the NIRC. Such revenue regulation shall not
produce any effect and cannot be source of any right. - Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation
vs. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, Regional Director, Revenue Region No. 8, and Chief
Assessment Division, Revenue Region No. 8, G.R. No. 158885, October 2, 2009
Section 112(A) and (C) must be interpreted according to its clear, plain, and unequivocal language.
The taxpayer can file his administrative claim for refund or credit at anytime within the two-year
prescriptive period. If he files his claim on the last day of the two-year prescriptive period, his claim
is still filed on time. The Commissioner will have 120 days from such filing to decide the claim. If the
Commissioner decides the claim on the 120th day, or does not decide it on that day, the taxpayer
still has 30 days to file his judicial claim with the CTA. This is not only the plain meaning but also
the only logical interpretation of Section 112(A) and (C). - San Roque Power Corporation vs.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 205543, June 30, 2014
The Court has consolidated these 3 petitions as they involve the same parties, similar facts and
common questions of law. This is not the first time that Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation
(FBDC) has come to this Court about these issues against the very same respondents (CIR), and the
Court En Banc has resolved them in two separate, recent cases that are applicable here. It is of
course axiomatic that a rule or regulation must bear upon, and be consistent with, the provisions of
the enabling statute if such rule or regulation is to be valid. In case of conflict between a statute and
an administrative order, the former must prevail. To be valid, an administrative rule or regulation
must conform, not contradict, the provisions of the enabling law. An implementing rule or
regulation cannot modify, expand, or subtract from the law it is intended to implement. Any rule
that is not consistent with the statute itself is null and void. To recapitulate, RR 7-95, insofar as it
restricts the definition of "goods" as basis of transitional input tax credit under Section 105 is a
nullity. - Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue and
Revenue District Officer, Revenue District No. 44, Taguig and Pateros, Bureau of Internal
Revenue, G.R. No. 175707, November 19, 2014
For failure of Silicon to comply with the provisions of Section 112(C) of the NIRC, its judicial claims
for tax refund or credit should have been dismissed by the CTA for lack of jurisdiction. The Court
stresses that the 120/30-day prescriptive periods are mandatory and jurisdictional, and are not
mere technical requirements. - Silicon Philippines, Inc. (Formerly Intel Philippines
Manufacturing, Inc.) vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 173241, March 25, 2015
DOCUMENTARY STAMPS TAX
JEC contented that it overpaid documentary stamp tax but the court ruled that it failed to prove
such contention. A documentary stamp tax is in the nature of an excise tax. It is not imposed upon
the business transacted but is an excise upon the privilege, opportunity or facility offered at
exchanges for the transaction of the business. It is an excise upon the facilities used in the

transaction of the business separate and apart from the business itself. Documentary stamp taxes
are levied on the exercise by persons of certain privileges conferred by law for the creation,
revision, or termination of specific legal relationships through the execution of specific instruments.
- Jaka Investments Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 147629, July
28, 2010
Documentary stamp tax is a tax on documents, instruments, loan agreements, and papers
evidencing the acceptance, assignment, sale or transfer of an obligation, right or property incident
thereto. It is in the nature of an excise tax because it is imposed upon the privilege, opportunity or
facility offered at exchanges for the transaction of the business. It is an excise upon the facilities
used in the transaction of the business distinct and separate from the business itself. Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Manila Bankers' Life Insurance Corporation, G.R. No.
169103, March 16, 2011
An electronic message containing instructions to debit their respective local or foreign currency
accounts in the Philippines and pay a certain named recipient also residing in the Philippines is not
transaction contemplated under Section 181 of the Tax Code. They are also not bills of exchange
due to their non-negotiability. Hence, they are not subject to DST. - The Hongkong and Shanghai
Banking Corporation Limited-Philippine Branches vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,
G.R. No. 166018 & 167728, June 4, 2014
JUDICIAL REMEDIES
The appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) is not limited to cases which involve
decisions of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) on matters relating to assessments or
refunds. The issue of prescription of the Bureau of Internal Revenues (BIRs) right to collect taxes
may be considered as covered by the term other matters over which the Court of Tax Appeals
(CTA) has appellate jurisdiction.
Requisites before the Period to Enforce Collection may be Suspended (a) that the taxpayer
requests for reinvestigation, and (b) that petitioner grants such request. - Commissioner of
Internal Revenue vs. Hambrecht & Quist Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 169225, November 17,
2010
PNB has not demonstrated any cogent reason for the SC to take an exception and excuse PNBs
blatant disregard of the basic procedural rules in a petition for review. Furthermore, the timely
perfection of an appeal is a mandatory requirement. One cannot escape the rigid observance of this
rule by claiming oversight, or in this case, lack of foresight. Neither can it be trifled with as a mere
technicality to suit the interest of a party. Verily, the periods for filing petitions for review and for
certiorari are to be observed religiously. Just as the losing party has the privilege to file an appeal
within the prescribed period, so does the winner have the right to enjoy the finality of the decision.
- Philippine National Bank vs. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 172458,
December 14, 2011
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

BOOK 1 (Articles 1-99, RPC)
FELONIES
(Stages of execution)
The Court cannot simply assume that there was attempted rape simply because accused undressed
himself and the offended party, plus the fact that accused did rape the latter on three other
occasions. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape, the accused must have commenced the act of
penetrating his sexual organ to the vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than
his own spontaneous desistance, the penetration, however slight, is not completed. - People of the
Philippines vs. Domingo Dominguez, Jr., alias Sandy, G.R. No. 180914, November 24, 2010
The crime of robbery remained unconsummated because Elmer Lagdaan refused to give his money
to Joseph Barra and no personal property was shown to have been taken. It was for this reason that
Elmer Lagdaan was shot. Joseph Barra can only be found guilty of attempted robbery with
homicide. People of the Philippines vs. Joseph Barra, G.R. No. 198020, July 10, 2013
CONSPIRACY
Acts of conspiracy of each accused need not be directly proved as it can be inferred from the acts
of the accused prior to, during or subsequent to the incident. What is material is that the actions
of the accused pertain to a joint purpose, concert of action or community of interest in conspiracy
an act one is the act of all. - People of the Philippines vs. Arnold Garchitorena y Camba A.K.A.
Junior; Joey Pamplona A.K.A. Nato and Jessie Garcia y Adorino, G. R. No. 175605, August 28,
2009
Conspiracy is always predominantly mental in composition because it consists primarily of a
meeting of minds and intent. It is present when the accused by their acts aimed at the same object,
one performing one part and another performing another so as to complete it with a view to the
attainment of the same object, and their acts though apparently independent were in fact concerted
and cooperative, indicating closeness of personal association, concerted action and concurrence of
sentiments. Clearly, it is attendant in circumstances when there was concerted action between the
accused-appellants before, during and after the offense which ably demonstrated their unity of
design and objective in successfully committing the crime. - People of the Philippines vs. Joseph
Serrano and Anthony Serrano, G.R. No. 179038, May 6, 2010
Neither can the rapid turn of events be considered to negate a finding of conspiracy. Unlike evident
premeditation, there is no requirement for conspiracy to exist that there be a sufficient period of
time to elapse to afford full opportunity for meditation and reflection. Instead, conspiracy arises on
the very moment the plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the subject felony. - People
of the Philippines vs. Restituto Carandang, Henry Milan and Jackman Chua, G.R. No. 175926,
July 6, 2011
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. While it is mandatory to prove it by competent evidence, direct
proof is not essential to show conspiracy it may be deduced from the mode, method, and manner
by which the offense was perpetrated, or inferred from the acts of the accused themselves when
such acts point to a joint purpose and design, concerted action and community of interest. The mere

circumstance that accused did not personally perform all the acts necessary to consummate the
crime is irrelevant when conspiracy is proven, since in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. People of the Philippines vs. Allan Niegas y Fallore, G.R. No. 194582, November 27, 2013
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
It is well settled that unlawful aggression presupposes actual, sudden, unexpected or imminent
dangernot merely threatening and intimidating action. Thus, unless the victim has committed
unlawful aggression against the other, there can be no selfdefense on the part of the latter. Severino David, Jr. y Echane and Timoteo Gianan vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No.
136037, August 13, 2008
When self-defense is invoked by an accused, the three (3) elements of self-defense, namely: (a)
unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (b) reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the aggression; and (c) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself, must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
In conspiracy, it does not matter who inflicted the mortal wound, as the act of one is the act of all,
and each incurs the same criminal liability. - People of the Philippines vs. Ramon Regalario,
Marciano Regalario, Sotero Regalario, Bienvenido Regalario and Noel Regalario, G.R. No.
174483, March 31, 2009
A person who invokes self-defense has the burden of proof. He must prove all the elements of selfdefense. However, the most important of all the elements is unlawful aggression on the part of the
victim.
Moreover, factual findings of the trial court as regards its assessment of the witnesses credibility
are entitled to great weight and respect particularly when the Court of Appeals affirms the said
findings, and will not be disturbed absent any showing that the trial court overlooked certain facts
and circumstances which could substantially affect the outcome of the case. It is the trial judge who
had the opportunity to observe the witnesses demeanor and deportment on the stand, and the
manner in which they gave their testimonies. The trial judge therefore is in a better position to
determine the veracity of the witnesses testimony. - People of the Philippines vs. Efren Laurio y
Rosales, G.R No. 182523, September 13, 2012
Self-defense, under Article 11, paragraph 1, and accident, under Article 12, paragraph 4 of the
Revised Penal Code, are affirmative defenses which the accused is burdened to prove, with clear
and convincing evidence. Such affirmative defenses involve questions of facts adduced to the trial
and appellate courts for resolution. By admitting killing the victim in self-defense or by accident
without fault or without intention of causing it, the burden is shifted to the accused to prove such
affirmative defenses. He should rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the weakness of
that of the prosecution. If the accused fails to prove his affirmative defense, he can no longer be
acquitted. - People of the Philippines vs. Marcial Malicdem, G.R. No. 184601, November 12,
2012
Under paragraph 4, Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, to successfully invoke avoidance of
greater evil as a justifying circumstance, the following requisites should be complied with: (1) the
evil sought to be avoided actually exists (2) the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it

and (3) there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. Moreover, Punzalan
failed to satisfy the third requisite that there be no other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it. Under paragraph 4, Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, infliction of damage or
injury to another so that a greater evil or injury may not befall ones self may be justified only if it is
taken as a last resort and with the least possible prejudice to another. If there is another way to
avoid the injury without causing damage or injury to another or, if there is no such other way but
the damage to another may be minimized while avoiding an evil or injury to ones self, then such
course should be taken. - People of the Philippines vs. Arturo Punzalan, Jr., G.R. No. 199892,
December 10, 2012
A person who invokes self-defense has the burden of proof. He must prove all the elements of selfdefense. However, the most important of all the elements is unlawful aggression on the part of the
victim. Unlawful aggression must be proved first in order for self-defense to be successfully
pleaded, whether complete or incomplete. - People of the Philippines vs. Gary Vergara y Oriel
and Joseph Inocencio y Paulino, G.R. No. 177763, July 3, 2013
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
To take advantage of superior strength is to use force out of proportion to the means available to
the person attacked to defend himself.
Tying the victim hog-style after rendering him immobilized constituted outraging or scoffing at the
corpse of the victim.
For voluntary surrender to be appreciated, it must be spontaneous, in such a manner that it shows
the intent of the accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, either because he
acknowledges his guilt or because he wishes to save them the trouble and expense of finding and
capturing him. People of the Philippines vs. Ramon Regalario, Marciano Regalario, Sotero
Regalario, Bienvenido Regalario and Noel Regalario, G.R. No. 174483, March 31, 2009
It is basic in our penal law that treachery is present when the offender employs means, methods or
forms which tend directly and especially to insure the execution of the crime, without risk to himself
arising from the defense which the offended party might make. - People of the Philippines vs.
Joseph Asilan y Tabornal, G.R. No. 188322, April 11, 2012
When the victim was stabbed by accused, the latter inside the trial, judicial notice can be taken that
when the tricycle driver is seated on the motorcycle, his head is usually higher or at the level of the
roof of the side car which leaves his torso exposed to the passengers who are seated in the side car.
Hence, there was no way for Jesus to even be forewarned of the intended stabbing of his body both
from the people seated in the side car and those seated behind him. Thus, treachery is present.
There is treachery when the means, methods, and forms of execution gave the person attacked no
opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and such means, methods, and forms of execution
were deliberately and consciously adopted by the accused without danger to his person. What is
decisive in an appreciation of treachery is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the
victim to defend himself.
Furthermore, in a case of special complex crime of carnapping with homicide, there must be proof
not only of the essential elements of carnapping, but also that it was the original criminal design of
the culprit and the killing was perpetrated in the course of the commission of the carnapping or on

the occasion thereof. - People of the Philippines vs. Joel Aquino y Cendana, G.R. No. 201092,
January 15, 2014
The accused, charged for the felony of murder, questions the appreciation of the qualifying
circumstance of abuse of strength when the same was not in the Information. The Court ruled that
even if abuse of superior strength was properly alleged and proven in court, it cannot serve to
qualify or aggravate the felony at issue since it is jurisprudentially settled that when the
circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in the
latter. - People of the Philippines vs. Marcelino Dadao, Antonio Sulindao, Eddie Malogsi
(deceased) and Alfemio Malogsi, G.R. No. 201860, January 22, 2014
TREACHERY
The essence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery is the suddenness, surprise and the lack of
expectation that the attack will take place, thus, depriving the victim of any real opportunity for
self-defense while ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor. - People of
the Philippines vs. Dante Jadap, G.R. No. 177983, March 30, 2010
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means,
methods, or forms in the execution, which tend directly and specially to insure its execution,
without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. People of the Philippines vs. Samson Escleto, G.R. No. 183706, April 25, 2012
Treachery is present when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing
means, methods, or forms in the execution, which tend directly and specially to insure its execution,
without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. People of the Philippines vs. Ramil Rarugal alias "Amay Bisaya," G.R. No. 188603, January 16,
2013
The manner by which appellant deliberately rolled the grenade on the ground towards the dance
floor packed with the unsuspecting revelers, leaving one dead and scores wounded in the aftermath
of the sudden blast was accompanied with treachery. There is treachery when the offender
commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution
thereof which tend directly and especially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising
from the defense which the offended party might make. - People of the Philippines vs. Ramil
Mores, G.R. No. 189846, June 26, 2013
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place
at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at
the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity.
The essence of treachery is that the attack is deliberate and without warning, done in a swift and
unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or
escape. - People of the Philippines vs. Lito Hatsero, G.R. No. 192179, July 3, 2013
Treachery exists when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing
means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by the aggressor on unsuspecting

victims, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend themselves, thereby ensuring its
commission without risk to the aggressor, and without the slightest provocation on the part of the
victims. - People of the Philippines vs. Gerry Sabangan and Noli Bornasal, G.R. No. 191722,
December 11, 2013
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES
A person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, like one who acts under the
impulse of an uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury, is exempt from criminal liability
because he does not act with freedom. An act done by me against my will is not my act. The force
contemplated must be so formidable as to reduce the actor to a mere instrument who acts not only
without will but against his will. A threat of future injury is not enough. - People of the Philippines
vs. Nelida Dequina y Dimapanan, Joselito Jundoc y Japitana & Nora Jingabo y Cruz, G.R. No.
177570, January 19, 2011
For the defense of Bulagao that he was suffering from mental retardation be given credit, There
must be a showing from the findings of the psychologist that Bulagao had the same mental or
psychological condition at the time of the said incidents. The RTC noted that the psychological
examination of Bulagao was conducted more than a couple of years after the dates of the
complained of incidents. Even assuming that accused-appellant was of such mental state at the
time of the incidents, the psychologist testified that accused-appellant had the capacity to discern
right from wrong. - People of the Philippines vs. Aniceto Bulagao, G.R. No. 184757, October 5,
2011
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
When the prosecution fails to prove the exact date of the commission of the offense and there is a
question whether the accused reached the age of majority at the time of the commission, such
question shall be resolved in favor of the accused and therefore shall benefit from the mitigating
circumstance of minority. People of the Philippines vs. Richard O. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641,
September 10, 2009
PAROLE
No jurisprudence in criminal law is more settled than that alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it
is easy to contrive and difficult to disprove, and for which reason it is generally rejected.
Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9346 provides that persons convicted of offenses punished with
reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, shall not be eligible
for parole under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended. People of the Philippines vs. Vicente Candellada, G.R. No. 189293, July 10, 2013
BOOK II (Articles 114-365, RPC) and related Special Laws
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
In the falsification of public or official documents, whether by public officials or by private persons,
it is unnecessary that there be present the idea of gain or the intent to injure a third person; the

principal thing punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth as
therein solemnly proclaimed. - Romeo D. Lonzanida vs. People Of The Philippines, G.R. No.
160243-52, July 20, 2009
COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002
When all the elements of the crimes charged were present thereby establishing the guilt beyond
reasonable doubt of the accused, no error has been committed in the courts decision of conviction.
In fact, settled is the principle that findings of the trial courts which are factual in nature are
accorded respect when no glaring errors; gross misapprehension of facts; and speculative, arbitrary
and unsupported conclusions can be gathered from such findings. The rule finds an even more
stringent application where said findings are sustained by the Court of Appeals. - People of the
Philippines vs. Joseph Serrano and Anthony Serrano, G.R. No. 179038, May 6, 2010
Tuan was charged with illegal possession of prohibited drugs and contended that he should not be
convicted to such crime due to discrepancies and testimony of the witnesses. The court ruled that
Discrepancies and inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses referring to minor details, and
not in actuality touching upon the central fact of the crime, do not impair their
credibility. Testimonies of witnesses need only corroborate each other on important and relevant
details concerning the principal occurrence. - People of the Philippines vs. Estela
Tuan y Baludda, G.R. No. 176066 August 11, 2010
The failure of the arresting police officers to comply with said DDB Regulation No. 3, Series of 1979
is a matter strictly between the Dangerous Drugs Board and the arresting officers and is totally
irrelevant to the prosecution of the criminal case for the reason that the commission of the crime of
illegal sale of a prohibited drug is considered consummated once the sale or transaction is
established. - People of the Philippines vs. Chito Gratil y Guelas, G.R. No. 182236, June 22,
2011
In the crime of sale of dangerous drugs, the prosecution must be able to successfully prove the
following elements: (1) identities of the buyer and seller, the object, and the consideration; and (2)
the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. The conspicuous variance in the
testimonies for the prosecution casts serious doubt on the arresting teams due care in the custody
of the confiscated illegal drug. We declared that the failure of the prosecution to offer the testimony
of key witnesses to establish a sufficiently complete chain of custody of a specimen of shabu, and
the irregularity which characterized the handling of the evidence before it was finally offered in
court, fatally conflicts with every proposition relative to the culpability of the accused. - People of
the Philippines vs. Edwin Ulat y Aguinaldo @ Pudong, G.R. No. 180504, October 5, 2011
In a buy-bust operation, the violator is caught in flagrante delicto and the police officers conducting
the operation are not only authorized, but duty-bound, to apprehend the violator and to search him
for anything that may have been part of or used in the commission of the crime. - People of the
Philippines vs. Gregg C. Buenaventura, G.R. No. 184807, November 23, 2011
Legaspi claims that she was instigated into committing the crime as charged, as she was the one
approached by San Andres, who was then looking to buy shabu cannot stand. To use instigation as a
defense, the accused must prove with sufficient evidence that the government induced him to
commit the offense. Legaspi was never forced, coerced, or induced to source the prohibited drug.
Unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the members of the buy-bust operation team

were inspired by improper motive or did not properly perform their duty, their testimonies on the
operation deserve full faith and credit. - People of the Philippines vs. Nenita Legaspi y Lucas,
G.R. No. 173485, November 23, 2011
Prior surveillance is not required for a valid buy-bust operation, especially if the buy-bust team is
accompanied to the target area by their informant. Furthermore, the failure of the police officers to
use ultraviolet powder on the buy-bust money is not an indication that the buy-bust operation was
a sham. The use of initials to mark the money used in a buy-bust operation has been accepted by
the SC. - People of the Philippines vs. Benjamin Amansec y Dona, G.R. No. 186131, December
14, 2011
Unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the members of the buy-bust team were inspired
by any improper motive or were not properly performing their duty, their testimonies on the buybust operation deserve full faith and credit. Settled is the rule that in cases involving violations of
the Dangerous Drugs Act, credence is given to prosecution witnesses who are police officers, for
they are presumed to have performed their duties in a regular manner, unless there is evidence to
the contrary suggesting ill motive on the part of the police officers or deviation from the regular
performance of their duties. - People of the Philippines vs. Marcos Sabadlab y Narciso @ "Bong
Pango G.R. No. 186392, January 18, 2012
In cases involving violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act, credence is given to prosecution witnesses
who are police officers on the ground that they are presumed to have performed their duties in a
regular manner. The exception is when there is evidence to the contrary suggesting ill motive on
the part of the police officers or deviation from the regular performance of their duties. In the case
at bar, accused-appellants only evidence of ill motive on the part of the NBI operatives is his own
testimony of frame-up and extortion, a very common defense in dangerous drugs cases. We have
held that such defense is viewed with disfavor, for it can be easily concocted. To substantiate such a
defense, therefore, the evidence must be clear and convincing. - People of the Philippines vs.
Arnel Clarite y Salazar, G.R. No. 187157, February 15, 2012
The Court stresses that the objective test in buy-bust operations demands that the details of the
purported transaction must be clearly and adequately shown. This must start from the initial
contact between the poseur-buyer and the pusher, the offer to purchase, the promise or payment of
the consideration until the consummation of the sale by the delivery of the illegal drug subject of
the sale. The manner by which the initial contact was made, whether or not through an informant,
the offer to purchase the drug, the payment of the buy-bust money, and the delivery of the illegal
drug, whether to the informant alone or the police officer, must be the subject of strict scrutiny by
courts to insure that law-abiding citizens are not unlawfully induced to commit an offense. - People
of the Philippines vs. Rosemarie Magundayao y Alejandro alias "Rose," G.R. No. 188132,
February 29, 2012
It is settled that Sec. 86 of Republic Act No. 9165 does not invalidate operations on account of the
law enforcers failure to maintain close coordination with the PDEA. - People of the Philippines vs.
Jesusa Figueroa y Coronado, G.R. No. 186141, April 11, 2012
Illegal possession of prohibited or regulated drugs is committed when the following elements
concur: (1) the accused is in possession of an item or object which is identified to be a prohibited
drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused freely and consciously
possessed the said drug. - People of the Philippines vs. Jimmy Biyala Velasquez, G.R. No.

177224, April 11, 2012
This Court has already ruled in several cases that the failure of the arresting officer to comply
strictly with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 is not fatal. It will not render the arrest of the
accused illegal or the items seized or confiscated from him inadmissible. What is of utmost
important is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the
same would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Also, in every prosecution for the illegal sale of prohibited drugs, the presentation of the drug, i.e.,
the corpus delicti, as evidence in court is material. In fact, the existence of the dangerous drug is
crucial to a judgment of conviction. It is, therefore, indispensable that the identity of the prohibited
drug be established beyond doubt. Even more than this, what must also be established is the fact
that the substance bought during the buy-bust operation is the same substance offered in court as
exhibit. The chain of custody requirement performs this function in that it ensures that unnecessary
doubts concerning the identity of the evidence are removed.
Finally, the Court acknowledged that a testimony about a perfect chain is not always the standard
as it is almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken chain. The Court stresses that what is of
utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items.
- People of the Philippines vs. Maricar Brainer y Mangulabnan, G.R. No. 188571, October 10,
2012
The elements that should be proven in both the sale and possession of dangerous drugs intrinsically
include the identification of what was seized by police officers to be the same item examined and
presented in court. This identification must be established with moral certainty and is a function of
the rule on the chain of custody. - People of the Philippines vs. Meriam Guru y Kazan, G.R. No.
189808, October 24, 2012
This Court has reviewed and scrutinized in detail the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and
found glaring inconsistencies that relate to the identity of the prohibited drug allegedly confiscated
from Del Rosario. The patent inconsistency between the testimonies of PO2 Mendoza and PO3
Besmonte necessarily leads us to doubt that the plastic sachet of shabu identified in court is the
same one allegedly seized from Del Rosario. In light of the foregoing, we find merit in Del Rosarios
claim that the prosecution failed to discharge its burden of proving his guilt beyond reasonable
doubt. The dangerous drug itself, the shabu in this case, constitutes the very corpus delicti of the
offense and in sustaining a conviction under Republic Act No. 9165, the identity and integrity of the
corpus delicti must definitely be shown to have been preserved. This requirement necessarily
arises from the illegal drugs unique characteristic that renders it indistinct, not readily identifiable,
and easily open to tampering, alteration or substitution either by accident or otherwise. Thus, to
remove any doubt or uncertainty on the identity and integrity of the seized drug, evidence must
definitely show that the illegal drug presented in court is the same illegal drug actually recovered
from the accused-appellant otherwise, the prosecution for possession under Republic Act No. 9165
fail. - People of the Philippines vs. Ronald Del Rosario, G.R. No. 188107, December 5, 2012
It may be gleaned that to establish the chain of custody in a buy-bust operation is as follows: first,
the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the
apprehending officer second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to
the investigating officer third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the
forensic chemist for laboratory examination and fourth, the turnover and submission of the

marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the court. We agree with the finding of the
Court of Appeals. A perusal of the records of the case revealed that after the dangerous drugs were
seized from Lapasaran, the same were marked RML and RML1 by the buy-bust team. PO1 Saez
and PO2 Maglana then turned over RML and RML1 to investigating officer P/SInsp. Obong, who
in turn, delivered the same to the PNP Crime Laboratory for examination. Based on the Physical
Science Report timed, dated and signed by Forensic Chemist Bonifacio, RML and RML1 tested
positive for the presence of shabu. Lastly, both sachets were then presented and turned over by
P/SInsp. Bonifacio to the court. The Certificate of Inventory, request for laboratory examination
and the consequent testimonies in Court leaves no doubt in the Courts mind that the chain of
custody rule was duly followed. - People of the Philippines vs. Renato Lapasaran, G.R. No.
198820, December 10, 2012
When prosecuting an illegal possession of dangerous drugs case, the following elements must be
established: (1) the accused is in possession of an item or object, which is identified to be a
prohibited drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused freely and
consciously possessed the drug; With regards to Chain of Custody, unless there is a showing of bad
faith, ill will, or proof that the evidence has been tampered or meddled with, the presumptions that
the integrity of such evidence had been preserved and that the police officers who handled the
seized drugs had discharged their duties properly and with regularity remain. - People of the
Philippines, vs. Malik Manalao y Alauya, G.R. No. 187496, February 06, 2013
The elements that must be established for the successful prosecution of illegal sale of dangerous
drugs, viz: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object, and consideration; and (2) the
delivery of the thing sold and the payment for the same. What is material is the proof that the
transaction or sale actually took place, coupled with the presentation in court of the corpus delicti.
The delivery of the contraband to the poseur-buyer and the receipt of the marked money
consummate the buy-bust transaction between the entrapping officers and the accused. The chain
of custody of the seized drugs in a buy-bust operation had been sufficiently established when there
was proof of the following: first, the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered
from the accused by the apprehending officer; second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the
apprehending officer to the investigating officer; third, the turnover by the investigating officer of
the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and fourth, the turnover and
submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the court. - People of the
Philippines vs. Linda Alviz y Yatco and Elizabeth De La Vega y Bautista, G.R. No. 177158,
February 06, 2013
A testimony about a perfect chain is not always the standard as it is almost always impossible to
obtain an unbroken chain." The arresting officers failure to conduct a physical inventory and to
photograph the items seized from De Jesus will not render his arrest illegal or the items confiscated
from him inadmissible in evidence as they were able to nonetheless preserve the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the said items. This is what is of utmost importance as the seized items are
what would be used in the determination of De Jesus guilt or innocence.
What is significant is that the links in the chain of custody were all accounted for by the
prosecution, from the time the items were confiscated from De Jesus, up to the time they were
presented in court during trial as proof of the corpus delicti. In any case, unless De Jesus can show
that there was bad faith, ill will, or tampering with the evidence, the presumption that the integrity
of the evidence has been preserved, and that the police officers discharged their duties properly

and with regularity, will remain. - People of the Philippines vs. Victor De Jesus y Garcia, G.R. No.
198794, February 06, 2013
Noncompliance with Section 21(1), Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 regarding chain of custody,
does not necessarily render the arrest illegal or the items seized inadmissible because what is
essential is that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved which would
be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused. - People of the
Philippines vs. Lolita Quesido y Badarang, G.R. No. 189351, April 10, 2013
Denial or frame-up is a standard defense ploy in most prosecutions for violation of the Dangerous
Drugs Law. As such, it has been viewed by the court with disfavor for it can just as easily be
concocted.
When the accused is charged with the sale of illicit drugs, the following defenses cannot be set up:
(1) that facilities for the commission of the crime were intentionally placed in his way or (2) that
the criminal act was done at the solicitation of the decoy or poseur-buyer seeking to expose his
criminal act or (3) that police authorities feigning complicity in the act were present and
apparently assisted in its commission. - People of the Philippines vs. Marilyn Aguilar y
Manzanillo, G.R. No. 191396, April 17, 2013
Marking of the seized items immediately after seizure and confiscation may be undertaken at
the police station rather than at the place of arrest for as long as it is done in the presence of an
accused in illegal drugs cases. - People of the Philippines vs. Dante L. Dumalag, G.R. No. 180514,
April 17, 2013
When, of all the individuals who came into direct contact with or had physical possession of the
shabu allegedly seized from the accused, only the arresting officer testified for the specific purpose
of identifying the evidence, and his testimony miserably failed to demonstrate an unbroken chain as
it ended with his identification of the money and seized items he marked and documents he signed,
then the requirement of chain of custody is broken. In effect, the custodial link ended with the
arresting officer when he testified that he brought the seized items, together with the accused, to
the police station. Such a break in the chain of custody is fatal to the prosecutions case, and the
accused must be acquitted. - People of the Philippines vs. Arturo Enriquez y Delos Reyes, G.R.
No. 197550, 25 September 2013
The failure to strictly comply with Sec. 21(1), Art. II of R.A. 9165 does not necessarily render an
accuseds arrest illegal or the items seized or confiscated from him inadmissible. What is of utmost
importance is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items,
as these would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Consistency with the chain of custody rule requires that the marking of the seized items
to truly ensure that they are the same items that enter the chain and are eventually the ones
offered in evidence should be done (1) in the presence of the apprehended violator (2)
immediately upon confiscation. Thus, even if the police officers failed to immediately make an
inventory and marking of the seized sachet of shabu at the place where the accused was
apprehended does not destroy the integrity and evidentiary value of said sachet of shabu, if the
chain of custody could be continuously traced from its receipt by the arresting officer, the transfer
to the police laboratory for examination, it being kept in police custody awaiting trial, and its
presentation as evidence before the RTC. - People of the Philippines vs. Giovanni Ocfemia y
Chavez, G.R. No. 185383, September 25, 2013
While the accused may not be convicted of illegal sale of shabu due to the absence of all the
elements of the crime, they may still be convicted for illegal delivery of shabu if all its elements are
present and proven by the prosecution. The accused may also be convicted for illegal possession of
dangerous drugs as the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs necessarily includes the crime of
illegal possession of dangerous drugs. - People of the Philippines vs. Michael Maongco y
Yumonda and Phans Bandali y Simpal, G.R. No. 196966, October 23, 2013
The testimonies of the police officers who conducted the buy-bust operations are credible when
they are consistent in establishing the elements of illegal sale of shabu, despite their consistencies
on peripheral matters. In addition, objections to the alleged violation to the chain of custody rule
must be made during trial and not first time on appeal, otherwise the objection must be denied. People of the Philippines vs. Marilyn Santos and Arlene Valera, G.R. No. 193190, November
13, 2013
Non-compliance with Section 21 does not necessarily render the arrest illegal or the items seized
inadmissible because what is essential is that the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items
are preserved which would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
The failure to take photographs and to make an inventory of the seized evidence, and the lack of
participation of the representatives from the media, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any
elected public official in the operation will not render the evidence seized as inadmissible. - People
of the Philippines vs. Marissa Castillo, G.R. No. 190180, November 27, 2013
In dangerous drugs cases, the failure of the police officers to make a physical inventory and to
photograph the sachets of shabu, as well as to mark the sachets at the place of arrest, do not render
the seized drugs inadmissible in evidence or automatically impair the integrity of the chain of
custody of the said drugs. What is of utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the seized items, as these would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or
innocence of the accused. - People of the Philippines vs. Asir Gani and Normina Gani, G.R. No.
198318, November 27, 2013
What determines if there was, indeed, a sale of dangerous drugs in a buy-bust operation is proof of
the concurrence of all the elements of the offense, to wit: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller,
the object, and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor,
which the prosecution has satisfactorily established. - People of the Philippines vs. Roselito
Taculod y Elle, G.R. No. 198108, December 11, 2013
When the prosecution was able to establish the elements for conviction for the crime of illegal sale
of regulated or prohibited drugs, illegal possession of regulated and prohibited drugs and the guilt
of the accused, the Court must affirm the decision of trial court and the CA.
As to imposition of penalties in illegal sale of regulated or prohibited drugs, illegal possession of
regulated and prohibited drugs, as provided by law, it shall depend on the amount sold and
possessed by the accused. - People of the Philippines vs. Donald Vasquez y Sandigan, G.R. No.
200304, January 15, 2014
For there to be illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the following elements must be present: (1) the
identity of the buyer and the seller, the object and the consideration of the sale; and (2) the delivery
to the buyer of the thing sold and receipt by the seller of the payment therefor. Thus, upon delivery

of the illicit drug to the buyer and the receipt of the payment by the seller, illegal sale of dangerous
drugs is committed. - People of the Philippines vs. Joselito Morate y Tarnate, G.R. No. 201156,
January 29, 2014
In cases of illegal sale of regulated and prohibited drugs, it is necessary that the identity and
integrity of the seized drugs and other related articles have been preserved from the time they
were confiscated from the accused until their presentation as evidence in court. The following links
must be established in the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation: first, the seizure and marking, if
practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending officer; second, the
turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the investigating officer; third, the
turn over by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory
examination; and fourth, the turn over and submission of the marked illegal drugs seized from the
forensic chemist to the court. When the seizing officer (the poseur-buyer) failed to mark the seized
illegal drugs and it was only when the drugs were turned over to the investigating officer that they
were marked, there is already failure on the part of the prosecution to establish the evidences
chain of custody and the Court can no longer consider or even safely assume that the integrity and
evidentiary value of the confiscated dangerous drug were properly preserved. - People of the
Philippines vs. Hermanos Constantino, Jr. y Binayug, a.k.a. "Jojit,"G.R. No. 199689, March 12,
2014
MURDER
The Court held that while there were indeed discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecution
witnessed, they are not sufficient to negate the guilt of accused. As long as the testimony jibes on
material points, the slight clashing statements neither dilute the credibility nor the veracity of their
testimony. - People of the Philippines vs. Darwin Bernabe Garcia, G.R. No. 185726, October
16, 2009
Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non, without which there can be no self-defense,
whether complete or incomplete. - People of the Philippines vs. Alberto Tabarnero and Gary
Tabarnero, G.R. No. 168169, February 24, 2010
Donald Pais was killed by the accused appellants however, the latter denied such allegations. The
court ruled that for the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at
some other place at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically
impossible for him to be at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity. - People of the
Philippines vs. Roberto Asis and Julius Pearanda, G.R. No. 177573, July 7, 2010
Basic is the rule that in order to affirm the conviction of an accused person, the prosecution must
establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A finding of guilt must rest on the strength of the
prosecutions own evidence, not on the weakness or even absence of evidence for the defense.
People of the Philippines vs. Rosendo Rebucan y Lamsin, G.R. No. 182551, July 27, 2011
The Court agrees with Cleofe and Leonardo that alibi is indeed a good defense and could certainly
exculpate a person accused of a crime. However, this is true only if the accuseds alibi strictly meets
the following requisites: 1. His presence at another place at the time of the commission of the crime;
and 2. The physical impossibility of his presence at the scene of the crime. - People of the
Philippines vs. Cleofe Baroquillo y Villanueva and Leonardo Mahilum y Caete, G.R. No.
184960, August 24, 2011
In a number of cases, surveyed in People v. Rivera, we ruled that treachery cannot be appreciated
simply because the attack was sudden and unexpected. We can not presume that treachery was
present merely from the fact that the attack was sudden. The suddenness of an attack, does not of
itself, suffice to support a finding of alevosia, even if the purpose was to kill, so long as the decision
was made all of a sudden and the victim's helpless position was accidental. . . . While it appears that
the attack upon the victim was sudden, the surrounding circumstances attending the stabbing
incident, that is, the open area, the presence of the victims families and the attending eyewitnesses,
works against treachery. If accused-appellant wanted to make certain that no risk would come to
him, he could have chosen another time and place to stab the victim. - People of the Philippines
vs. Vicente Vilbar, G.R. No. 186541, February 1, 2012
There is treachery or alevosia when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person,
employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to
insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from any defense which the offended party
might make. The testimonial evidence gathered in this case clearly indicates that the victims who
were simply engaged in conversation in a private residence were caught entirely by surprise with
the assailants swift, deliberate and unexpected attack using multiple firearms thereby negating the
possibility for the victims to escape or defend themselves. - People of the Philippines vs.
Diosdado Camat and Mamerto Dulay, G.R. No. 188612, July 30, 2012
To hold the accused liable for murder, the prosecution must prove that: (1) a person was killed; (2)
the accused killed him; (3) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances
mentioned in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code; and (4) the killing is neither parricide nor
infanticide. - People of the Philippines vs. Mark Joseph Zapuiz y Ramos "Jaymart," G.R. No.
199713, February 20, 2013
Factual findings of the trial court, when affirmed by the CA, are generally conclusive upon the
Supreme Court when supported by evidence on record. Thus, when the trial court gave credence to
the testimony of the witnesses who saw that the accused and his son set fire on the victims house
and later shoot the victim and the CA affirmed the trial courts findings, the SC will affirm the
conviction of the accused for murder.
The essence of evident premeditation is that the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by
cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during a space of
time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment. When the time it took the accused and his son to device
their plan, plot where the gasoline should be poured, and procure the gasoline and the firearms, as
well as the time it took to go to Antonio Ardets house, and even the time when they waited for
Antonio Ardet to come out of the house, all afforded the accused sufficient opportunity to reflect
upon the consequences of his act to kill his brother-in-law and his determination to commit the
cold-blooded deed from the time of its conception until it was carried out, it clearly shows that the
accused and his son had a previously and carefully crafted plan to kill the victim. - People of the
Philippines vs. Gary Alinao, G.R. No. 191256, September 18, 2013
To successfully prosecute the crime of murder, the following elements must be established: (1) that
a person was killed; (2) that the accused killed him or her; (3) that the killing was attended by any
of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248of the Revised Penal Code; and (4) that the
killing is not parricide or infanticide. The essence of treachery is that the attack is deliberate and
without warning, done in a swift and unexpected way, affording the hapless, unarmed and

unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape. In order for treachery to be properly
appreciated, two elements must be present: (1) at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a
position to defend himself; and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular
means, methods, or forms of attack employed by him. These elements are extant in the facts of this
case and as testified to by Roger above-quoted.
In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. It does not need to be proven by direct evidence and
may be inferred from the conduct before, during, and after the commission of the crime
indicative of a joint purpose, concerted action, and concurrence of sentiments as in conspiracy.
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove the following: (i) that he was present at
another place at the time of the perpetration of the crime; and (ii) that it was physically impossible
for him to be at the scene of the crime during its commission. Physical impossibility involves the
distance and the facility of access between the crime scene and the location of the accused when the
crime was committed. The accused must demonstrate that he was so far away and could not have
been physically present at the crime scene and its immediate vicinity when the crime was
committed. - People of the Philippines, vs. Rolando Las Pias, Jimmy Delizo and Merwin Las
Pias, G.R. No. 191723, July 23, 2014
HOMICIDE
It is axiomatic that a person who invokes accident must prove that he acted with due care. This was
belied by the conduct of the Lanuza when he allegedly received the shotgun from the private
complainant. As he himself admitted, he received the shotgun by placing his pointer finger, also
known as the trigger finger because it is used to squeeze the trigger, inside the trigger guard and
over the trigger itself. Worse, he did so while the barrel of the gun was pointed at the private
complainant. - People of the Philippines vs. Rodel Lanuza y Bagaoisan, G.R. No. 188562,
August 17, 2011
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES
Villacorta is not totally without criminal liability. He is guilty of slight physical injuries under Article
266(1) of the Revised Penal Code for the stab wound he inflicted upon Cruz. Although the charge in
the instant case is for murder, a finding of guilt for the lesser offense of slight physical injuries may
be made considering that the latter offense is necessarily included in the former since the essential
ingredients of slight physical injuries constitute and form part of those constituting the offense of
murder. - People of the Philippines vs. Orlito Villacorta, G.R. No. 186412, September 7, 2011
RAPE
Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault,
especially a minor, as in this case, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and
put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to
condemn an injustice and have the offender apprehended and punished.
It is enough that there is the slightest penetration of the male organ into the female sex organ. The
mere touching by the male organ of the labia of the pudendum of the womans private part is
sufficient to consummate rape. It was therefore consummated rape which accused-appellant
committed. - People of the Philippines vs. Mario Castro, G.R. No. 172874, December 17, 2008
In the prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the extreme penalty of death,
nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with
which an accused is charged must be established. Qualifying circumstances or special qualifying
circumstances must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself; otherwise,
there can be no conviction of the crime in its qualified form. As a qualifying circumstance of the
crime of rape, the concurrence of the victims minority and her relationship to the accusedappellant must be both alleged and proven beyond reasonable doubt. - People of the Philippines
vs. Joselito A. Lopit, G.R. No. 177742, December 17, 2008
The gravamen of the crime of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman through force, threat, or
intimidation against her will or without her consent; the exact time of its commission is not an
essential element to the crime. - People of the Philippines vs. Jaime Cadag Jimenez, G.R. No.
170235, April 24, 2009
The mere touching by the male organ of the labia of the pudendum of the womans private part is
sufficient to consummate rape. - People of the Philippines vs. Jessie Mariano, G.R. No. 168693,
July 19, 2009
In cases of rape, the force and intimidation is viewed from the perspective of the victim. There need
not be physical force provided that the victim succumbed to the act out of fear. Furthermore, the
sweetheart theory as a defense does not carry any weight when it is not accompanied by
independent proof. - People of the Philippines vs. Alberto Buban, G.R. No. 172710, October 30,
2009
The sweetheart defense, being an affirmative defense, must be established with convincing
evidenceby some documentary and/or other evidence like mementos, love letters, notes, pictures
and the like. In this case, there was no evidence offered to prove that what transpired between
accused and victim was consensual. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Grande, G.R. No.
170476, December 23, 2009
It has consistently been held that no family member would expose a fellow family member to the
ignominy of a rape trial or to the shame and scandal of having to undergo such an ordeal merely to
satisfy their alleged motive if the charge is not true. - People of the Philippines vs. Herminigildo
Salle Sobusa, G.R. No. 181083, January 21, 2010
It is doctrinally settled that the factual findings of the trial court, especially on the credibility of the
rape victim, are accorded great weight and respect and will not be disturbed on appeal. - People of
the Philippines vs. Marlon Barsaga Abella, G.R. No. 177295, January 6, 2010
No parent would expose his or her own daughter to the shame and scandal of having undergone
such debasing defilement of her chastity if the charges were not true. - People of the Philippines
vs. Manuel Bagos, G.R. No. 177152, January 6, 2010
AAA was raped by Romeo but the latter denied such accusation. The court ruled that In order that
the defense of alibi may prosper, the appellant must prove both the presence of the appellant in
another place at the time of the commission of the offense and the physical impossibility of him
being at the scene of the crime. People of the Philippines vs. Romeo Republo, G.R. No. 172962
July 8, 2010
AAA a ten year old girl was raped by Nelson Balunsat who is her first cousin. Nelson denied
allegation. It is settled that when the victims testimony is corroborated by the physicians finding of
penetration, there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of
carnal knowledge. Laceration, whether healed or fresh, is the best physical evidence of forcible
defloration. - People of the Philippines vs. Nelson Balunsat y Balunsat, G.R. No. 176743, July
28, 2010
AAA was raped by Magayon but the latter denied such allegation. The court ruled that a rape victim,
who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, and remains
consistent, is a credible witness. Moreover, when the offended parties are young and immature
girls, as in this case, where the victim was only nine years old at the time the rape was committed,
courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired, not only because of their
relative vulnerability, but also because of the shame and embarrassment to which they would be
exposed by court trial, if the matter about which they testified were not true. - People of the
Philippines vs. Teddy Magayon, G.R. No. 175595 July 28, 2010
A certification from the Local Civil Registrar as to the date of birth of a victim of rape is sufficient
evidence to prove minority of a victim. - People of the Philippines vs. Edgardo Ogarte, G.R. No.
182690, May 30, 2011
Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under the instances provided for in the
law. With the intrinsic nature of the said crime, only two parties, namely the victim and the accused,
are usually involved. As such, accuseds defense of denial will not stand as against the victims
positive identification and credible testimony. This is especially so when it is qualified by minority
and relationship and the victim has no improper motive in purporting the accused as the
perpetrator. Moreover, in rape committed by a father or a person recognized by the victim as her
father, the prosecution need not prove the elements of force and intimidation as the same was
substituted by the formers moral ascendancy and influence over the latter. - People of the
Philippines vs. Romeo Miranda y Michael, G.R. No. 176634, April 5, 2010
The spontaneity with which the victim has detailed the incidents of rape, the tears she has shed at
the stand while recounting her experience, and her consistency almost throughout her account
dispel any insinuation of a rehearsed testimony. The eloquent testimony of the victim, coupled with
the medical findings attesting to her non-virgin state, should be enough to confirm the truth of her
charges. - People of the Philippines vs. Benjamin Padilla y Untalan, G.R. No. 182917, June 8,
2011
The Court has repeatedly held that the date of the commission of rape is not an essential element of
the crime. It is not necessary to state the precise time when the offense was committed except when
time is a material ingredient of the offense. In statutory rape, time is not an essential element. What
is important is that the information alleges that the victim was a minor under twelve years of age
and that the accused had carnal knowledge of her, even if the accused did not use force or
intimidation on her or deprived her of reason. - People of the Philippines vs. Noel Dion, G.R. No.
181035, July 4, 2011
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place
at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at

the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity. - People of the Philippines vs. Arnel Manjares,
G.R. No. 185844, November 23, 2011
The date of the commission of the rape is not an essential element of the crime of rape, for the
gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge of a woman. Inconsistencies and discrepancies in
details which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime are not grounds for acquittal. - People of
the Philippines vs. Henry Arpon y Juntilla, G.R. No. 183563, December 14, 2011
It has long been established that the testimony of a rape victim, especially a child of tender years, is
given full weight and credit. A rape victim who testifies in a categorical, straightforward,
spontaneous and frank manner, and remains consistent, is a credible witness. Furthermore, this
Court has repeatedly ruled that matters affecting credibility are best left to the trial court because
of its unique opportunity to observe that elusive and incommunicable evidence of the witness'
deportment on the stand while testifying, an opportunity denied the appellate courts which usually
rely only on the cold pages of the mute records of the case. In incestuous rape of a minor, it is not
necessary that actual force and intimidation be employed. The moral ascendancy of appellant over
the victim, his daughter, renders it unnecessary to show physical force and intimidation. - People
of the Philippines vs. Daniel Ortega, G.R. No. 186235, January 25, 2012
Denial and alibi are inherently weak defenses and constitute self-serving negative evidence which
cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the positive declaration of a credible witness.
Between the positive assertions of the [victim] and the negative averments of the [appellant], the
former indisputably deserve more credence and are entitled to greater evidentiary weight. - People
of the Philippines vs. Paterno Sarmiento Samandre, G.R. No. 181497, February 22, 2012
Mere denial, without any strong evidence to support it, can scarcely overcome the positive
declaration by the victim of the identity and involvement of appellant in the crimes attributed to
him. - People of the Philippines vs. Melecio De Los Santos, Jr., G.R. No. 186499, March 21, 2012
Although the rape of a person under 18 years of age by the common-law spouse of the victim's
mother is punishable by death, this penalty cannot be imposed on the offender because his
relationship was not what was alleged in the Informations. Thus, the offender is guilty only of three
counts of simple rape, punishable by reclusion perpetua for each count. - People of the
Philippines vs. Roger Tejero, G.R. No. 187744, June 20, 2012
Even if the alleged romantic relationship were true, this fact does not necessarily negate rape for a
man cannot demand sexual gratification from a fiance and worse, employ violence upon her on the
pretext of love because love is not a license for lust. - People of the Philippines vs. Marcial
Bayrante y Boaquina, G.R. No. 188978, June 13, 2012
The Court held that actual force or intimidation need not be employed in incestuous rape of a minor
because the moral and physical dominion of the father is sufficient to cow the victim into
submission to his beastly desires. The absence of violence or offer of resistance would not affect the
outcome of the case because the overpowering and overbearing moral influence of the father over
his daughter takes the place of violence and offer of resistance required in rape cases committed by
an accused who did not have blood relationship with the victim. - People of the Philippines vs.
Antonio Osma, Jr. y Agaton, G.R. No. 187734, August 29, 2012

Following a long line of jurisprudence, full penetration of the female genital organ is not
indispensable. It suffices that there is proof of the entrance of the male organ into the labia of the
pudendum of the female organ. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ, however
slight, is sufficient. Penetration of the penis by entry into the lips of the vagina, even without
rupture or laceration of the hymen, is enough to justify conviction for rape.
Furthermore, in establishing the age of the victim, bare testimony of the victims mother or a
member of the family would suffice only if the victim is alleged to be below seven years of age and
what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old.
Finally, the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other
place at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically impossible for him
to be at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity. Physical impossibility refers not only to
the geographical distance between the place where the accused was and the place where the crime
was committed when the crime transpired, but more importantly, the facility of access between the
two places. - People of the Philippines vs. Alejandro Viojela y Asartin, G.R. No. 177140,
October 17, 2012
After a careful review of the records of this case, we are persuaded that appellant is indeed guilty of
qualified rape. In People v. Pruna, 390 SCRA 577 (2002), we formulated a set of guidelines that will
serve as a jurisprudential benchmark in appreciating age either as an element of the crime or as a
qualifying circumstance in order to address the seemingly conflicting court decisions regarding the
sufficiency of evidence of the victims age in rape cases. The Pruna guidelines are as follows: 1. The
best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an original or certified true copy of the
certificate of live birth of such party. 2. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar authentic
documents such as baptismal certificate and school records which show the date of birth of the
victim would suffice to prove age. 3. If the certificate of live birth or authentic document is shown to
have been lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear and credible, of the
victims mother or a member of the family either by affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to
testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party
pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence shall be sufficient under the following
circumstances: a. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is sought to be proved
is that she is less than 7 years old b. If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of age and what is
sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old c. If the victim is alleged to be below 12
years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old. 4. In the absence of
a certificate of live birth, authentic document, or the testimony of the victims mother or relatives
concerning the victims age, the complainants testimony suffice provided that it is expressly and
clearly admitted by the accused. 5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the
offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding age shall
not be taken against him. 6. The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to the age of
the victim. - People of the Philippines vs. Edgar Padigos, G.R. No. 181202, December 5, 2012
To raise the crime of simple rape to qualified rape, the twin circumstances of minority of the victim
and her relationship to the offender must concur. When a father commits the odious crime of rape
against his own daughter, his moral ascendancy or influence over the latter substitutes for violence
and intimidation. The absence of violence or offer of resistance would not affect the outcome of the
case because the overpowering and overbearing moral influence of the father over his daughter
takes the place of violence and offer of resistance required in rape cases committed by an accused

who did not have blood relationship with the victim. - People of the Philippines vs. Anastacio
Amistoso y Broca, G.R. No. 201447, January 9, 2013
Gravamen of the offense of rape is sexual intercourse with a woman against her will or without her
consent. We also previously declared that when a victim is threatened with bodily injury as when
the rapist is armed with a deadly weapon, such as a knife or bolo, such constitutes intimidation
sufficient to bring the victim to submission to the lustful desires of the rapist. Thus, appellants
succeeding in having non-consensual sexual intercourse with ABC through intimidation using a
knife plainly constitutes the crime of rape. Delay in reporting an incident of rape is not an indication
of a fabricated charge and does not necessarily cast doubt on the credibility of the complainant Not
all rape victims can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone. - People
of the Philippines vs. Antonio Basallo y Asprec, G.R. No. 182457, January 30, 2013
In dealing with cases for rape, this Court has often acknowledged that there is often a want of
witnesses. Due to its intimate nature, rape is usually a crime bereft of witnesses, and, more often
than not, the victim is left to testify for herself. Thus, in the resolution of rape cases, the victims
credibility becomes the primordial consideration. . Inconsistencies in the victims testimony do not
impair her credibility, especially if the inconsistencies refer to trivial matters that do not alter the
essential fact of the commission of rape. The testimonies of child-victims of rape are to be given full
weight and credence. Reason and experience dictate that a girl of tender years, who barely
understands sex and sexuality, is unlikely to impute to any man a crime so serious as rape, if what
she claims is not true. - People of the Philippines vs. Jonathan "Uto" Veloso y Rama, G.R. No.
188849, February 13, 2013
When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step
parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the commonlaw-spouse of the parent of the victim. The elements of the crime charged against accused-appellant
are: (a) the victim is a female over 12 years but under 18 years of age; (b) the offender is a parent,
ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree,
or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim; and (c) the offender has carnal knowledge of
the victim either through force, threat, or intimidation. - People of the Philippines vs. Edmundo
Vitero, G.R. No. 175327, April 3, 2013
In rape committed by close kin, such as the victims father, stepfather, uncle, or the commonlaw
spouse of her mother, it is not necessary that actual force or intimidation be employed. Moral
influence or ascendancy takes the place of violence and intimidation.
The sweetheart theory, as a defense, necessarily admits carnal knowledge, the first element of rape.
- People of the Philippines vs. Alberto Deligero y Bacasmot, G.R. No. 189280, April 17, 2013
Romeo Bustamante was accused of raping his minor daughter. There were no other witnesses and
the prosecution was not able to establish the element of force and intimidation. In convicting the
accused, the Supreme Court held that in a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely
on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human
nature and the normal course of things. The Court also ruled that the moral ascendancy of an
accused over the victim renders it unnecessary to show physical force and intimidation since, in
rape committed by a close kin, such as the victims father, stepfather, uncle, or the commonlaw
spouse of her mother, moral influence or ascendancy takes the place of violence or intimidation. People of the Philippines vs. Romeo Bustamante y Aliganga, G.R. No. 189836, June 5, 2013
The Revised Penal Code, as amended, punishes the rape of a mentally disabled person regardless of
the perpetrators awareness of his victims mental condition. However, the perpetrators knowledge
of the victims mental disability, at the time he committed the rape, qualifies the crime and makes it
punishable by death under Article 266B, paragraph 10. - People of the Philippines vs. Moises
Caoile, G.R. No. 203041, June 5, 2013
Article 266-A(1)(d) provides the definition of the crime of statutory rape, the elements of which
are: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman and (2) that such a woman is under
twelve years of age or is demented. As a special qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the
concurrence of the victims minority and her relationship to the accused must be both alleged and
proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Full penetration of the vaginal orifice is not an essential ingredient, nor is the rupture of the hymen
necessary, to conclude that carnal knowledge took place the mere touching of the external genitalia
by a penis that is capable of consummating the sexual act is sufficient to constitute carnal
knowledge.
A mere denial, without any strong evidence to support it, can scarcely overcome the positive
declaration by the victim of the identity and involvement of appellant in the crimes attributed to
him. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Pamintuan y Sahagun, G.R. No. 192239, June 5,
2013
The only subject of inquiry on statutory rape is the age of the woman and whether carnal
knowledge took place. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Piosang, G.R. No. 200329, June 5,
2013
Accused-appellant Abel Diaz was convicted of the crime of rape. His appeal boils down to a question
of credibility of the prosecutions primary witness, the private complainant Mara. He argues that
the failure of Mara to make an outcry during the two hours he allegedly stayed in her room makes
her testimony not credible. In rejecting his contention the Supreme Court ruled that the precise
duration of the rape is not material to and does not negate the commission of the felony. When one
is being raped, forcibly held, weak and in great pain, and in shock, she cannot be reasonably
expected to keep a precise track of the passage of time down to the last minute. - People of the
Philippines vs. Abel Diaz, G.R. No. 200882, June 13, 2013
What is material to the prosecution for illegal sale of dangerous drugs is the proof that the
transaction or sale actually occurred, coupled with the presentation in court of the substance seized
as evidence. With respect to illegal possession of dangerous drugs, possession of dangerous drugs
constitutes prima facie evidence of knowledge or animus possidendi sufficient to convict an
accused in the absence of a satisfactory explanation of such possession. - People of the Philippines
vs. Mercidita T. Resurreccion, G.R. No. 188310, June 13, 2013
Inconsistencies in a rape victims testimony do not impair her credibility, especially if the
inconsistencies refer to trivial matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of rape.
It is not uncommon for a rape victim to initially conceal the assault against her person for several
reasons, including that of fear of threats posed by her assailant. A rape charge only becomes

doubtful when the victims inaction or delay in reporting the crime is unreasonable or unexplained.
- People of the Philippines vs. Roman Zafra y Serrano, G.R. No. 197363, June 26, 2013
If the testimony of the rape victim is clear, consistent and credible to establish the crime beyond
reasonable doubt, a conviction may be based on it, notwithstanding its subsequent retraction. Mere
retraction by a prosecution witness does not necessarily vitiate her original testimony. Thus, an
affidavit of retraction of the father of the victim unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence
cannot prevail over the positive declaration made by the victim herself. - People of the Philippines
vs. Carlito Espenilla, G.R. No. 192253, September 18, 2013
Minor inconsistencies in the testimony of the rape victim, who was a minor, does not warrant a
finding of exculpating reasonable doubt when it fails to establish beyond doubt the innocence of the
appellant for the crime charged since the credibility of a rape victim is not diminished, let alone
impaired, by minor inconsistencies in her testimony. - People of the Philippines vs. Jade
Cuaycong y Remonquillo, G.R. No. 196051, October 2, 2013
When the rape victims testimony which identified the accused as the rapist is clear, categorical,
consistent and credible, the defense of alibi will crumble and the accused shall be held liable. Thus,
if the victim was able to identify the accused in the police station as the rapist and during trial, he
will be convicted for rape even if the rapist covered his face with his clothes and despite the
incident taking place in the dark of night. - People of the Philippines vs. Michael Espera y
Cuyacot, G.R. No. 202868, October 2, 2013
It is jurisprudentially settled that in a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on
the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing and consistent with human
nature and the normal course of things. Furthermore, it is likewise settled that the factual findings
of the trial court, especially when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are entitled to great weight and
respect, if not conclusiveness, since the trial court was in the best position as the original trier of the
facts in whose direct presence and under whose keen observation the witnesses rendered their
respective versions of the events that made up the occurrences constituting the ingredients of the
offense charged. Thus, the testimony of a rape victim who is 15-year old girl which recounted the
ordeal she experienced at the hands of her own father, if delivered in a straightforward and
convincing manner, is sufficient to convict the accused. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo M.
Vidaa, G.R. No. 199210, October 23, 2013
When a rape victim is paralyzed with fear, she cannot be expected to think and act coherently. Her
failure to take advantage of an opportunity to escape does not automatically vitiate the credibility
of her account. Rape victims, especially child victims, should not be expected to act the way mature
individuals would when placed in such a situation. The fact that AAA was not able to escape when
she had the opportunity to do so, her continued visit to their home after the incident, and her delay
in filing the complaint does not at all contradict her credibility. - People of the Philippines vs.
Daniel Alcober, G.R. No. 192941, November 13, 2013
In rape cases, the accused may be convicted based solely on the testimony of the victim, provided
that such testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the
normal course of things. Rape victims are not expected to make an errorless recollection of the
incident, so humiliating and painful that they might be trying to obliterate it from their memory,
thus, a few inconsistent remarks in rape cases will not necessarily impair the testimony of the

offended party. - People of the Philippines vs. Welmo. Linsie y Binevidez, G.R. No. 199494,
November 27, 2013
In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the
victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of
things. The very nature of the crime of rape, conviction or acquittal depends almost entirely on the
credibility of the complainants testimony because of the fact that, usually, only the participants can
directly testify as to its occurrence.
Physical resistance need not be established when intimidation is brought to bear on the victim and
the latter submits out of fear the failure to shout or offer tenuous resistance does not make
voluntary the victims submission to the criminal acts of the accused.
A love affair does not justify rape for a man does not have the unbridled license to subject his
beloved to his carnal desires against her will. - People of the Philippines vs. Dalton Laurian, Jr. y
Pugsot, G.R. No. 199868, December 11, 2013
It is a well-established rule that testimonies of rape victims, especially child victims, are given full
weight and credit. When a woman, more so if she is a minor, says she has been raped, she says, in
effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed. Youth and immaturity are generally
badges of truth. Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of
sexual assault, especially a minor, particularly in cases of incestuous rape, because no woman
would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of
exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and to have the offender
apprehended and punished. - People of the Philippines vs. Lino Paldo, G.R. No. 200515,
December 11, 2013
It is jurisprudentially settled that when a woman says she has been raped, she says in effect all that
is necessary to show that she has been raped and her testimony alone is sufficient if it satisfies the
exacting standard of credibility needed to convict the accused. Thus, in this jurisdiction, the fate of
the accused in a rape case, ultimately and oftentimes, hinges on the credibility of the victims
testimony. In this regard, the Court defers to the trial courts assessment of the credibility of
victims testimony, most especially, when it is affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Furthermore, it is not absurd nor contrary to human experience that the victim gave birth ten (10)
months after the alleged sexual assault as there may be cases of long gestations. - People of the
Philippines vs. Mervin Gahi, G.R. No. 202976, February 19, 2014
When through evidence, the accused is guilty of rape through sexual assault but the information
charged against him is rape through carnal knowledge, the accused cannot be found guilty of rape
by sexual assault even though it was proven during trial. This is due to the material differences and
substantial distinctions between the two modes of rape; thus, the first mode is not necessarily
included in the second, and vice-versa. Consequently, to convict the accused of rape by sexual
assault when what he was charged with was rape through carnal knowledge, would be to violate his
constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. However,
the accused, on the said information, may be convicted of the lesser crime of acts of lasciviousness. People of the Philippines vs. Bernabe Pareja y Cruz, G.R. No. 202122, January 15, 2014

When the accused asserts that the cover of darkness and lack of lighting inside the "kamalig" where
the crime took place, utterly diminished victims ability to identify him or anyone for that matter, is
downright erroneous. The victim never claimed to have seen her attacker inside the "kamalig."
What was testified was the fact that the victim saw appellant Jastiva when he walked past her by
the open door of the "kamalig" and his face was finally illuminated by the moonlight. The Court
have held that wicklamps, flashlight, even moonlight and starlight may, in proper situations, be
sufficient illumination, making the attack on the credibility of witnesses solely on this ground
unmeritorious. Furthermore, in other cases the Court ruled, If identification of persons is possible
even by the light of stars, with more reason that one could identify persons by moonlight. - People
of the Philippines vs. Aurelio Jastiva, G.R. No. 199268, February 12, 2014
Under Section 3(b), Article I of Republic Act No. 7610, the term "child abuse" is defined as the
maltreatment of a child, whether habitual or not, which includes the physical abuse of a child,
among other acts. In this case, AAA positively identified the accused-appellant as the person who
kicked her in the buttocks, hit her head with a hammer, and smashed her head on the wall on.
Because of the said brutal and inhumane acts of the accused-appellant, AAA suffered bruises and
contusions in different parts of her body. Furthermore, the Court finds no cogent reason to
disbelieve AAAs testimony, which was corroborated by the medical findings of Dr. Rivamonte and
Dr. Arellano that the victims hymen had "complete healed lacerations at 1, 3, 6, 9 oclock positions."
Jurisprudence provides that the eloquent testimony of the victim, coupled with the medical findings
attesting to her non-virgin state, should be enough to confirm the truth of her charges of rape. People of the Philippines vs. Hermenigildo Delen y Esco Billa, G.R. No. 194446, April 21,
2014
Impregnation of a woman is not an element of rape. - People of the Philippines vs. Joel Abat y
Cometa, G.R. No. 202704, April 2, 2014
Jurisprudence instructs that when the credibility of a witness is of primordial consideration, as in
this case, the findings of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses and its
assessment of the probative weight thereof, as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings are
accorded respect if not conclusive effect. This is because the trial court has had the unique
opportunity to observe the demeanor of a witness and was in the best position to discern whether
they were telling the truth. - People of the Philippines vs. Renato Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 192820,
June 4, 2014
Pregnancy is not an essential element of rape. Whether the child which the rape victim bore was
fathered by the accused, or by some unknown individual, is of no moment. What is important and
decisive is that the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim against the latter's will or without
her consent, and such fact was testified to by the victim in a truthful manner. Thus, when the victim,
a 17-year old girl who was the house helper of the sister of the accused, categorically and
consistently testified that the accused had carnal knowledge of her while pointing a gun in her
mouth, the courts will give credence to her testimony and convict the accused regardless of the
pregnancy of the victim.
Inconsistencies and discrepancies in details which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime are
not grounds for acquittal. As long as the inaccuracies concern only minor matters, the same do not
affect the credibility of witnesses. Truth-telling witnesses are not always expected to give error-free
testimonies considering the lapse of time and treachery of human memory. Inaccuracies may even
suggest that the witnesses are telling the truth and have not been rehearsed.

Authorities in forensic medicine agree that the determination of the exact date of fertilization is
problematic. The exact date thereof is unknown; thus, the difficulty in determining the actual
normal duration of pregnancy. Pregnancy is not an essential element of the crime of rape. Whether
the child which the rape victim bore was fathered by the accused, or by some unknown individual,
is of no moment. What is important and decisive is that the accused had carnal knowledge of the
victim against the latter's will or without her consent, and such fact was testified to by the victim in
a truthful manner. - People of the Philippines vs. Democrito Paras, G.R. No. 192912, June 4,
2014
To convict an accused for statutory rape, two elements must be proven: 1.) the victim is a female
under 12 years of age or is demented; and the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim. Thus,
where the prosecution was able to present a 7-year old girls credible, positive and categorical
testimony relative to the circumstances surrounding her rape; and the physical evidence consistent
with victims assertion that she was raped, the accused must be held guilty of statutory rape. People of the Philippines vs. Renato Besmonte, G.R. No. 196228, June 4, 2014
The Court differentiated the terms "deprived of reason" and "demented," as follows, the term
demented refers to a person who has dementia, which is a condition of deteriorated mentality,
characterized by marked decline from the individual's former intellectual level and often by
emotional apathy, madness, or insanity. On the other hand, the phrase deprived of reason under
paragraph 1 (b) has been interpreted to include those suffering from mental abnormality,
deficiency, or retardation. Thus, AAA, who was clinically diagnosed to be a mental retardate, can be
properly classified as a person who is "deprived of reason," and not one who is "demented." People of the Philippines vs. Leonardo Cataytay y Silvano, G.R. No. 196315, October 22, 2014
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT OF 2006
In determining the age for purposes of exemption from criminal liability under R.A. 9344, Section 6
thereof clearly refers to the age as determined by the anniversary of ones birth date, and not the
mental age of the accused. Thus, a person who is eighteen years old at the time of the commission of
the crime of rape is not exempt from criminal liability despite having a mental age of nine years old.
- People of the Philippines vs. Milan Roxas y Aguiluz, G.R. No. 200793, June 4, 2014
KIDNAPPING
While one of the essential elements of this crime (Art 270 - Kidnapping and failure to return a
minor) is that the offender was entrusted with the custody of the minor, what is actually being
punished is not the kidnapping but the deliberate failure of that person to restore the minor to his
parents or guardians. - People of the Philippines vs. Aida Marquez, G.R. No. 181440, April 13,
2011
ROBERRY
A truth-telling witness is not always expected to give an error-free testimony considering the lapse
of time and the treachery of human memory. What is primordial is that the mass of testimony jibes
on material points, the slight clashing of statements dilute neither the witnesses credibility nor the
veracity of his testimony. Variations on the testimony of witnesses on the same side with respect to
minor, collateral, or incidental matters do not impair the weight of their united testimony to the

prominent facts. Inconsistencies on minor and trivial matters only serve to strengthen rather than
weaken the credibility of witnesses for they erase the suspicion of rehearsed testimony.
The deprivation required by Article 267 means not only the imprisonment of a person, but also the
deprivation of his liberty in whatever form and for whatever length of time. It involves a situation
where the victim cannot go out of the place of confinement or detention or is restricted or impeded
in his liberty to move. In other words, the essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the
victims liberty, coupled with indubitable proof of the intent of the accused to effect such
deprivation. - People of the Philippines vs. Alberto M. Basao alias "Dodong," Jovel S. Apole,
Melquiades L. Apole, Estrelita G. Apole, Rolando A. Apole alias "Bebot," Vicente C. Salon,
Jaime Tandan, Renato C. Apole alias "Boboy," Rolando M. Ochivillo alias "Allan," Lorenzo L.
Apole, John Doe, Peter Doe and Mike Doe, Jovel S. Apole, Rolando A. Apole, and Renato C.
Apole, G.R. No. 189820, October 10, 2012
In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of the malefactor is to commit robbery, with
homicide perpetrated on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. The intent to commit robbery
must precede the taking of human life. The homicide may take place before, during or after the
robbery. It is only the result obtained, without reference or distinction as to the circumstances,
causes or modes or persons intervening in the commission of the crime that has to be taken into
consideration. There is no such felony of robbery with homicide through reckless imprudence or
simple negligence. The constitutive elements of the crime, namely, robbery and homicide, must be
consummated.
It is immaterial that the death would supervene by mere accident; or that the victim of homicide is
other than the victim of robbery, or that two or more persons are killed or that aside from the
homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or usurpation of authority, is committed by reason or on the
occasion of the crime. Likewise immaterial is the fact that the victim of homicide is one of the
robbers; the felony would still be robbery with homicide. - People of the Philippines vs. Welvin
Diu y Kotsesa, and Dennis Dayaon y Tupit, G.R. No. 201449 , April 3, 2013
B.P. 22
The elements of violation of B.P. Blg. 22 are: (1) making, drawing, and issuance of any check to
apply on account or for value; (2) knowledge of the maker, drawer, or issuer that at the time of
issue he does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of the
check in full upon its presentment; and (3) subsequent dishonor of the check by the drawee bank
for insufficiency of funds or credit, or dishonor for the same reason had not the drawer, without any
valid cause, ordered the bank to stop payment. - Liberata Ambito and Basilio Ambito vs. People
of the Philippines, G.R. No. 127327, February 13, 2009
ESTAFA
The receipt by the drawer of the notice of dishonor is not an element of the offense. The
presumption only dispenses with the presentation of evidence of deceit if such notification is
received and the drawer of the check failed to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check
within three (3) days from receipt of the notice of dishonor of the check.
The elements of Estafa by means of deceit, whether committed by false pretenses or concealment,
are the following (a) that there must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means; (b)

That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or
simultaneous with the commission of the fraud; (c) That the offended party must have relied on the
false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his money or
property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means; (d) That as a result
thereof, the offended party suffered damage. - Jude Joby Lopez vs. People of the Philippines, G.R.
No. 166810. June 26, 2008
It is elementary that denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is negative and
self-serving evidence which has far less evidentiary value than the testimony of credible witnesses
who testify on affirmative matters. - People of the Philippines vs. Virginia Baby P. Montaner,
G.R. No. 184053, August 31, 2011
It is settled that a person may be charged and convicted separately of illegal recruitment and Estafa.
Rodericks contention that he cannot be convicted of estafa because the element of deceit is lacking
is without merit, as private complainants were able to establish, through their positive and credible
testimonies, that appellant acted in conspiracy with his co-accused to mislead private complainants
into believing that appellant and his co-accused, for a fee, can deploy private complainants abroad
for employment. - People of the Philippines vs. Angelita I. Daud, Hanelita M. Gallemit and
Roderick Gallemit y Tolentino, G.R. No. 197539, June 2, 2014
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
To constitute illegal recruitment in large scale three (3) elements must concur: (a) the offender has
no valid license or authority required by law to enable him to lawfully engage in recruitment and
placement of workers; (b) the offender undertakes any of the activities within the meaning of
"recruitment and placement" under Art. 13, par. (b), of the Labor Code, or any of the prohibited
practices enumerated under Art. 34 of the same Code (now Sec. 6, RA 8042); and, (c) the offender
committed the same against three (3) or more persons, individually or as a group.
There are three ways of committing estafa under the above-quoted provision: (1) by using a
fictitious name; (2) by falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions; and (3) by means of other similar deceits. Under
this class of estafa, the element of deceit is indispensable. - People of the Philippines vs. Grace
Calimon and Aida Comila, January 29, 2009, G.R. No. 175229
The offense of illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum where the criminal intent of the accused is
not necessary for conviction, while estafa is malum in se where the criminal intent of the accused is
crucial for conviction. - People of the Philippines vs. Dolores Ocden, G.R. No. 173198, June 1,
2011
The elements of estafa are: (a) that the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by
means of deceit, and (b) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third person. Both elements are present, Ochoas deceit was evident in her false
representation to private complainants that she possessed the capability to send said private
complainants to Taiwan/Saudi Arabia for employment. Clearly deceived by Ochoas words and
actions, private complainants were persuaded to hand over their money to Ochoa to pay for their
placement and medical fees. Sadly, private complainants were never able to leave for work abroad,

nor recover their money. People of the Philippines vs. Rosario "Rose" Ochoa, G.R. No. 173792,
August 31, 2011
It was not necessary for the prosecution to prove that Roderick himself received the placement fees
from complainants and issued receipts for the same, given the finding of the existence of conspiracy
among Roderick and his co-accused Hanelita and Daud to convict Roderick of Illegal recruitment in
large scale. Direct proof of previous agreement to commit a crime is not necessary. It may be
deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated, or inferred from the acts
of the accused which point to a joint purpose and design, concerted action and community of
interest. And Between the categorical statements of the private complainants, on the one hand, and
the bare denial of appellant, on the other hand, the former must perforce prevail. - People of the
Philippines vs. Angelita I. Daud, Hanelita M. Gallemit and Roderick Gallemit y Tolentino, G.R.
No. 197539, June 2, 2014
LIBEL
Malice connotes ill will or spite and speaks not in response to duty but merely to injure the
reputation of the person defamed, and implies an intention to do ulterior and unjustifiable
harm. Malice is present when it is shown that the author of the libelous remarks made such
remarks with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity
thereof. - Isagani M. Yambot, Letty Jimenez-Magsanoc, Jose Ma. D. Nolasco, Artemio T.
Engracia, Jr. and Volt Contreras vs. Hon. Artemio Tuquero in his capacity as Secretary of
Justice, and Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr., G.R. No. 169895, March 23, 2011
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Mercantile Law

2015)
CORPORATION LAW
DOCTRINE OF SEPARATE LEGAL PERSONALITY
Stockholders cannot claim ownership over corporate properties by virtue of the Minutes of a
Stockholders meeting which merely evidence a loan agreement between the stockholders and the
corporation. As such, there interest over the properties are merely inchoate. - Philippine National
Bank vs. Merelo B. Aznar et al., G.R. No. 171805, May 30, 2011
DOCTRINE OF PIERCING THE VEIL OF CORPORATE FICTION
In this connection, case law lays down a three-pronged test to determine the application of the alter
ego theory, which is also known as the instrumentality theory, namely:
(1) Control, not mere majority or complete stock control, but complete domination, not only of
finances but of policy and business practice in respect to the transaction attacked so that
the corporate entity as to this transaction had at the time no separate mind, will or
existence of its own;
(2) Such control must have been used by the defendant to commit fraud or wrong, to
perpetuate the violation of a statutory or other positive legal duty, or dishonest and unjust
act in contravention of plaintiffs legal right; and
(3) The aforesaid control and breach of duty must have proximately caused the injury or unjust
loss complained of.
The first prong is the instrumentality or control test. This test requires that the subsidiary be
completely under the control and domination of the parent. It examines the parent corporations
relationship with the subsidiary. It inquires whether a subsidiary corporation is so organized and
controlled and its affairs are so conducted as to make it a mere instrumentality or agent of the
parent corporation such that its separate existence as a distinct corporate entity will be ignored. It
seeks to establish whether the subsidiary corporation has no autonomy and the parent corporation,
though acting through the subsidiary in form and appearance, is operating the business directly for
itself.
The second prong is the fraud test. This test requires that the parent corporations conduct in
using the subsidiary corporation be unjust, fraudulent or wrongful. It examines the relationship of
the plaintiff to the corporation. It recognizes that piercing is appropriate only if the parent
corporation uses the subsidiary in a way that harms the plaintiff creditor. As such, it requires a
showing of an element of injustice or fundamental unfairness.
The third prong is the harm test. This test requires the plaintiff to show that the defendants
control, exerted in a fraudulent, illegal or otherwise unfair manner toward it, caused the harm
suffered.
A causal connection between the fraudulent conduct committed through the
instrumentality of the subsidiary and the injury suffered or the damage incurred by the plaintiff
should be established. The plaintiff must prove that, unless the corporate veil is pierced, it will have
been treated unjustly by the defendants exercise of control and improper use of the corporate form
and, thereby, suffer damages. - Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Hydro Resources
Contractors Corporation, GR. No. 167603, 167561 & 167603, March 13, 2013

2015)
GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS
The PNRC enjoys a special status as an important ally and auxiliary of the government in the
humanitarian field in accordance with its commitments under international law. Its structure is sui
generis. The Court should not shake its existence to the core in an untimely and drastic manner that
would not only have negative consequences to those who depend on it in times of disaster and
armed hostilities but also have adverse effects on the image of the Philippines in the international
community. - Dante V. Liban, Reynaldo M. Bernardo and Salvador M. Viari vs. Richard J.
Gordon, Philippine National Red Cross, Intervenor, G. R. No. 175352, January 18, 2011
Not all corporations, which are not government owned or controlled, are ipso facto to be
considered private corporations as there exists another distinct class of corporations or chartered
institutions which are otherwise known as "public corporations." These corporations are treated by
law as agencies or instrumentalities of the government which are not subject to the tests of
ownership or control and economic viability but to different criteria relating to their public
purposes/interests or constitutional policies and objectives and their administrative relationship to
the government or any of its Departments or Offices. - Boy Scouts of the Philippines vs.
Commission On Audit, G.R. No. 177131, June 7, 2011
CORPORATE NAME
While the SC stand by in its pronouncement on the importance of the corporate name to the very
existence of corporations and the significance thereof in the corporations right to sue, it shall not go
so far as to dismiss a case filed by the proper party using its former name when adequate
identification is presented. - NM Rothschild & Sons (Australia) Limited vs. Lepanto
Consolidated Mining Company, G.R. No. 175799, November 28, 2011
BOARD OF DIRECTORS/CORPORATE OFFICERS
Except for the powers which are expressly conferred on it by the Corporation Code and those that
are implied by or are incidental to its existence, a corporation has no powers. Physical acts, like the
signing of documents, can be performed only by natural persons duly authorized for the purpose by
corporate bylaws or by a specific act of the board of directors. - Cebu Bionic Builders Supply, Inc.
and Lydia Sia vs. Development Bank of the Philippines, Jose To Chip, Patricio Yap and Roger
Balila, G.R. No. 154366, November 17, 2010
The requirement of the certification of non-forum shopping is rooted in the principle that a partylitigant shall not be allowed to pursue simultaneous remedies in different fora, as this practice is
detrimental to an orderly judicial procedure. However, the Court has relaxed, under justifiable
circumstances, the rule requiring the submission of such certification considering that, although it
is obligatory, it is not jurisdictional. Not being jurisdictional, it can be relaxed under the rule of
substantial compliance. Thus, a President of a corporation, among other enumerated corporate
officers and employees, can sign the verification and certification against of non-forum shopping in
behalf of the said corporation without the benefit of a board resolution. - South Cotabato
Communications Corporation and Gauvain J. Benzonan vs. Hon. Patricia A. Sto. Tomas,
Secretary of Labor And Employment, Rolando Fabrigar, Merlyn Velarde, Vince Lamboc,

2015)
Felipe Galindo, Leonardo Miguel, Julius Rubin, Edel Roderos, Merlyn Coliao and Edgar
Jopson, G.R. No. 173326, December 15, 2010
DERIVATIVE SUIT
A derivative suit cannot prosper without first complying with the legal requisites for its institution.
Thus, a complaint which contained no allegation whatsoever of any effort to avail of intra-corporate
remedies allows the court to dismiss it, even motu proprio. Indeed, even if petitioners thought it
was futile to exhaust intra-corporate remedies, they should have stated the same in the Complaint
and specified the reasons for such opinion. The requirement of this allegation in the Complaint is
not a useless formality which may be disregarded at will. - Nestor Ching and Andrew Wellington
vs. Subic Bay Golf And Country Club, Inc., Hu Ho Hsiu Lien alias Susan Hu, Hu Tsung Chieh
alias Jack Hu, Hu Tsung Hui, Hu Tsung Tzu and Reynald R. Suarez, G.R. No. 174353,
September 10, 2014
MERGER
FEBTC employees that were absorbed by petitioner upon the merger between FEBTC and BPI
should be covered by the Union Shop Clause found in the existing CBA between petitioner and
respondent Union. The Court believes that it is contrary to public policy to declare the former
FEBTC employees as forming part of the assets or liabilities of FEBTC that were transferred and
absorbed by BPI in the Articles of Merger. Assets and liabilities, should be deemed to refer only to
property rights and obligations of FEBTC and do not include the employment contracts of its
personnel. A corporation cannot unilaterally transfer its employees to another employer like
chattel. Even though FEBTC employees had no choice or control over the merger of their employer
with BPI, they had a choice whether or not they would allow themselves to be absorbed by BPI.
Employment is a personal consensual contract and absorption by BPI of a former FEBTC employee
without the consent of the employee is in violation of an individuals freedom to contract. - Bank of
the Philippine Islands vs. BPI Employees Union-Davao Chapter-Federation of Unions in BPI
Unibank, G.R. No. 164301, August 10, 2010
SECURITIES AND REGULATIONS CODE
It is axiomatic that jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by law and is determined by the
allegations of the complaint or the petition irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to all or
some of the claims or reliefs asserted therein. - Philippine Stock Exchange, Inc. vs. The Manila
Banking Corporation et.al, G.R. No. 147778. July 23, 2008
INTRA-CORPORATE CONTROVERSIES
Civil cases involving the inspection of corporate books are governed by the rules of procedure set
forth in the Interim Rules of Procedure for Intra-Corporate Controversies under Republic Act No.
8799 (Interim Rules). In order to assail the decision or order issued under the Interim order must
be sought from the appellate court to enjoin the enforcement or implementation of the decision or
order, and unless a restraining order is so issued, the decision or order rendered under the Interim
Rules shall remain to be immediately executory.
In the inspection of Corporate Books, the burden of proof lies with the corporation who
refuses to grant to the stockholder the right to inspect corporate records.

2015)
Supervening events refer to facts which transpire after judgment has become final and executory or
to new circumstances which developed after the judgment has acquired finality, including matters
which the parties were not aware of prior to or during the trial as they were not yet in existence at
that time, a supervening event affects or changes the substance of the judgment and renders the
execution thereof inequitable, impossible or unjust. - Dee Ping Wee, Araceli Wee and Marina U.
Tan vs. Lee Hiong Wee and Rosalind Wee, G.R. No. 169345, August 25, 2010
BANKING LAWS
Banks, their business being impressed with public interest, are expected to exercise more care and
prudence than private individuals in their dealings, even those involving registered lands. The rule
that persons dealing with registered lands can rely solely on the certificate of title does not apply to
banks. - Philippine Trust Company (also known as Philtrust Bank) vs. Hon. Court of Appeals
and Forfom Development Corporation, G.R. No. 150318, November 22, 2010
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas placed Rural Bank of Tuba (RBTI) under receivership with the
Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation as the receiver. Accordingly, PDIC filed a petition for
assistance in the liquidation of RBTI which was approved by the trial court. As an incident of the
proceeding, BIR intervened as one of the creditors of RBTI. BIR contends that a tax clearance is
required before the approval of project of distribution of the assets of a bank. In denying their
contention, the Court held the law expressly provides that debts and liabilities of the bank under
liquidation are to be paid in accordance with the rules on concurrence and preference of credit
under the Civil Code. With reference to the other real and personal property of the debtor,
sometimes referred to as free property, the taxes and assessments due the National Government,
other than those in Articles 2241(1) and 2242(1) of the Civil Code, such as the corporate income
tax, will come only in ninth place in the order of preference. If the BIRs contention that a tax
clearance be secured first before the project of distribution of the assets of a bank under liquidation
may be approved, then the tax liabilities will be given absolute preference in all instances, including
those that do not fall under Articles 2241(1) and 2242(1) of the Civil Code. - Philippine Deposit
Insurance Corporation vs. Bureau Of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 172892, June 13, 2013
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
The conviction of Gemma for trademark infringement under Section 155 of Republic Act No. 8293,
as the counterfeit goods seized were not only found in her possession and control, but also in the
building registered under her business. The counterfeit cigarettes seized from Gemmas possession
were intended to confuse and deceive the public as to the origin of the cigarettes intended to be
sold. - Gemma Ong a.k.a. Maria Teresa Gemma Catacutan vs. People of the Philippines, G.R.
No. 169440, November 23, 2011
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS LAW
Banks are engaged in a business impressed with public interest, and it is their duty to protect in
return their many clients and depositors who transact business with them. - Bank Of America NT
& SA vs. Philippine Racing Club, G.R. No. 150228, July 30, 2009
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

POLICE POWER
Ayala Land Inc sold parcel of land to Spouses Jose Critina Yuson with a restriction that the property
shall be used exclusively for the establishment and maintenance of a preparatory school, However,
the spouses evaded such restriction and thus it is violates zoning ordinance. The court ruled that
zoning ordinance in question, while valid as a police measure, was not intended to affect existing
rights protected by the impairment clause. It is always a wise policy to reconcile apparently
conflicting rights under the Constitution and to preserve both instead of nullifying one against the
other. - The Learning Child, Inc. and Sps. Felipe And Mary Anne Alfonso vs.
Ayala Alabang Village Association, et al., G.R. No. 134269 July 7, 2010
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
HRET
The 2004 HRET Rules on summons is silent on how the summons should be served on the
protestee. Significantly, Rule 80 of the 2004 HRET Rules provides that the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure applies by analogy or suppletorily in so far as the latter may be applicable and not
inconsistent therewith as well as with the orders, resolutions and decisions of the HRET. In view of
the failure of the HRET Rules to specify the authorized modes of service of summons, resort then is
necessary to Sections 6 and 7, Rule 14, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. In the case at bar, the service
of the summons was made through registered mail, which is not among the allowed modes of
service under Rule 14 of the Rules of Court. - Datu Pax Pakung S. Mangudadatu vs. The House of
Representatives Electoral Tribunal and Angelo O. Montilla, G.R. No. 179813, December 18,
2008
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
POWER OF REORGANIZATION
The President, by virtue of Section 31, Chapter 10, Title III, Book III of the Administrative Code of
1987, has the continuing authority to reorganize the Office of the President, "in order to achieve
simplicity, economy and efficiency." As such, the issuance of Executive Order No. 378 by President
Arroyo was well within her prerogative. Its constitutionality can be derived from the exercise of a
delegated legislative power granted by law. Moreover, it purports to institute necessary reforms in
government in order to improve and upgrade efficiency in the delivery of public services by
redefining the functions of the NPO and limiting its funding to its own income and to transform it
into a self-reliant agency able to compete with the private sector. - Atty. Sylvia Banda, Consoricia
O. Penson, Radito V. Padrigano, et al., vs. Eduardo R. Ermita, in his capacity as Executive
Secretary, The Director General of the Philippine Information Agency and The National
Treasurer, G.R. No. 166620, April 20, 2010
PARDONING POWER
When the pardon extended to former President Estrada shows that both the principal penalty of
reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties are included in the pardon. The first sentence refers
to the executive clemency extended to former President Estrada who was convicted by the

Sandiganbayan of plunder and imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua. The latter is the principal
penalty pardoned which relieved him of imprisonment. The sentence that followed, which states
that "(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and political rights," expressly remitted the accessory
penalties that attached to the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua. Hence, from the text of the
pardon that the accessory penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute disqualification
were expressly remitted together with the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Furthermore, the third preambular clause of the pardon, i.e., [w]hereas, Joseph Ejercito Estrada
has publicly committed to no longer seek any elective position or office, neither makes the pardon
conditional, nor militate against the conclusion that former President Estradas rights to suffrage
and to seek public elective office have been restored. A preamble is really not an integral part of a
law. It is merely an introduction to show its intent or purposes. It cannot be the origin of rights and
obligations. Where the meaning of a statute is clear and unambiguous, the preamble can neither
expand nor restrict its operation much less prevail over its text. Hence if the pardon was intended
be conditional, it should have explicitly stated the same in the text of the pardon itself. Since it did
not make an integral part of the decree of pardon, the 3rd preambular clause cannot be interpreted
as a condition to the pardon extended. - Atty. Alicia Risos-Vidal and Alfredo S. Lim vs.
Commission on Elections and Joseph Ejercito Estrada, G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
Majority of the above jurisprudence have found their way in our jurisdiction. In Chavez v. PCGG, this
Court held that there is a governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to state
secrets regarding military, diplomatic and other security matters. In Chavez v. PEA, there is also a
recognition of the confidentiality of Presidential conversations, correspondences, and discussions
in closed-door Cabinet meetings. In Senate v. Ermita, the concept of presidential communications
privilege is fully discussed. As may be gleaned from the above discussion, the claim of executive
privilege is highly recognized in cases where the subject of inquiry relates to a power textually
committed by the Constitution to the President, such as the area of military and foreign relations.
Under our Constitution, the President is the repository of the commander-in-chief, appointing,
pardoning, and diplomatic, powers. Consistent with the doctrine of separation of powers, the
information relating to these powers may enjoy greater confidentiality than others.
The above cases, especially, Nixon, In Re Sealed Case and Judicial Watch, somehow provide the
elements of presidential communications privilege, to wit:
1) The protected communication must relate to a quintessential and non-delegable
presidential power;
2) The communication must be authored or solicited and received by a close advisor of
the President or the President himself. The judicial test is that an advisor must be in
operational proximity with the President.
3) The presidential communications privilege remains a qualified privilege that may be
overcome by a showing of adequate need, such that the information sought likely
contains important evidence and by the unavailability of the information elsewhere by
an appropriate investigating authority.
In the case at bar, Executive Secretary Ermita premised his claim of executive privilege on the
ground that the communications elicited by the three (3) questions fall under conversation and
correspondence between the President and public officials necessary in her executive and policy
decision-making process and, that the information sought to be disclosed might impair our

diplomatic as well as economic relations with the Peoples Republic of China. Simply put, the bases
are presidential communications privilege and executive privilege on matters relating to diplomacy
or foreign relations.
Using the above elements, we are convinced that, indeed, the communications elicited by the three
(3) questions are covered by the presidential communications privilege. First, the communications
relate to a quintessential and non-delegable power of the President, i.e. the power to enter into an
executive agreement with other countries. This authority of the President to enter into executive
agreements without the concurrence of the Legislature has traditionally been recognized in
Philippine jurisprudence. Second, the communications are received by a close advisor of the
President. Under the operational proximity test, petitioner can be considered a close advisor, being
a member of President Arroyos cabinet. And third, there is no adequate showing of a compelling
need that would justify the limitation of the privilege and of the unavailability of the information
elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority. - Romulo Neri vs. Senate Committee on
Accountability Of Public Officers and Investigations, Senate Committee on Trade and
Commerce, and Senate Committee on National Defense and Security, G.R. No. 180643, March
25, 2008
If what is involved is the presumptive privilege of presidential communications when invoked by
the President on a matter clearly within the domain of the Executive, the said presump-tion dictates
that the same be recognized and be given preference or priority, in the absence of proof of a
compelling or critical need for disclosure by the one assailing such presumption. - Romulo L. Neri
vs. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, Senate
Committee on Trade and Commerce, and Senate Committee on National Defense and
Security, G.R. No. 180643, September 04, 2008
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Section 6 of RA No. 8246, cited by the CA Justices as a legal basis for the aforesaid waiver, does not
allow any provision of the said law to be used to justify the transfer of any member of the CA to any
place or station without his or her consent. However, the movement from one station to another
concerned here is occasioned by the operation of the IRCA, and not by the construction of the
provision of RA No. 8246. To our mind, the said provision of law guarantees that a Member of the
Court of Appeals shall not be transferred without his consent from a station where he ought to be.
The said station is determined not by RA No. 8246 but by the rule on the reorganization of Divisions
contained in the IRCA. The said rule is anchored on the solitary standard supplied by R.A. No. 8246,
which is seniority. - RE: Request of Thelma J. Chiong For Investigation of the Alleged Justice
For Sale In CA-Cebu, A.M. No. 07405CA, February 22, 2008
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISION
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
In Rodolfo S. de Jesus vs. COA, the Court upheld the authority and jurisdiction of the COA to rule on
the legality of the disbursement of government funds by a water district and declared that such
power does not conflict with the jurisdiction of the courts, the DBM, and the LWUA. Citing Section 2,
Subdivision D, Article IX of the Constitution, the Court declared that it is the mandate of the COA to

audit all government agencies, including GOCCs with original charters. Indeed, the Constitution
specifically vests in the COA the authority to determine whether government entities comply with
laws and regulations in disbursing government funds, and to disallow illegal or irregular
disbursements of government funds. This independent constitutional body is tasked to be vigilant
and conscientious in safeguarding the proper use of the governments, and ultimately the peoples,
property. - Rebecca A. Barbo, Eleonora R. De Jesus, and Antonio B. Magtibay vs. Commission
on Audit, G.R. No. 157542, October 10, 2008
As the sole constitutional body mandated to examine, audit and settle all accounts pertaining to the
revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property owned or held in trust by,
or pertaining to, the government, including government-owned or controlled corporations, the
Commission on Audit is in the best position to determine which allowances and benefits may be
properly allowed under the circumstances. Using the "public purpose" test, there must be a
showing that the additional allowances and benefits are necessary or relevant to the fulfillment of
the official duties and functions of the government officers and employees. Otherwise, absent the
direct and substantial relationship between the performance of the public functions and the grant
of the disputed allowances, the disallowance of those benefits cannot be invalidated. - Ramon R.
Yap vs. Commision on Audit, G.R. No. 158562, April 23, 2010
COA had exclusive jurisdiction to decide on the allowance or disallowance of money claims arising
from the implementation of Republic Act No. 6758 (Compensation and Position Classification Act of
1989). - Manolito Agra et al., vs. Commission On Audit, G. R. No. 167807, December 6, 2011
COMMISSION ON ELECTION
By virtue of the 1987 Constitution, the COMELEC has the power to investigate and prosecute cases
of violations of election laws. Assuming it was acting as the National Board of Canvassers at the
time it held Bedol in contempt, the board was still exercising quasi-judicial functions. - Lintang
Bedol vs. Commission On Elections, G.R. No. 179830, December 03 2009
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISION
Both the appointing authority and the appointee are equally real parties in interest who have the
requisite legal standing to bring an action challenging a CSC disapproval of an appointment. The
CSCs disapproval of an appointment is a challenge to the exercise of the appointing authoritys
discretion. The appointing authority must have the right to contest the disapproval. The appointee
is rightly a real party in interest too. He is also injured by the CSC disapproval, because he is
prevented from assuming the office in a permanent capacity. - Liza M. Quirog and Rene L.
Relampagos vs. Governor Erico B. Aumentado / Civil Service Commission vs. Court of
Appeals and Gov. Erico B. Aumentado, G.R. No. 163443 & G.R. No. 163568, November 11,
2008
A person taking the civil service examinations for another constitutes dishonesty and grave
misconduct. Also, in case where there are discrepancies in the application form or personal data
sheet such as birth date, bare allegations of want of knowledge will not hold water unless there is
presentation of competent proof. - Civil Service Commission vs. Fatima A. Macud, G.R. No.
177531, September 10, 2009
BILL OF RIGHTS
DUE PROCESS
Due process in an administrative context does not require trial type proceedings similar to those in
courts of justice; where opportunity to be heard either through oral arguments or through
pleadings is accorded, there is no denial of procedural due process. - Atty. Emmanuel Pontejos vs.
Hon. Aniano A. Desierto and Restituto Aquino, G.R. No. 148600, July 7, 2009
During appeals in criminal cases, the Office of the Solicitor General has the power to represent the
State and the failure of the Court of Appeals to notify the State through the OSG of the pending
proceeding shall constitute deprivation of due process and shall render all subsequent proceedings
null and void. - People of the Philippines vs. Arturo F. Duca, G.R. No. 171175, October 30, 2009
EQUAL PROTECTION
In view of the various stages of deliberation in the selection process and as a consequence of
his/her duty to faithfully enforce the relevant laws, the discretion of the President in the matter of
the Order of National Artists is confined to the names submitted to him/her by the National
Commission for Culture and Arts (NCCA) and the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) Boards.
There was a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution when the former President
gave preferential treatment to respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Maosa and Moreno The
conferment of the Order of National Artists on said respondents was therefore made with grave
abuse of discretion and should be set aside. - National Artist For Literature Virgilio Almario et
al. vs. The Executive Secretary et al., G.R. No. 189028, July 16, 2013
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
Without valid justification for the in flagrante delicto arrests of accused-appellants, the search of
accused-appellants persons incidental to said arrests, and the eventual seizure of the shabu from
accused-appellants possession, are also considered unlawful and, thus, the seized shabu is
excluded in evidence as fruit of a poisonous tree. Without the corpus delicti for the crime charged,
then the acquittal of accused-appellants is inevitable. - People of the Philippines vs. Rolando S.
Delos Reyes, alias "Botong," and Raymundo G. Reyes, alias "Mac-Mac," G.R. No. 174774,
August 31, 2011
EXPROPRIATION
In the context of the States inherent power of eminent domain, there is taking where the owner is
actually deprived or dispossessed of his property; where there is a practical destruction or a
material impairment of the value of his property; or when he is deprived of the ordinary use
thereof. There is a taking when the expropriator enters private property not only for a momentary
period but for a more permanent duration, for the purpose of devoting the property to a public use
in such a manner as to oust the owner and deprive him of all beneficial enjoyment thereof.
It cannot be said that the right of eminent domain may be exercised by simply leasing the premises
to be expropriated. In a lease contract, the owner was compensated and not deprived of the
ordinary and beneficial use of his property by its being diverted to public use, there is no taking

within the constitutional sense. - Philippine National Oil Company vs. Leonilo A. Maglasang and
Oscar S. Maglasang, G.R. No. 155407, November 11, 2008
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
An accuseds right to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial is guaranteed in criminal cases by
Section 14(2), Article III of the Constitution. This right to a speedy trial may be defined as one free
from vexatious, capricious and oppressive delays, its salutary objective being to assure that an
innocent person may be free from the anxiety and expense of a court litigation or, if otherwise, of
having his guilt determined within the shortest possible time compatible with the presentation and
consideration of whatsoever legitimate defense he may interpose. Intimating historical perspective
on the evolution of the right to speedy trial, we reiterate the old legal maxim, justice delayed is
justice denied.
A verbal judgment or order of dismissal is a violation of Section 1, Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure hence, such order is, in contemplation of law, not in esse, therefore, ineffective.
- Monico V. Jacob and Celso L. Legarda vs. Hon. Sandiganbayan Fourth Division and The
Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 162206, November 17, 2010
LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS
ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
Dishonesty is incurred when an individual intentionally makes a false statement of any material
fact, practicing or attempting to practice any deception or fraud in order to secure his examination,
registration, appointment, or promotion. It is understood to imply the disposition to lie, cheat,
deceive, or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in
principle; lack of fairness and straightforwardness; the disposition to defraud, deceive or betray.
Negligence as the omission of the diligence which is required by the nature of the obligation and
corresponds with the circumstances of the persons, of the time, and of the place. In the case of
public officials, there is negligence when there is a breach of duty or failure to perform the
obligation, and there is gross negligence when a breach of duty is flagrant and palpable. Given the
fact that respondent was able to successfully overcome the onus of demonstrating that he does not
possess any unexplained wealth and that the omissions in his SALNs did not betray any sense of
bad faith or the intent to mislead or deceive on his part considering that his SALNs actually disclose
the extent of his and his wifes assets and business interest. - Office of the Ombudsman vs. Arnel
A. Bernardo, Attorney V, Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) G.R. No. 181598, March 6, 2013
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
The PNP Chief had no jurisdiction to entertain appeal in the guise of a motion for re-investigation
filed by petitioners against the decision of Inspection and Legal Affairs Division of the CPDC. The
motion for re-investigation filed by Judge Angeles with the PNP Chief is in substance an appeal from
the decision of the CPDC District Director. Since the PNP Chief had no jurisdiction, all actions taken
by the PNP Chief pursuant to the appeal is void. - Judge Adoracion G. Angeles vs. P/Insp. John A.
Mamauag, Spo2 Eugene Almario, SPO4 Erlinda Garcia and SPO1 Vivian Felipe, G.R. No.
153624, October 24, 2008
Courts will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, if: first, there is a grave violation of the
Constitution; second, the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is
involved; third, when the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles
to guide the bench, the bar and the public; and fourth, the case is capable of repetition yet evading
review, the above exceptions do not find application in the instant case. - Office of the Deputy
Ombudsman for Luzon, et al. vs. Jesus D. Francisco, Sr., G.R. No. 172553, December 14, 2011
ELECTION LAW
DISQUALIFICATION
After a candidate has been proclaimed by the COMELEC, no case for disqualification. Should
COMELEC find probable cause that the proclaimed winner has violated the Omnibus Election Code
and an action for disqualification is instituted as a result, the Commission should file an information
against the winner with regular courts but shall still dismiss the disqualification case. - Roberto
Albaa, Katherine Belo, Generoso Derramas, Vicente Duran, Ricardo Araque, Merlinda Degala,
Gabriel Aranas, Ernesto Bitoon and Juvic Deslate, vs. Pio Jude S. Belo, Rodolfo Deocampo and
Lorencito Diaz, G.R. No. 158734, October 2, 2009
POLITICAL PARTIES
The twin requirements of due notice and hearing are indispensable before the COMELEC may
properly order the cancellation of the registration and accreditation of a party-list organization.
Indubitably, if the term-sharing agreement was not actually implemented by the parties
thereto, it appears that SENIOR CITIZENS, as a party-list organization, had been unfairly and
arbitrarily penalized by the COMELEC En Banc. Verily, how can there be disobedience on the part of
SENIOR CITIZENS when its nominees, in fact, desisted from carrying out their agreement? Hence,
there was no violation of an election law, rule, or regulation to speak of. Clearly then, the
disqualification of SENIOR CITIZENS and the cancellation of its registration and accreditation have
no legal leg to stand on. - Coalition Of Associations of Senior Citizens in the Philippines, Inc.
[Senior Citizens Partylist], represented herein by its Chairperson and First Nominee,
Francisco G. Datol, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 206844-45, July 23, 2013
ELECTIONS PROHIBITED ACTS
When a security guard carries the firearm within the vicinity of the workplace that he is
assigned, the subsequent use of the said firearm shall not constitute a violation of the Gun Ban
Rule. - Juanito R. Rimando vs. Commission On Elections and Norma O. Magno, G.R. No.
176364, September 18, 2009
After a candidate has been proclaimed by the COMELEC, no case for disqualification. Should
COMELEC find probable cause that the proclaimed winner has violated the Omnibus Election Code
and an action for disqualification is instituted as a result, the Commission should file an information
against the winner with regular courts but shall still dismiss the disqualification case. - Roberto
Albaa, Katherine Belo, Generoso Derramas, Vicente Duran, Ricardo Araque, Merlinda Degala,

Gabriel Aranas, Ernesto Bitoon and Juvic Deslate vs. Pio Jude S. Belo, Rodolfo Deocampo and
Lorencito Diaz, G.R. No. 158734, October 2, 2009
JURISDICTION IN ELECTION LAW
Since it is the COMELEC which has jurisdiction to take cognizance of an appeal from the decision of
the regional trial court in election contests involving elective municipal officials, then it is also the
COMELEC which has jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
Clearly, petitioner erred in invoking this Court's power to issue said extraordinary writ. - Ceriaco
Bulilis vs. Victorino Nuez, Hon. Presiding Judge, 6th MCTC, Ubay, Bohol, Hon. Presiding Judge,
RTC, Branch 52, Talibon, Bohol, G.R. No.195953, August 9, 2011
The Court held that his case must be distinguished from other cases where the disqualified
candidate was shown to be merely leasing a residence in the place where he sought to run for office.
- Representative Danilo Ramon S. Fernandez vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
and Jesus L. Vicente, G. R. No. 187478, December 21, 2009
ELECTION PROTEST
COMELEC cannot outright dismiss an appeal due to non-payment of appeal fees when the
Commission itself has promulgated an order clarifying the rules and promoted liberal construction
thereof. - Constancio D. Pacanan, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections and Francisco M. Langi, Sr.,
G.R. No. 186224, August 25, 2009
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
PUBLIC CORPORATIONS
Not all corporations, which are not government owned or controlled, are ipso facto to be
considered private corporations as there exists another distinct class of corporations or chartered
institutions which are otherwise known as "public corporations." These corporations are treated by
law as agencies or instrumentalities of the government which are not subject to the tests of
ownership or control and economic viability but to different criteria relating to their public
purposes/interests or constitutional policies and objectives and their administrative relationship to
the government or any of its Departments or Offices. - Boy Scouts of the Philippines vs.
Commission On Audit, G.R. No. 177131, June 7, 2011
POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
Under the Local Government Code, two requisites must be met before a national project that affects
the environmental and ecological balance of local communities can be implemented:
prior consultation with the affected local communities, and prior approval of the project by the
appropriate sanggunian. Absent either of these mandatory requirements, the projects
implementation is illegal. Accordingly, the information dissemination conducted by respondent
province months after the Environmental Compliance Certificates had already been issued was
insufficient to comply with this requirement under the Local Government Code. Had they been
conducted properly, the prior public consultation should have considered the ecological or

environmental concerns of the stakeholders and studied measures alternative to the project, to
avoid or minimize adverse environmental impact or damage. In fact, respondent Province once
tried to obtain the favorable endorsement of the Sangguniang Bayan of Malay, but this was denied
by the latter. - Boracay Foundation, Inc., vs. The Province of Aklan, represented by Governor
Carlito S. Marquez, the Philippine Reclamation Authority, and the DENR-EMB (Region VI)
G.R. No. 196870, June 26, 2012
SOCIAL JUSTICE
For sure, the NHAs Order of relocating [Petitioner Magkalas] to her assigned lot and demolishing
her property on account of her refusal to vacate was consistent with the laws funda-mental
objective of promoting social justice in the manner that will inure to the common good. [Magkalas]
cannot disregard the lawful action of the NHA which was merely implementing P.D. No. 1315. It is
also worth noting that [Magkalas] continued refusal to leave the subject property has hindered the
development of the entire area. Indeed, [Magkalas] cannot invoke the social justice clause at the
expense of the common welfare. - Caridad Magkalas vs. National Housing Authority, G.R. No.
138823, September 17, 2008
ACADEMIC FREEDOM
While most agree that the right to criticize the judiciary is critical to maintaining a free and
democratic society, there is also a general consensus that healthy criticism only goes so far. Many
types of criticism leveled at the judiciary cross the line to become harmful and irresponsible
attacks. These potentially devastating attacks and unjust criticism can threaten the independence of
the judiciary. The court must "insist on being permitted to proceed to the disposition of its business
in an orderly manner, free from outside interference obstructive of its functions and tending to
embarrass the administration of justice. - Re: Letter of The Up Law Faculty entitled "Restoring
Integrity: A Statement by the Faculty of the University of the Philippines College of Law on
the Allegations of Plagiarism and Misrepresentation in the Supreme Court, A.M. No. 10-10-4SC, March 8, 2011
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law

RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT
ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT
To prove illegal recruitment, it must be shown that appellant gave complainants the distinct
impression that she had the power or ability to send complainants abroad for work such that the
latter were convinced to part with their money in order to be employed. All eight private
complainants consistently declared that Ochoa promised them employment overseas after they
submit their bio-data, birth certificates, passports and payment for placement and medical fees. People of the Philippines vs. Rosario "Rose" Ochoa, G.R. No. 173792, August 31, 2011
OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT
The subsequently executed side agreement of an overseas contract worker with her foreign employer
which reduced his salary below the amount approved by the POEA is void because it is against our
existing laws, morals and public policy. The said side agreement cannot supersede the terms of the
standard employment contract approved by the POEA. Consequently, the solidary liability of
respondent with petitioners foreign employer for the money claims continues although she was
forced to sign another contract. It is the terms of the original POEA-approved employment contract
that shall govern the relationship of petitioner with the respondent recruitment agency and the
foreign employer. - Santosa B. Datuman vs. First Cosmopolitan Manpower and Promotion
Services, Inc., G.R. No. 156029, November 14, 2008
LABOR STANDARDS
WAGES (Non-Diminution of Benefits)
It is a jurisprudential rule that where there is an established employer practice of regularly,
knowingly and voluntarily granting benefits to employees over a significant period of time, despite
the lack of a legal or contractual obligation on the part of the employer to do so, the grant of such
benefits ripens into a vested right of the employees and can no longer be unilaterally reduced or
withdrawn by the employer. - Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. National Labor
Relations Commission, Felipe E. Patag and Bienvenido C. Flora, G.R. No. 152928, June 18, 2009
DISABILITY BENEFITS
Respondents disability can only be assessed by the company-designated physician. If the companydesignated physician declares him fit to work, then the seaman is bound by such declaration. In order
to claim disability benefits under the Standard Employment Contract, it is the company-designated
physician who must proclaim that the seaman suffered a permanent disability, whether total or
partial, due to either injury or illness, during the term of the latters employment. - Magsaysay
Maritime Corp. and/or Conrado N. Dela Cruz and ODF Jell Asa vs. Jaime M. Velasquez and the
Honorable Court Of Appeals, G.R. No. 179802, November 14, 2008
The petitioners are mistaken in their notion that only the POEA SEC should be considered in resolving
the issue involving a seafarer. The applicability of the Labor Code provisions on permanent disability,
particularly Article 192(c)(1), to seafarers, is already a settled matter. Section 29 of the 1996 POEA

Standard Employment Contract itself provides that "all rights and obligations of the parties to the
Contract, including the annexes thereof, shall be governed by the laws of the Republic of the
Philippines, international conventions, treaties and covenants where the Philippines is a signatory."
Even without this provision, a contract of labor is so impressed with public interest that the New Civil
Code expressly subjects it to the "special laws on labor unions, collective bargaining, strikes and
lockouts, closed shop, wages, working conditions, hours of labor and similar subjects." - Philasia
Shipping Agency Corporation and/or Intermodal Shipping, Inc. vs. Andres G. Tomacruz, G.R.
No. 181180, August 15, 2012
The statement of Dr. Ong was not a categorical attestation as to the actual fitness of Medel to resume
his occupation as a seafarer. Plainly, after Medel underwent cranioplasty to repair the fracture in his
skull, it is not farfetched to assume that he still needed additional time for his wound to heal and to
recuperate in order to restore himself to his former state of health. To our mind, the medical
certificate of Dr. Lim and not of Dr. Ong is the definitive declaration on the physical condition of
Medel. Unfortunately for petitioners, however, this declaration was issued beyond the 240-day
period pursuant to Section 2 in Rule X of the Implementing Rules of Book IV of the Labor Code
(Amended Rules on Employees Compensation). Hence, Medel has right to the disability benefits. Fair Shipping Corp., and/or Kohyu Marine Co., Ltd. vs. Joselito T. Medel, G.R. No. 177907,
August 29, 2012
The initial treatment period of 120 days where the seaman is on temporary total disability as he is
totally unable to work making him entitled to basic wage during this period until he is declared fit to
work or his temporary disability is acknowledged by the company to be permanent, either partially
or totally, may be extended up to a maximum of 240 days under the conditions prescribed by law,
subject to the right of the employer to declare within this period that a permanent partial or total
disability already exists.
The provisions of the POEA SEC, the Labor Code, and its implementing rules and regulations, are to
be read hand in hand when determining the disability benefits due a seafarer. - Pacific Ocean
Manning, Inc. and Celtic Pacific Ship Management Co., Ltd., vs. Benjamin D. Penales, G.R. No.
162809, September 5, 2012
RETIREMENT BENEFITS
A perusal of Article XIV of the CBA readily shows that retirement benefits shall be gran-ted only to
those employees who, after rendering at least ten (10) years of continuous services, would retire
upon reaching the mandatory retirement age, or would avail of optional voluntary retirement.
Nowhere can it be deduced from the CBA that those employees whose employment was terminated
through one of the authorized causes are entitled to retirement benefits. In fact, Section 3 of the said
article specifically provides that retrenched employees shall be given two (2) months pay for every
year of service. Section 3 shows the intention of the parties to exclude retrenched employees, like
herein petitioners, from receiving retirement benefits under the existing retirement plan as set forth
in Section. - Flavio S. Suarez, Jr., Renato A. De Asis, Francisco G. Adorable, et al. vs. National Steel
Corporation, G.R. No. 150180, October 17, 2008
TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT
EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP

The law makes the principal responsible to the employees of the labor-only contractor as if the
principal itself directly hired or employed the employees. - Iligan Cement Corporation vs. Iliascor
Employees And Workers Union- Southern Philippines Federation Of Labor (IEWU-SPFL), and
its Officers And Members, G.R. No. 158956, April 24, 2009
In order to safeguard the rights of workers against the arbitrary use of the word project to prevent
employees from attaining the status of regular employees, employers claiming that their workers are
project employees should not only prove that the duration and scope of the employment was
specified at the time they were engaged, but also that there was indeed a project. The project could
either be (1) a particular job or undertaking that is within the regular or usual business of the
employer company, but which is distinct and separate, and identifiable as such, from the other
undertakings of the company; or (2) a particular job or undertaking that is not within the regular
business of the corporation. As it was with regard to the distinction between a regular and casual
employee, the purpose of this requirement is to delineate whether or not the employer is in constant
need of the services of the specified employee. If the particular job or undertaking is within the
regular or usual business of the employer company and it is not identifiably distinct or separate from
the other undertakings of the company, there is clearly a constant necessity for the performance of
the task in question, and therefore said job or undertaking should not be considered a project. - GMA
Network, Inc. vs. Carlos P. Pabriga, Geoffrey F. Arias, Kirby N. Campo, Arnold L. Lagahit, and
Armando A. Catubig, G.R. No. 176419, November 27, 2013
DISMISSAL FROM EMPLOYMENT
The right of an employer to dismiss an employee on account of loss of trust and confidence must not
be exercised whimsically and the employer must clearly and convincingly prove by substantial
evidence the facts and incidents upon which loss of confidence in the employee may be fairly made
to rest; otherwise, the latters dismissal will be rendered illegal. - San Miguel Corporation vs.
National Labor Relations Commission and Wiliam L. Friend Jr., G.R. No. 153983, May 26, 2009
Where there is divergence in the findings and conclusions of the National Labor Relations
Commission (NLRC), on the one hand, from those of the Labor Arbiter and the Court of Appeals, on
the other, the Supreme Court is constrained to examine the evidence, to determine which findings
and conclusion are more conformable with the evidentiary facts.
Managerial prerogatives are subject to limitations provided by law, collective bargaining agreements,
and general principles of fair play and justice.
Redundancy, for purposes of the Labor Code, exists where the services of an employee are in excess
of what is reasonably demanded by the actual requirements of the enterprise. - Coca-Cola Bottlers
Philippines, Inc. vs. Angel U. Del Villar, G.R. No. 163091, October 6, 2010
Loss of confidence as a just cause for termination of employment is premised from the fact that an
employee concerned holds a position of trust and confidence, but in order to constitute a just cause
for dismissal, the act complained of must be work-related such as would show the employee
concerned to be unfit to continue working for the employer.
As a general rule, employers are allowed a wider latitude of discretion in terminating the
employment of managerial personnel or those who, while not of similar rank, perform functions
which by their nature require the employers full trust and confidence.
Grave abuse of discretion is an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty
enjoined by law or to act in contemplation of law as when the judgment rendered is not based on law
and evidence but on caprice, whim and despotism. - Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. National Labor
Relations Commission and Aida M. Quijano, G.R. No. 123294, October 20, 2010
The only criterion to guide the exercise of its management prerogative is that the policies, rules and
regulations on work-related activities of the employees must always be fair and reasonable and the
corresponding penalties, when prescribed, commensurate to the offense involved and to the degree
of the infraction. - The Coca-Cola Export Corporation vs. Clarita P. Gacayan, G.R. No. 149433,
December 15, 2010
The determination of whether or not an employees services are still needed or sustainable properly
belongs to the employer. Provided there is no violation of law or a showing that the employer was
prompted by an arbitrary or malicious act, the soundness or wisdom of this exercise of business
judgment is not subject to the discretionary review of the Labor Arbiter and the NLRC. - Nelson A.
Culili vs. Eastern Telecommunications Philippines, Inc., Salvador Hizon (President and Chief
Executive Officer), Emiliano Jurado (Chairman of the Board), VIRGILIO GARCIA (Vice
President) and Stella Garcia (Assistant Vice President), G.R. No. 165381, February 9, 2011
She, ironically a Senior Financial Accountant tasked with ensuring financial reportorial/regulatory
compliance from others, repeatedly submitted tampered or altered receipts to support her claim for
meal reimbursements, in gross violation of the rules and regulations of petitioner company, such acts
warrants dismissal. - The Coca-Cola Export Corporation vs. Clarita P. Gacayan, G.R. No. 149433,
June 22, 2011
Although the Supreme Court has, more often than not, been inclined towards the workers and has
upheld their cause in their conflicts with the employers, such inclination has not blinded it to the rule
that justice is in every case for the deserving, to be dispensed in the light of the established facts and
applicable law and doctrine. An employee who resigns and executes a quitclaim in favor of the
employer is generally stopped from filing any further money claims against the employer arising
from the employment. - Ma. Joy Teresa O. Bilbao vs. Saudi Arabian Airlines, G.R. No. 183915,
December 14, 2011
The NLRC and the Court of Appeals found that the union members/employees were not given work
starting April 14, 1997 and that more than six months have elapsed after the union members were
laid off when the next vessel was serviced at the Minterbro pier on December 22 to 28, 1997. In
Sebuguero, the Court ruled on a case regarding lay-off or temporary retrenchment, which
subsequently resulted to the separation from employment of the concerned employee as it lasted for
more than six months. Article 283 of the Labor Code covers retrenchment. This provision, however,
speaks of a permanent retrenchment as opposed to a temporary layoff as is the case here. There is
no specific provision of law which treats of a temporary retrenchment or layoff and provides for the
requisites in effecting it or a period or duration therefor. These employees cannot forever be
temporarily laid- off. To remedy this situation or fill the hiatus, Article 286 may be applied but only
by analogy to set a specific period that employees may remain temporarily laid-off or in floating
status Six months is the period set by law that the operation of a business or undertaking may he
suspended thereby suspending the employment of the employees concerned. The temporary lay-off
wherein the employees likewise cease to work should also not last longer than six months. After six
months, the employees should either be recalled to work or permanently retrenched following the

requirements of the law, and that failing to comply with this would be tantamount to dismissing the
employees and the employer would thus he liable for such dismissal. As the Court of Appeals did not
err in ruling that Sebuguero applies to this case, the consequences arrived at in Sebuguero also apply.
Layoff is essentially retrenchment and under Article 283 of the Labor Code a retrenched employee is
entitled to separation pay equivalent to one (1) month salary or one-half (12) month salary per year
of service, whichever is higher. - Minadanao Terminal And Brokerage Service, Inc. and/ or
Fortunato De Castro vs. Nagkahiusang Mamumuo sa Minterbo Southern Philippines
Federation of Labor, et al., G.R. No. 174300, December 5, 2012
In all cases involving termination of employment, the burden of proving the existence of the just
causes rests upon the employer. What can be gathered from a thorough review of the records of this
case is that the inadequacies of the respondent as a teacher did not stem from a reckless disregard of
the welfare of her students or of the issues raised by the School regarding her teaching. Far from
being tainted with bad faith, respondents failings appeared to have resulted from her lack of
necessary skills, in-depth knowledge, and expertise to teach the Filipino language at the standards
required of her by the School. The Court finds that the petitioners had sufficiently proved the charge
of gross inefficiency, which warranted the dismissal of Santos from the School. - International
School Manila and/or Brian Mccauley vs. International School Alliance Of Educators (ISAE)
and Members represented by Raquel David Ching, President, Evangeline Santos, Joselyn Rucio
and Methelyn Filler, G.R. No. 167286, February 5, 2014
DUE PROCESS
Twin-notice Requirement
The essential elements of procedural due process are the twin requirements of notice and hearing.
Otherwise, the dismissal of an employee will be tainted with illegality. Those requirements cannot be
dispensed with even when the dismissal is pursuant to the closed shop provision in the CBA. Thus,
the rights of an employee to be informed of the charges against him and to reasonable opportunity
to present his side in a controversy with either the company or his own union are not wiped away by
a union security clause or a union shop clause in a collective bargaining agreement. - General Milling
Corporation vs. Ernesto Casio, et al., G.R. No. 149552, March 10, 2010
REINSTATEMENT
Under Article 223 of the Labor Code, an employee entitled to reinstatement "shall either be admitted
back to work under the same terms and conditions prevailing prior to his dismissal or separation
or, at the option of the employer, merely reinstated in the payroll." - Pfizer, Inc. and/or Rey Gerardo
Bacarro, and/or Ferdinand Cortes, and/or Alfred Magallon, and/or Aristotle Arce vs.
Geraldine Velasco, G.R. No. 177467, March 9, 2011
CONSTRUCTIVE DISMISSAL
Constructive dismissal is an involuntary resignation resorted to when continued employment
becomes impossible, unreasonable or unlikely; when there is a demotion in rank or a diminution in
pay; or when a clear discrimination, insensibility or disdain by an employer becomes unbearable to
an employee.
For abandonment to be a valid ground for dismissal, two elements must then be satisfied: (1) the
failure to report for work or absence without valid or justifiable reason; and (2) a clear intention to

sever the employer-employee relationship. - Virginia Sugue et. al. vs. Triumph International
(Phils.), Inc., G.R. No. 164804/G.R. No. 164784, January 30, 2009
SOCIAL WELFARE LEGISLATION
SSS LAW
The degree of proof required under P.D. 626 is merely substantial evidence, which means such
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. Accordingly, the claimant must show, at least by substantial evidence, that the
development of the disease was brought about largely by the conditions present in the nature of the
job. What the law requires is a reasonable work connection, not a direct causal relation. However, for
humanitarian reasons, as the petitioner pursued his claim all the way to the Court as an indigent
litigant, and due to his advancing age, what had already been given him should no longer be taken
away from him. - Alexander B. Gatus vs. Social Security System, G.R. No. 174725, January 26,
2011
GSIS LAW
Services in the MMSU, PHIVIDEC and as OIC ViceGovernor of Ilocos Norte cannot be credited because,
aside from having been rendered parttime in said agencies, the said positions were without
compensation as defined in Section 2(i) of RA No. 8291. - Simeon M. Valdez vs. Government
Service Insurance System, G.R. No. 146175. June 30, 2008
The GSIS et al.s contention that under Section 3 of Republic Act No. 8291, which provides that all
laws or any law or parts of law specifically inconsistent with it are deemed repealed or modified,
thus, all provisions of the Teves Retirement Law that are inconsistent with Republic Act No. 8291 are
deemed repealed or modified cannot stand. This is because, unless the intention to revoke is clear
and manifest, the abrogation or repeal of a law cannot be assumed. The repealing clause contained
in Republic Act No. 8291 is not an express repealing clause because it fails to identify or designate
the statutes that are intended to be repealed. - Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) et al.
vs. Commission on Audit (COA), Amorsonia B. Escarda, Ma. Cristina D. Dimagiba, and Reynaldo
P. Ventura, G. R. No. 162372, October 19, 2011
LABOR RELATIONS
RIGHT TO SELF-ORGANIZATION
No substantial distinction Under the CBA Between Regular Employees Hired After Probationary
Status and Regular Employees Hired After the Merger. They belong to the same bargaining unit being
represented by the Union. They both enjoy benefits that the Union was able to secure for them under
the CBA. When they both entered the employ of BPI, the CBA and the Union Shop Clause therein were
already in effect and neither of them had the opportunity to express their preference for unionism or
not. - Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. BPI Employees Union-Davao Chapter-Federation of
Unions in BPI UNIBANK, G.R. No. 164301, August 10, 2010
RIGHT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Standard Chartered argues that maternity benefits, under this provision, can only be given to its own
employees and not to spouses of male employees. However, a reading of Section 1 shows that at the
time the CBA was signed there was already an existing group hospitalization insurance plan and
Standard Chartered was committing under the CBA to continue the same.
In determining the coverage of the benefits under the said plan, it is the provision of the plan itself
that govern. In the said plan, the term dependent includes a members spouse who is not more than
65 years of age. The plan further provides that unless dependents are excluded in any particular
Insurance Schedule the term insured person shall be deemed to include any dependent insured
under the Policy. In other words, dependents enjoy the same benefits as the insured person unless
they are expressly excluded in the Insurance Schedule of benefits. The Court notes that there is
nothing in the Insurance Schedules or the plan itself which excludes dependents from availing of the
maternity benefits granted under the plan. - Standard Chartered Bank vs. Standard Chartered
Bank Employees Union (SCBEU), G.R. No. 165550, October 08, 2008
Right of an Employee not to join a Union is not Absolute and Must Give Way to the Collective Good of
All Members of the Bargaining Unit. Time and again, this Court has ruled that the individual
employees right not to join a union may be validly restricted by a union security clause in a CBA and
such union security clause is not a violation of the employees constitutional right to freedom of
association. - Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. BPI Employees Union-Davao ChapterFederation of Unions in BPI UNIBANK, G.R. No. 164301, August 10, 2010
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE
The University is guilty of refusal to bargain amounting to an unfair labor practice under Article 248
of the Labor Code. Indeed there was a requirement on both parties of the performance of the mutual
obligation to meet and convene promptly and expeditiously in good faith for the purpose of
negotiating an agreement. There was nothing in the March 19, 2001 and July 6, 2001 orders of
Director Maraan and Cacdac which restrained or enjoined compliance by the parties with their
obligations under the CBA and under the law. The issue of union leadership is distinct and separate
from the duty to bargain. - De La Salle University vs. De La Salle University Employees
Association (DLSUEA-NAFTEU), G.R. No. 169254, August 23, 2012
As there was no bad faith on the part of the company in its bargaining with the union, deadlock was
possible and did occur. Thus, because of the unresolved issue on wage increase, there was actually a
complete stoppage of the ongoing negotiations between the parties and the union filed a Notice of
Strike. A mutual declaration would neither add to nor subtract from the reality of the deadlock then
existing between the parties. Thus, the absence of the parties mutual declaration of deadlock does
not mean that there was no deadlock. At most, it would have been simply a recognition of the
prevailing status quo between the parties. - Tabangao Shell Refinery Employees Association vs.
Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation, G.R. No. 170007, April 7, 2014
PROCEDURE AND JURISDICTION
PROCEDURAL RULES AND TECHNICALITIES

Failure to attach all pleadings and documents, by itself, is not a sufficient ground to dismiss a petition.
Lapses in the literal observation of a procedural rule will be overlooked when they do not involve
public policy, when they arose from an honest mistake or unforeseen accident, and when they have
not prejudiced the adverse party or deprived the court of its authority.
When there is enough basis on which a proper evaluation of the merits of petitioners case may be
had, the Court may dispense with the time consuming procedure of remand in order to prevent
further delays in the disposition of the case.
The essence of due process lies simply in an opportunity to be heard, and not that an actual hearing
should always and indispensably be held. Even assuming that an employee was not fully heard during
the employers investigation, it is his fault if the same is due to his misguided insistence on having a
trial type hearing despite established jurisprudence stating that the mere opportunity to be heard
would suffice as due process in administrative proceedings. - Leandro M. Alcantara vs. The
Philippine Commercial and International Bank, G.R. No. 151349, October 20, 2010
APPEAL
While the bond requirement on appeals involving monetary awards has been relaxed in certain cases,
this can only be done where there was substantial compliance of the NLRC Rules of Procedure or
where the appellants, at the very least, exhibited willingness to pay by posting a partial bond or
where the failure to comply with the requirements for perfection of appeal was justified.
Here, the negligence and/or ignorance of the rules of petitioners former counsel is not sufficient
justification for their failure to comply with the posting of the bond within the reglementary period.
Neither can petitioners subsequent but belated posting of the bond be considered as substantial
compliance warranting the relaxation of the rules in the interest of justice. - Philux, Inc. And Max
Kienle vs. National Labor Relations Commission and Patricia Perjes, G.R. No. 151854,
September 03, 2008
The NLRC shall, in cases of perfected appeals, limit itself to reviewing those issues which are raised
on appeal. As a consequence thereof, any other issues which were not included in the appeal shall
become final and executory. - Rodolfo Luna vs. Allado Construction Co., Inc., and/or Ramon
Allado, G.R. No. 175251, May 30, 2011
An appeal is only a statutory privilege and it may only be exercised in the manner provided by law.
Nevertheless, in certain cases, we had occasion to declare that while the rule treats the filing of a cash
or surety bond in the amount equivalent to the monetary award in the judgment appealed from, as a
jurisdictional requirement to perfect an appeal, the bond requirement on appeals involving monetary
awards is sometimes given a liberal interpretation in line with the desired objective of resolving
controversies on the merits. - Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation vs. Cayetano Pacana Iii, Noe
U. Dacer, Johnny B. Racaza, Leonardo S. Orevillo, Araceli T. Libre, Genovevo E. Romitman,
Porferia M. Valmores, Meneleo G. Lactuan, Dionisio G. Bangga, Francisco D. Manga, Nestor A.
Amplayo, Leilani B. Gasataya, Loreta G. Lactuan, Ricardo B. Pido, Resigolo M. Nacua and
Anacleto C. Remedio, G.R. No. 171673, May 30, 2011
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Remedial Law

2015)
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE RULES OF COURT
A final and executory judgment, under the doctrine of immutability and inalterability, may no
longer be modified in any respect either by the court which rendered it or even by the Supreme
Court. However, as rules of procedure are mere tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice,
their strict and rigid application, which would result in technicalities that tend to frustrate rather
than promote substantial justice, must always be eschewed. Thus, in the absence of a pattern or
scheme to delay the disposition of the case or a wanton failure to observe the mandatory
requirement of the rules on the part of the plaintiff, courts should decide to dispense with rather
than wield their authority to dismiss. - PCI Leasing and Finance, Inc. vs. Antonio C. Milan, Doing
Business Under the Name and Style of "A. Milan Trading," and Laura M. Milan, G.R. No.
151215, April 5, 2010
Procedural rules were conceived to aid the attainment of justice. If a stringent application of the
rules would hinder rather than serve the demands of substantial justice, the former must yield to
the latter. - City of Dumaguete, herein represented by City Mayor, Agustin R. Perdices vs.
Philippine Ports Authority, G.R. No. 168973, August 24, 2011
JURISDICTION
In cases where a COMELEC Division issues an interlocutory order, the same COMELEC Division
should resolve the motion for reconsideration of the order. - Eddie T. Panlilio vs. Commission on
Elections and Lilia G. Pineda, G.R. No. 181478, July 15, 2009
As a general rule, the defense of lack of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage of the proceeding.
However, it admits an exception where the party fully participated in the proceedings. A teacher
cannot raise want of jurisdiction when she has availed of the remedies in the proceedings. - Civil
Service Commission vs. Fatima A. Macud, G.R. No. 177531, September 10, 2009
Court has full discretionary power to take cognizance and assume jurisdiction of special civil
actions for certiorari and mandamus filed directly with it for exceptionally compelling reasons or if
warranted by the nature of the issues clearly and specifically raised in the petition. The Court may
suspend or even disregard rules when the demands of justice so require.
No court, aside from the Supreme Court, may enjoin a national government project unless the
matter is one of extreme urgency involving a constitutional issue such that unless the act
complained of is enjoined, grave injustice or irreparable injury would arise. - Department of
Foreign Affairs and Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas vs. Hon. Franco T. Falcon, In His Capacity as
the Presiding Judge of Branch 71 of the Regional Trial Court in Pasig City and BCA
International Corporation, G.R. No. 176657, September 1, 2010
Administrative agencies, like the Energy Regulatory Commission, are tribunals of limited
jurisdiction and, as such, could wield only such as are specifically granted to them by the enabling
statutes. In relation thereto is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction involving matters that demand

2015)
the special competence of administrative agencies even if the question involved is also judicial in
nature. - BF Homes, Inc. and The Philippine Waterworks and Construction Corp. vs. Manila
Electric Company, G.R. No. 171624, December 6, 2010
The rule is settled that jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is conferred by law and is
determined by the allegations in the complaint and the character of the relief sought, irrespective of
whether the plaintiffs are entitled to all or some of the claims asserted therein. Once vested by law,
on a particular court or body, the jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of the action cannot
be dislodged by anybody other than by the legislature through the enactment of a law. - Bernabe L.
Navida et al. vs. Hon. Teodoro A. Dizon, Jr., G.R. No. 125078, May 30, 2011
A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief against his opponent
and after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or question that same jurisdiction. NM Rothschild & Sons (Australia) Limited vs. Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company, G.R.
No. 175799, November 28, 2011
It is a rule of universal application, almost, that courts of justice constituted to pass upon
substantial rights will not consider questions in which no actual interests are involved; they decline
jurisdiction of moot cases. And where the issue has become moot and academic, there is no
justiciable controversy, so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value. There is
no actual substantial relief to which petitioners would be entitled and which would be negated by
the dismissal of the petition. - Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company vs. Eastern
Telecommunications Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 163037, February 6, 2013
A.M. No. 04-5-19-SC, entitled Resolution Providing Guidelines in the Inventory and Adjudication of
Cases Assigned to Judges who are Promoted or Transferred to Other Branches in the Same Court
Level of the Judicial Hierarchy, actually recognizes that both the transferred judge and the new
judge can decide the case but gives consideration to the preference of the parties, but the lapses in
the observance of the rule by the judge which was not chosen by the accused does not invalidate the
decision due to violation of due process when the accused was sufficiently given the opportunity to
be heard, to defend himself and to confront his accusers on the offense hurled against him. - People
of the Philippines vs. Giovanni Ocfemia y Chavez, G.R. No. 185383, September 25, 2013
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Petitioner wants this Court to recognize the rights and interests of the residents of Sun Valley
Subdivision but it miserably failed to establish the legal basis, such as its ownership of the subject
roads, which entitles petitioner to the remedy prayed for. As petitioner has failed to establish that it
has any right entitled to the protection of the law, and it also failed to exhaust administrative
remedies by applying for injunctive relief instead of going to the Mayor as provided by the Local
Government Code, the petition must be denied. - New Sun Valley Homeowners' Association, Inc.,
vs. Sangguniang Barangay, Barangay Sun Valley, Paraaque City, et al., G.R. No. 156686, July
27, 2011
It is settled that the non-observance of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies results
in lack of cause of action, which is one of the grounds in the Rules of Court justifying the dismissal of
the complaint. - Addition Hills Mandaluyong Civic & Social Organization, Inc., vs. Megaworld
Properties & Holdings, Inc., Wilfredro I. Imperial, In His Capacity As Director, NCR and

2015)
Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board, Department of Natural Resources, G.R. No. 175039,
April 18, 2012
CIVIL PROCEDURE
CAUSE OF ACTIONS
A judge is not an active combatant in proceedings where the order he had rendered is being
assailed. As such, he must leave the opposing parties to contend their individual positions and the
appellate court to decide the issues without his active participation. Being a nominal party to the
case, he has no personal interest nor personality therein. Thus, he has no legal standing to institute
a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. - Hon. Hector B. Barillo, Acting
Presiding Judge, MTC Guihulngan, Negros Oriental vs. Hon. Ralph Lantion, Hon. Mehol K.
Sadain and Hon. Florentino A. Tuason, Jr., The Commissioners of the Second Division,
Commission on Elections, Manila; and Walter J. Aragones, G.R. No. 159117, March 10, 2010
The nature of the cause of action is determined by the facts alleged in the complaint. Three essential
elements must be shown to establish a cause of action. In this case, the legal rights of the petitioner
Bank and the correlative legal duty of LCDC have not been sufficiently established in view of the
failure of the Bank's evidence to show the provisions and conditions that govern its legal
relationship. - Metropolitan Bank And Trust Company vs. Ley Construction and Development
Corporation, G.R. No.185590, December 03, 2014
PLEADINGS
Initiatory Pleadings
Since the alleged misconduct falls under indirect contempt, proceedings should be initiated either
motu proprio by order of or a formal charge by the offended court, or by a verified petition with
supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein, and upon
full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court
concerned. It is clear that private respondent has missed out on all of the above requirements as he
filed only a motion rather than a verified petition. - Bases Conversion Development Authority vs.
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer of Pampanga, Register of Deeds of Angeles City, Benjamin
Poy Lorenzo, Lavernie Poy Lorenzo, Diosdado De Guzman, Rosemary Eng Tay Tan, Leandro
De Guzman, Benjamin G. Lorenzo, Antonio Manalo, and Socorro De Guzman, G.R. Nos.
155322-29, June 27, 2012
FAILURE TO FILE AN APPELLANTS BRIEF
Liberality is given to litigants who are worthy of the same, and not to ones who flout the rules, give
explanations to the effect that the counsels are busy with other things, and expect the court to
disregard the procedural lapses on the mere self-serving claim that their case is meritorious. - MCAMBF Countdown Cards Philippines Inc., Amable R. Aguiluz V, Amable C. Aguiluz IX, Cielo C.
Aguiluz, Alberto L. Buenviaje, Vicente Acsay and MCA Holdings and Management Corporation
vs. MBf CARD International Limited and MBf Discount Card Limited. G.R. No. 173586, March
14, 2012

2015)
DEFAULT
While it is desirable that the Rules of Court be faithfully observed, courts should not be
obsessively strict over the occasional lapses of litigants. Given a good reason, the trial court
should set aside its order of default, constantly bearing in mind that it is the exception and not the
rule of the day. - RN Development Corporation vs. A.I.I. System, Inc., G.R. No. 166104. June 26,
2008
SUMMONS
A case should not be dismissed simply because an original summons was wrongfully served as it
would be difficult to conceive that when the defendant appears before the Court complaining that
he has not been validly summoned, the case against him will immediately be dismissed. - Spouses
German Anunciacion and Ana Ferma Anunciacion and Gavino G. Conejos vs. Perpetua M.
Bocanegra and George M. Bocanegra, G.R. No. 152496, July 30, 2009
The Regional Trial Court failed to acquire jurisdiction over the Republic by service of summons
upon the DPWH Region III alone. The applicable rule of procedure in this case is Section 13, Rule 14
of the Rules of Court, which mandates that when the defendant is the Republic of the Philippines,
the service of summons may be effected on the Office of the Solicitor General. The DPWH and its
regional office are simply agents of the Republic, which is the real party in interest. - Republic of
the Philippines represented by the Department of Public Works and Highways, through the
Hon. Secretary, Hermogenes Ebdane vs. Alberto A. Domingo, G.R. No. 175299, September 14,
2011
DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS
PILTEL filed different actions to different courts thereby declaring it by the court as guilty of forum
shopping. Forum shopping is the act of a litigant who repetitively avails of several judicial remedies
in different courts, simultaneously or successively, all substantially founded on the same
transactions and the same essential facts and circumstances, and raising substantially the same
issues either pending in, or already resolved adversely by some other court, or to increase his
chances of obtaining a favorable decision if not in one court, then in another. - Pilipino Telephone
Corporation vs. Radiomarine Network, Inc., G.R. No. 152092, August 4, 2010
Defenses not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. It also
allows courts to dismiss cases motu proprio on any of the enumerated grounds (1) lack of
jurisdiction over the subject matter; (2) litis pendentia; (3) res judicata; and (4) prescription
provided that the ground for dismissal is apparent from the pleadings or the evidence on record. Heirs of Domingo Valientes vs. Hon. Reinerio (Abraham) B. Ramas, Acting Presiding Judge,
RTC, Branch 29, 9th Judicial Region, San Miguel, Zamboanga del Sur and Vilma V. Minor, G.R.
No. 157852, December 15, 2010
Rule 45, Section 4 of the Rules of Court indeed requires the attachment to the petition for review
on certiorari such material portions of the record as would support the petition. However, such a
requirement was not meant to be an ironclad rule such that the failure to follow the same would
merit the outright dismissal of the petition. In accordance with Section 7 of Rule 45, the Supreme
Court may require or allow the filing of such pleadings, briefs, memoranda or documents as it may

2015)
deem necessary within such periods and under such conditions as it may consider appropriate. F.A.T. Kee Computer Systems, Inc. vs. Online Networks International, Inc., G.R. No. 171238,
February 2, 2011
It bears stressing that the sanction of dismissal may be imposed even absent any allegation and
proof of the plaintiff's lack of interest to prosecute the action, or of any prejudice to the defendant
resulting from the failure of the plaintiff to comply with the rules. The failure of the plaintiff to
prosecute the action without any justifiable cause within a reasonable period of time will give rise
to the presumption that he is no longer interested in obtaining the relief prayed for. - Philippine
Charter Insurance Corporation vs. Explorer Maritime Co., Ltd., Owner of the Vessel M/V
"Explorer", Wallem Phils. Shipping, Inc., Asian Terminals, Inc. and Foremost International
Port Services, Inc., G.R. No. 175409, September 7, 2011
RES JUDICATA
Conclusiveness of judgment, one of the aspects of the concept of res judicata, requires only the
identity of issues and parties, but not of causes of action. Hence, facts and issues actually and
directly resolved in a former suit cannot again be raised in any future case between the same
parties, even if the latter suit may involve a different claim or cause of action. A case involving an
issue of whether or not an instituted civil case was dismissible due to forum shopping committed
by petitioners, which eventually was dismissed based on that same ground, constitutes as res
judicata to a petition with the same issue between the same parties albeit on a different ground of
failure to prosecute. - Ley Construction & Development Corporation, LC Builders &
Developers, Inc., Metro Container Corporation, Manuel T. Ley, and Janet C. Ley vs. Philippine
Commercial & International Bank, Ex-Officio Sheriff of the Regional Trial Court Of
Valenzuela, Metro Manila, and Clerk of Court and Ex-Officio Sheriff of the Regional Trial
Court of Pasig, Metro Manila, G.R. No. 160841, June 23, 2010
Besana filed complaint for illegal dismissal but the court decided that he was not illegally dismissed.
However, he failed to file an appeal which therefore attained finality of the decision. NEA issued
another resolution including his dismissal and he appealed to such resolution. The court ruled that
he is already barred by Res judicata. Res judicata or bar by prior judgment is a doctrine which holds
that a matter that has been adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction must be deemed to
have been finally and conclusively settled if it arises in any subsequent litigation between the same
parties and for the same cause. The doctrine of res judicata is founded on a public policy against reopening that which has previously been decided, so as to put the litigation to an end. - Engr. Job Y.
Besana, Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora et al., vs. Rodson F. Mayor, G.R. No. 153837 July 21, 2010
Literally, res judicata means "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or
matter settled by judgment." It lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on
the merits, without fraud or collusion, by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon any matter within
its jurisdiction, is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies, in all other actions or suits
in the same or any other judicial tribunal of concurrent jurisdiction on the points and matters in
issue in the first suit. - Heirs of Maximino Derla, namely: Zelda, Juna, Geraldine, Aida, Alma, All
Surnamed Derla; and Sabina Vda. De Derla, all represented by their Attorney-in-Fact, Zelda
Derla vs. Heirs of Catalina Derla Vda. de Hipolito, Mae D. Hipolito, Roger Zagales, Francisco
Derla, Sr., Jovito Derla, exaltacion pond, and Vina U. Casaway, in her capacity as the Register
Of Deeds of Tagum, Davao Del Norte, G.R. No. 157717, April 13, 2011

2015)
The annulment of the sale of share in the subject property and the legal redemption and the claim
for damages should not be mistaken to be the causes of action, but they were the remedies and
reliefs. The cause of action is the sale of the entire subject property by Basilia, et al. to Selga spouses
without Sony Brars knowledge and consent, hence, depriving the latter of her rights and interests
over her pro-indiviso share in the subject property as a co-heir and co-owner. Therefore, Civil case
before RTC-Branch 56 should be dismissed, being barred by res judicata. Any error committed by
RTC-Branch 55 in the Decision in Civil Case No. 276 could only be reviewed or corrected on appeal.
- Tobias Selga and Ceferina Garancho Selga vs. Sony Entierro Brar, represented by her
Attorney-in-Fact Marina T. Entierro, G.R. No. 175151, September 21, 2011
A judicial compromise has the effect of res judicata. A judgment based on a compromise agreement
is a judgment on the merits.
Only substantial identity is necessary to warrant the application of res judicata. The addition or
elimination of some parties does not alter the situation. There is substantial identity of parties
when there is a community of interest between a party in the first case and a party in the second
case albeit the latter was not impleaded in the first case. - Rizal Commercial Banking
Corporation vs. Dolores Hilario, Teresita Hilario, Thelma Hilario Ochoa Eduardo Hilario,
G.R. No. 160446, September 19, 2012
LITIS PENDENCIA
As regards identity of causes of action, the test often used in determining whether causes of action
are identical is to ascertain whether the same evidence which is necessary to sustain the second
action would have been sufficient to authorize a recovery in the first, even if the forms or nature of
the two actions be different. If the same facts or evidence would sustain both actions, the two
actions are considered the same within the rule that the judgment in the former is a bar to the
subsequent action; otherwise, it is not. - Philippine National Bank vs. Gateway Property
Holdings, Inc., G.R. No. 181485, February 15, 2012
INTERVENTION
Jurisprudence describes intervention as "a remedy by which a third party, not originally impleaded
in the proceedings, becomes a litigant therein to enable him, her or it to protect or preserve a right
or interest which may be affected by such proceedings." "The right to intervene is not an absolute
right; it may only be permitted by the court when the movant establishes facts which satisfy the
requirements of the law authorizing it." - The Board of Regents of the Mindanao State
University represented by its Chairman vs. Abedin Limpao Osop, G.R. No. 172448, February
22, 2012
Although Rule 19 of the Rules of Court is explicit on the period when a motion to intervene may be
filed. This rule, however, is not inflexible. Interventions have been allowed even beyond the period
prescribed in the Rule, when demanded by the higher interest of justice. Interventions have also
been granted to afford indispensable parties, who have not been impleaded, the right to be heard
even after a decision has been rendered by the trial court, when the petition for review of the
judgment has already been submitted for decision before the Supreme Court, and even where the

2015)
assailed order has already become final and executory. - Deogenes O. Rodriguez vs. Hon. Court Of
Appeals and Philippine Chinese Charitable Association, Inc., G.R. No. 184589, June 13, 2013
JUDGEMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS
Supervening events refer to facts which transpire after judgment has become final and executory or
to new circumstances which developed after the judgment has acquired finality, including matters
which the parties were not aware of prior to or during the trial as they were not yet in existence at
that time. - Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) vs. Group Management Corporation
(GMC) and Lapu-Lapu Development & Housing Corporation (LLDHc), G.R. No. 167000 &
169971, June 8, 2011
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
A demurrer to evidence is defined as an objection by one of the parties in an action, to the effect that
the evidence which his adversary produced is insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to
make out a case or sustain the issue. - Nilo Oropesa vs. Cirilo Oropesa, G.R. No. 184528, April 25,
2012
FAILURE TO FILE AN APPELANTS BRIEF
disregard the procedural lapses on the mere self-serving claim that their case is meritorious. - MCAMbf Countdown Cards Philippines Inc., Amable R. Aguiluz V, Amable C. Aguiluz IX, Cielo C.
Aguiluz, Alberto L. Buenviaje, Vicente Acsay and MCA Holdings And Management Corporation
vs. MBf Card International Limited and MBf Discount Card Limited, G.R. No. 173586, March
14, 2012
MODES OF APPEALS
Under Section 1, Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, an appeal to this Court by way of a
Petition for Review on Certiorari should raise only questions of law which must be distinctly set
forth in the petition. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. Thus, the Court may be minded to
review the factual findings of the CA only in the presence of any of the following circumstances: 1)
the conclusion is grounded on speculations, surmises or conjectures; 2) the inference is manifestly
mistaken, absurd or impossible; 3) there is grave abuse of discretion; 4) the judgment is based on a
misapprehension of facts; 5) the findings of fact are conflicting; 6) there is no citation of specific
evidence on which the factual findings are based; 7) the findings of facts are contradicted by the
presence of evidence on record; 8) the findings of the CA are contrary to those of the trial court; 9)
the CA manifestly overlooked certain relevant and undisputed facts that, if properly considered,
would justify a different conclusion; 10) the findings of the CA are beyond the issues of the case;
and 11) such findings are contrary to the admission of both parties. - Romulo Tindoy vs. People of
the Philippines, G.R. No. 157106, September 03, 2008
Petitioners assertion in their motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of their petition that (a)
the foregoing documents/pleadings were not material to the issues they raised and (b) anyway, the
records of the case may be ordered elevated by the CA, cannot excuse them from failing to comply

2015)
with the requirement of a petition for review under Rule 43. We reiterate here that the right to
appeal is neither a natural right nor a part of due process as it is merely a statutory privilege and
may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of law. Save for the
most persuasive of reasons, strict compliance with procedural rules is enjoined to facilitate the
orderly administration of justice. Thus, one who seeks to avail of the right to appeal must comply
with the requirements of the Rules. Failure to do so often leads to the loss of the right to appeal. Pedro Gabriel et. al. vs. Murmuray Jamias et. al., G.R. No. 156482, September 17, 2008
The Court disagrees with Standard Chartered that the conclusion drawn by the CA from the
evidence based on record is a question of law. This is the opposite definition of a question of law. Its
reliance on the ruling in Commissioner of Immigration vs. Garcia that when the facts are
undisputed, then the question of whether or not the conclusion drawn therefrom by the Court of
Appeals is correct is a question of law is misplaced. In the present case, the facts are disputed.
SCBEU claims that there is an existing company practice entitling Standard Chartereds emplo-yees
to outpatient medicine reimbursements and spouses of its male employees to maternity benefits
while the latter argues the contrary. - Standard Chartered Bank vs. Standard Chartered Bank
Employees Union (SCBEU), G.R. No. 165550, October 08, 2008
Moreover, it is the Courts advice to lower courts, under exceptional circumstances, to be cautious
about not depriving of a party of the right to appeal and that every party litigant should be afforded
the amplest opportunity for the proper and just determination of his cause free from the
constraints of technicalities. - Republic of the Philippines vs. Heirs of Evaristo Tiotioen, G.R. No.
167215, October 08, 2008
As a general rule, appeals on pure questions of law are brought to this Court since Sec. 5 (2) (e), Art.
VIII of the Constitution includes in the enumeration of cases within its jurisdiction all cases in which
only an error or question of law is involved. Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure constitutes
an exception to the aforesaid general rule on appeals. Rule 43 provides for an instance where an
appellate review solely on a question of law may be sought in the CA instead of this Court. In the
case at bar, the question on whether Santos can retire under RA 660 or RA 8291 is undoubtedly a
question of law because it centers on what law to apply in his case considering that he has
previously retired from the government under a particular statute and that he was re-employed by
the government. Thus, he availed of the proper remedy which is a petition for review under Rule 43
of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. - Jose Santos vs. Committee on Claims Settlement, and
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), G.R. No. 158071, April 2, 2009
The right demand arbitration is predicated on the existence of an agreement to arbitrate between
the parties except when arbitration is expressly required by the law. Also, the party who demands
the right of arbitration must be privy to the agreement upon which he invokes his right, otherwise,
he has no legal personality to pursue a claim. - Ormoc Sugarcane Planters Association, Inc.
(OSPA), Occidental Leyte Farmers Multi-Purpose Cooperative, Inc. (OLFAMCA), Unifarm
Multi-Purpose Cooperative, Inc. (UNIFARM) and Ormoc North District Irrigation MultiPurpose Cooperative, Inc. (ONDIMCO), vs. The Court Of Appeals, Hideco Sugar Milling Co.,
Inc., and Ormoc Sugar Milling Co., Inc., G.R. No. 156660, August 24, 2009
The Supreme Court respects the findings of the Ombudsman because it is an independent body
tasked to investigate complaints against public officials and is meant to be free from influence from
the judiciary.

2015)
The decision of the Ombudsman on a complaint involving the finding of probable cause in criminal
cases involving public officials may be reviewed by the Supreme Court via Rule 65 and not Rule 43.
Petition for review under Rule 43 as mode of review only applies to decisions of the Ombusman
over administrative cases. - Ernesto Francisco, Jr. vs. Ombudsman Aniano A. Desierto et al., G.
R. No. 154117, October 2, 2009
There is no violation of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts where a decision of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) is appealed to the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45,
raising only questions of law.
Dismissal is not the remedy for misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties.
The owner of the property is not an indispensable party in an action for expropriation. Failure to
implead an indispensable party is not a ground for the dismissal of an actionthe remedy is to
implead the nonparty claimed to be indispensable
A declaration of heirship cannot be made in an ordinary civil action such as an action for
reconveyance, but must only be made in a special proceeding, for it involves the establishment of a
status or right While the appropriate special proceeding for declaration of heirship would be the
settlement of the estate of the decedent, nonetheless, an action for quieting of title is also a special
proceeding, specifically governed by Rule 63 of the Rules of Court on declaratory relief and similar
remedies. - Republic of the Philippines vs. Hon. Mamindiara P. Mangotara, in his capacity as
Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 1, Iligan City, Lanao del Norte, and Maria
Cristina Fertilizer Corporation, and the Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 170375, July 7,
2010
Under Supreme Court Circular No. 562000, in case a motion for reconsideration of the judgment,
order, or resolution sought to be assailed has been filed, the 60-day period to file a petition for
certiorari shall be computed from notice of the denial of such motion. - Coca-Cola Bottlers
Philippines, Inc. vs. Angel U. Del Villar, G.R. No. 163091, October 6, 2010
It is the inadequacy, not the mere absence of all other legal remedies and the danger of failure of
justice without the writ that must usually determine the propriety of certiorari. - Land Bank of the
Philippines vs. Spouses Joel R. Umandap and Felicidad D. Umandap, G.R. No. 166298,
November 17, 2010
Section 1, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court categorically states that the petition filed thereunder shall
raise only questions of law, which must be distinctly set forth. This rule, however, admits of certain
exceptions, one of which is when the findings of the Court of Appeals are contrary to those of the
trial court. - Cebu Bionic Builders Supply, Inc. and Lydia Sia vs. Development Bank Of The
Philippines, Jose To Chip, Patricio Yap and Roger Balila, G.R. No. 154366, November 17, 2010
When a party adopts an improper remedy, his petition may be dismissed outright. Nevertheless, the
acceptance of a petition for certiorari, as well as the grant of due course thereto is, in general,
addressed to the sound discretion of the court. The provisions of the Rules of Court, which are
technical rules, may be relaxed in certain exceptional situations. Where a rigid application of the
rule that certiorari cannot be a substitute for appeal will result in a manifest failure or miscarriage

2015)
of justice, it is within our power to suspend the rules or exempt a particular case from its operation.
- Spouses Ruben and Myrna Leynes vs. Former Tenth Division of the Court of Appeals,
Regional Trial Court, Branch 21, Bansalan, Davao Del Sur, Municipal Circuit Trial Court,
Branch 1, Bansalan, Davao Del Sur, and Spouses Gualberto & Rene Cabahug-Superales, G.R.
No. 154462, January 19, 2011
In a special civil action for certiorari, the Court of Appeals has ample authority to receive new
evidence and perform any act necessary to resolve factual issues. - Spouses Rogelio Marcelo and
Milagros Marcelo vs. LBC Bank, G.R. No. 183575, April 11, 2011
The petition under Rule 45 must not involve the calibration of the probative value of the evidence
presented. In addition, the facts of the case must be undisputed, and the only issue that should be
left for the Court to decide is whether or not the conclusion drawn by the CA from a certain set of
facts was appropriate. - Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Chief of the Philippine
National Police vs. Thi Thu Thuy T. De Guzman, G.R. No. 175021, June 15, 2011
The appointments made by respondent Loyola could not be considered grave misconduct and
dishonesty. There were vacant positions causead by the creation of positions and these vacancies
should be filled up. There is misconduct if there is a transgression of some established and definite
rule of action. In the case, evidence show that respondents Loyolas did not transgress some definite
rule of action. Had there been a transgression in the creation of positions and appointments, the
Civil Service Commission should have so stated when the appointments were submitted for
approval. - Eloisa L. Tolentino vs. Atty. Roy M. Loyola et al., G.R. No. 153809, July 27, 2011
The rules of procedure are mere tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice. Their strict
and rigid application especially on technical matters, which tends to frustrate rather than promote
substantial justice, must be avoided. Even the Revised Rules of Court envision this liberality.
Technicality, when it deserts its proper office as an aid to justice and becomes its great hindrance
and chief enemy, deserves scant consideration from the courts. - Heirs of Rodolfo Crisostomo
(Euprocinia, Royce and Irish Crisostomo) vs. Rudex International Development Corporation,
G.R. No. 176129, August 24, 2011
The basic rule is that factual questions are beyond the province of the Supreme Court, because only
questions of law may be raised in a petition for review. However, in exceptional cases, the Supreme
Court has taken cognizance of questions of fact in order to resolve legal issues, such as when there
was palpable error or a grave misapprehension of facts by the lower court. - Gemma
Ong a.k.a. Maria Teresa Gemma Catacutan vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 169440,
November 23, 2011
A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the law is on a certain state of facts, while
there is a question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts. For a
question to be one of law, the same must not involve an examination of the probative value of the
evidence presented by the litigants or any of them. The resolution of the issue must rest solely on
what the law provides on the given set of circumstances. Once it is clear that the issue invites a
review of the evidence presented, the question posed is one of fact. Thus, the test of whether a
question is one of law or of fact is not the appellation given to such question by the party raising the
same; rather, it is whether the appellate court can determine the issue raised without reviewing or
evaluating the evidence, in which case, it is a question of law; otherwise it is a question of fact. -

2015)
Felimon Manguiob vs. Judge Paul T. Arcangel, RTC, Branch 12, Davao City and Alejandra
Velasco, G.R. No. 152262, February 15, 2012
Like all rules, procedural rules should be followed except only when, for the most persuasive of
reasons, they may be relaxed to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree
of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the prescribed procedure. - Spouses Jesus Dycoco
and Joela E. Dycoco vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals, Nelly Siapno-Sanchez and Inocencio
Berma, G.R. No. 147257, July 31, 2013
Time and again the Supreme Court has declared that the right to appeal is neither a natural right
nor a part of due process. Anyone seeking exemption from the application of the reglementary
period for filing an appeal has the burden of proving the existence of exceptionally meritorious
instances warranting such deviation. - Rhodora Prieto vs. Alpadi Development Corporation,
G.R. No. 191025, July 31, 2013
It is already a well-established rule that the Court, in the exercise of its power of review under Rule
45 of the Rules of Court, is not a trier of facts and does not normally embark on a re-examination of
the evidence presented by the contending parties during the trial of the case, considering that the
findings of facts of the Court of Appeals are conclusive and binding on the Court.
This rule, however, admits of exceptions as recognized by jurisprudence, to wit: (1) [W]hen the
findings are grounded entirely on speculation, surmises or conjectures; (2) when the inference
made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible; (3) when there is grave abuse of discretion; (4)
when the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts; (5) when the findings of facts are
conflicting; (6) when in making its findings the Court of Appeals went beyond the issues of the case,
or its findings are contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee; (7) when the
findings are contrary to the trial court; (8) when the findings are conclusions without citation of
specific evidence on which they are based; (9) when the facts set forth in the petition as well as in
the petitioners main and reply briefs are not disputed by the respondent; (10) when the findings of
fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record;
and (11) when the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by
the parties, which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion. - Republic of the
Philippines Bureau of Forest Development vs. Vicente Roxas and the Register of Deeds of
Oriental Mindoro, G.R. No. 157988, December 11, 2013
The accused, arrested through a buy-bust operation of the police, is questioning the non
compliance with the rule on chain of custody of seized illegal drugs but the accused only raised such
objection on appeal at the CA. SC ruled that objection to evidence cannot be raised for the first time
on appeal; when a party desires the court to reject the evidence offered, he must so state in the
form of objection. Without such objection he cannot raise the question for the first time on appeal. People of the Philippines vs. Joselito Morate y Tarnate, G.R. No. 201156, January 29, 2014
A question of fact cannot properly be raised in a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of
Court. This petition of the union now before this Court is a petition for review under Rule 45 of the
Rules of Court. The existence of bad faith is a question of fact and is evidentiary. The crucial
question of whether or not a party has met his statutory duty to bargain in good faith typically turns
on the facts of the individual case, and good faith or bad faith is an inference to be drawn from the
facts. The issue of whether there was already deadlock between the union and the company is

2015)
likewise a question of fact. - Tabangao Shell Refinery Employees Association vs. Pilipinas Shell
Petroleum Corporation, G.R. No. 170007, April 7, 2014
PERIOD TO APPEAL
Jurisprudence has settled the fresh period rule, according to which, an ordinary appeal from the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) to the Court of Appeals, under Section 3 of Rule 41 of the Rules of Court,
shall be taken within fifteen (15) days either from receipt of the original judgment of the trial court
or from receipt of the final order of the trial court dismissing or denying the motion for new trial or
motion for reconsideration. Ermelinda C. Manaloto, Aurora J. Cifra, Flordeliza J. Arcilla,
Lourdes J. Catalan, Ethelinda J. Holt, Bienvenido R. Jongco, Artemio R. Jongco, Jr. and Joel
Jongco vs. Ismael Veloso III, G.R. No. 171365, October 6, 2010
EFFECT OF DEATH PENDING APPEAL
The death of an accused pending his appeal extinguished not only his criminal liabilities but also his
civil liabilities solely arising from or based on the crime committed. - People of the Philippines vs.
Domingo Paniterce, G.R. No. 186382, April 5, 2010
The death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability, as well
as his civil liability ex delicto. - People of the Philippines vs. Anastacio Amistoso y Broca, G.R.
No. 201447, August 28, 2013
EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECTS OF JUDGEMENTS
Respondent sheriff departed from the procedure prescribed by the Rules in the collection of
payment for sheriffs expenses in implementing a writ of execution. Respondent as an officer of the
court should have shown a high degree of professionalism in the performance of his duties. Instead,
he failed to comply with his duties under the law and to observe proper procedure dictated by the
rules. - Jorge Q. Go vs. Vinez A. Hortaleza, A.M. No. P051971. June 26, 2008
It is also wellsettled that the court is authorized to modify or alter a judgment after the same has
become executory, whenever the circumstances transpire rendering itsexecution unjust and
equitable. - California Bus Lines, Inc., vs. Court of Appeals, et.al, G.R. No. 145408, August 20,
2008
It is settled that when a final judgment is executory, it becomes immutable and unalterable. The
judgment may no longer be modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct
what is perceived to be an erroneous conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of whether the
modification is attempted to be made by the court rendering it or by the highest Court of the land. Government Service Insurance System vs. The Regional Trial Court Of Pasig City, Branch 71,
Cresenciano Rabello, Jr., Sheriff IV, RTC-Branch 71, Pasig City; and Eduardo M. Santiago,
substituted by his widow, Rosario Enriquez Vda. De Santiago, G.R. No. 175393, December 18
2009
It is settled that a writ of execution must conform substantially to every essential particular of the
judgment promulgated. Execution not in harmony with the judgment is bereft of validity. It must

2015)
conform, more particularly, to that ordained or decreed in the dispositive portion of the decision. University Physicians Services, Incorporated vs. Marian Clinics, Inc. and Dr. Lourdes
Mabanta, G.R. No. 152303, September 1, 2010
Sheriff Pascua totally ignored the established procedural rules laid down under Section 9, Rule 39
of the Rules of Court when he did not give Juanito the opportunity to either pay his obligation under
in cash, certified bank check, or any other mode of payment acceptable to Panganiban; or to choose
which of his property may be levied upon to satisfy the same judgment, Sheriff Pascua immediately
levied upon the vehicle that belonged to Juanitos wife, Yolanda. - Yolanda Leachon Corpuz vs.
Sergio V. Pascua, Sheriff III. Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Trece Martires City, Cavite, A.M.
No. P-11-2972, September 28, 2011
To justify the stay of immediate execution, the supervening events must have a direct effect on the
matter already litigated and settled. Or, the supervening events must create a substantial change in
the rights or relations of the parties which would render execution of a final judgment unjust,
impossible or inequitable making it imperative to stay immediate execution in the interest of
justice. - Spouses Jesse Cachopero and Bema Cachopero vs. Rachel Celestial, G.R. No. 146754,
March 21, 2012
Section 21, Rule 70 provides that the judgment of the RTC in ejectment cases appealed to it shall be
immediately executory and can be enforced despite the perfection of an appeal to a higher court. To
avoid such immediate execution, the defendant may appeal said judgment to the CA and therein
apply for a writ of preliminary injunction. In this case, the decisions of the MTCC, of the RTC, and of
the CA, unanimously recognized the right of the ATO to possession of the property and the
corresponding obligation of Miaque to immediately vacate the subject premises. This means that
the MTCC, the RTC, and the Court of Appeals all ruled that Miaque does not have any right to
continue in possession of the said premises. It is therefore puzzling how the Court of Appeals
justified its issuance of the writ of preliminary injunction with the sweeping statement that Miaque
"appears to have a clear legal right to hold on to the premises leased by him from ATO at least until
such time when he shall have been duly ejected therefrom by a writ of execution of judgment
caused to be issued by the MTCC. - Air Transportation Office (ATO) vs. Hon. Court Of Appeals
(Nineteenth Division) and Bernie G. Miaque, G.R. No. 173616, June 25, 2014
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
Preliminary Injunction
The doctrine of non-interference is premised on the principle that a judgment of a court of
competent jurisdiction may not be opened, modified or vacated by any court of concurrent
jurisdiction.
The purpose of a preliminary injunction is to prevent threatened or continuous irremediable injury
to some of the parties before their claims can be thoroughly adjudicated and to be entitled to an
injunctive writ, the petitioner has the burden to establish (a) a right in esse or a clear and
unmistakable right to be protected; (b) a violation of that right; (c) that there is an urgent and
permanent act and urgent necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage. - Jimmy T. Go vs. The
Clerk of Court And Ex-Officio Provincial Sheriff of Negros Occidental, Ildefonso M. Villanueva,
Jr., and Sheriff Dioscoro F. Caponpon, Jr. and Multi-Luck Corporation, G.R. No. 154623, March
13, 2009

2015)
Although as a general rule, a court should not by means of a preliminary injunction, transfer
property in litigation from the possession of one party to another, this rule admits of some
exceptions. For example, when there is a clear finding of ownership and possession of the land or
unless the subject property is covered by a torrens title pointing to one of the parties as the
undisputed owner. In the case at bar, the intervenors Valdez and Malvar have established a clear
and legal right of ownership and possession and the alleged TCT of the defendants spouses dela
Rosa is non-existent. - Sps. Gonzalo T. Dela Rosa & Cristeta Dela Rosa vs. Heirs of Juan Valdez
and Spouses Potenciano Malvar and Lourdes Malvar, G.R. No. 159101, July 27, 2011
Writ of injunction would issue: [U]pon the satisfaction of two requisites, namely: (1) the existence
of a right to be protected; and (2) acts which are violative of said right. In the absence of a clear
legal right, the issuance of the injunctive relief constitutes grave abuse of discretion. Injunction is
not designed to protect contingent or future rights. Where the complainants right is doubtful or
disputed, injunction is not proper. The possibility of irreparable damage without proof of actual
existing right is not a ground for an injunction. - BP Philippines, Inc. (Formerly Burmah Castrol
Philippines, Inc.) vs. Clark Trading Corporation, G.R. No. 175284, September 19, 2012
For the writ to issue, two requisites must be present, namely, the existence of the right to be
protected, and that the facts against which the injunction is to be directed are violative of said right.
A writ of preliminary injunction is an extraordinary event which must be granted only in the face of
actual and existing substantial rights. The duty of the court taking cognizance of a prayer for a writ
of preliminary injunction is to determine whether the requisites necessary for the grant of an
injunction are present in the case before it. In the absence of the same, and where facts are shown
to be wanting in bringing the matter within the conditions for its issuance, the ancillary writ must
be struck down for having been rendered in grave abuse of discretion.
The determination of the completeness or sufficiency of the form of the petition, including the
relevant and pertinent documents which have to be attached to it, is largely left to the discretion of
the court taking cognizance of the petition, in this case the Court of Appeals. If the petition is
insufficient in form and substance, the same may be forthwith dismissed without further
proceedings. That is the import of Section 6, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
In petitions for certiorari before the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, the provisions of
section 2, Rule 56, shall be observed. Before giving due course thereto, the court may require the
respondents to file their comment to, and not a motion to dismiss, the petition. Thereafter, the court
may require the filing of a reply and such other responsive or other pleadings as it may deem
necessary and proper. - Palm Tree Estates, Inc. and Belle Air Golf and Country Club, Inc., vs.
Philippine Bank, G.R. No. 159370, October 3, 2012
A writ of preliminary injunction is an extraordinary event which must be granted only in the face of
actual and existing substantial rights. The duty of the court taking cognizance of a prayer for a writ
of preliminary injunction is to determine whether the requisites necessary for the grant of an
injunction are present in the case before it. In this connection, a writ of preliminary injunction is
issued to preserve the status quo ante, upon the applicants showing of two important requisite
conditions, namely: (1) the right to be protected exists prima facie, and (2) the acts sought to be
enjoined are violative of that right. It must be proven that the violation sought to be prevented

2015)
would cause an irreparable injury. - Solid Builders, Inc. and Medina Foods Industries, Inc. vs.
China Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 179665, April 3, 2013
STATUS QUO ANTE ORDER
A status quo order is merely intended to maintain the last, actual, peaceable and uncontested state
of things which preceded the controversy, not to provide mandatory or injunctive relief. In this
case, it cannot be applied when the respondent was already removed prior to the filing of the case. Bro. Bernard Oca, et al., vs. Laurita Custodio, G.R. No. 174996, December 03, 2014
SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
DECLARATORY RELIEFS
Petitioners Erlinda Reyes and Rosemarie Matienzo assailed via Declaratory Relief under Rule 63 of
the Rules of Court, the orders of the trial courts denying their motions to suspend proceedings. This
recourse by petitioners, unfortunately, cannot be countenanced since a court order is not one of
those subjects to be examined under Rule 63. A petition for declaratory relief cannot properly have
a court decision as its subject matter. - Erlinda Reyes and Rosemarie Matienzo vs. Hon. Judge
Belen B. Ortiz, G.R. No. 137794, August 11, 2010
PROHIBITION
While it is desirable that the Rules of Court be faithfully observed, courts should not be
obsessively strict over the occasional lapses of litigants. Given a good reason, the trial court
should set aside its order of default, constantly bearing in mind that it is the exception and not the
rule of the day. - RN Development Corporation vs. A.I.I. System, Inc., G.R. No. 166104. June 26,
2008
Before resorting to the remedy of prohibition, there should be "no appeal or any other plain,
speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law." - Spouses Alvin Guerrero and
Mercury M. Guerrero vs. Hon. Lorna Navarro Domingo, G.R. No. 156142, March 23, 2011
MANDAMUS
Mandamus is employed to compel the performance, when refused, of a ministerial duty, but not to
compel the performance of a discretionary duty. The legal right to the performance of the particular
act sought to be compelled must be clear and complete. Otherwise, where the right sought to be
enforced is in substantial doubt or dispute, mandamus cannot issue. Thus, the issuance by the LRA
officials of a decree of registration is not a purely ministerial duty in cases where they find that such
would result to the double titling of the same parcel of land. - Fidela R. Angeles vs. The Secretary
of Justice, The Administrator, Land Registration Authority, The Register of Deeds of Quezon
City, and Senator Teofisto T. Guingona, Jr., G.R. No. 142549, March 9, 2010
FORECLOSURE OF REAL ESTATE MORTGAGE
Service of Notice of Sale

2015)
The written notice of sale to the judgment obligor need not be personally served on the judgment
obligor himself as it may be served on his counsel, or by leaving the notice in his office with his
clerk or a person having charge thereof. - Sps. Elizabeth S. Tagle & Ernesto R. Tagle vs. Hon.
Court of Appeals, RTC, Quezon City, Branch 97, Sps. Federico and Rosamyrna Carandang and
Sheriff Carol Bulacan, G.R. No. 162738, July 8, 2009
FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER
It is settled that for the purpose of bringing an ejectment suit, two requisites must concur, namely:
(1) there must be failure to pay rent or to comply with the conditions of the lease and (2) there
must be demand both to pay or to comply and vacate within the periods specified in Section 2,
particularly, 15 days in the case of land and 5 days in the case of buildings. - Charles Limbauan vs.
Faustino Acosta, G.R. No. 148606. June 30, 2008
SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS
SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE
Although matters relating to the rights of filiation and heirship must be ventilated in a special
proceeding, it would be more practical to dispense with a separate special proceeding for the
determination of the status of the parties if it appears that there is only one property being claimed
by the contending parties. - Heirs of Teofilo Gabatan vs. Court Of Appeals and Lourdes Pacana,
G.R. No. 150206, March 13, 2009
GUARDIANSHIP
A reading of Section 2, Rule 92 of the Rules of Court tells us that persons who, though of sound mind
but by reason of age, disease, weak mind or other similar causes, are incapable of taking care of
themselves and their property without outside aid are considered as incompetents who may
properly be placed under guardianship. - Nilo Oropesa vs. Cirilo Oropesa, G.R. No. 184528, April
25, 2012
WRIT OF AMPARO
The constitutional right to travel is not covered by the Rule on the Writ of Amparo. The Writ of
Amparo covers the right to life, liberty, and security. A persons right to travel is subject to the usual
constraints imposed by the very necessity of safeguarding the system of justice. - Reverend Father
Robert Reyes vs. Court of Appeals, Secretary Raul M. Gonzales, in his capacity as the
Secretary of Justice, and Commissioner Marcelino C. Libanan, in his capacity as the
Commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration, G.R. No. 182161, December 03 2009
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

2015)
SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
In rape cases, the accused cannot capitalize on the inconsistencies in testimonies of the witnesses
when such inconsistencies cover inconsequential details such as the time or place of commission
because they do not form part of the elements of the offense. He cannot also bank on the delay of
the filing of the offense because it is established in jurisprudence that the delay is justified due to
victims fear of public stigma. - People of the Philippines vs. Richard O. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641,
September 10, 2009
In cases of rape, the discrepancies in the testimony of the victim as to the dates of the commission
of the offense do not negate the finding of guilt. What is material in the offense is the occurrence of
rape and not the date of commission. - People of the Philippines vs. Alberto Buban, G.R. No.
172710, October 30, 2009
The Information is sufficient if it contains the full name of the accused, the designation of the
offense given by the statute, the acts or omissions constituting the offense, the name of the offended
party, the approximate date, and the place of the offense. - People of the Philippines vs. Joseph
Asilan y Tabornal, G.R. No. 188322, April 11, 2012
DESIGNATION OF OFFENSE
In a case of murder, qualifying circumstances need not be preceded by descriptive words such as
qualifying or qualified by to properly qualify an offense. Section 8 of the Rules of Criminal
Procedure does not require the use of such words to refer to the circumstances which raise the
category of an offense. It is not the use of the words qualifying or qualified by that raises a crime to
a higher category, but the specific allegation of an attendant circumstance which adds the essential
element raising the crime to a higher category. It is sufficient that the qualifying circumstances be
specified in the Information to apprise the accused of the charges against him to enable him to
prepare fully for his defense, thus precluding surprises during trial. - People of the Philippines vs.
Rene Rosas, G.R. No. 177825, October 24, 2008
PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTIONS
Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as
the civil liability based solely thereon. Corollary, the claim for civil liability survives
notwithstanding the death of the accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of
obligation other than delict, in which case an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only
by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on
Criminal Procedure as amended. - People of the Philippines vs. Jaime Ayochok y Tauli, G.R. No.
175784, August 25, 2010
The death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his criminal liability and only the civil
liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex
delicto insenso strictiore. - Dante Hernandez Datu vs. People of the Philippines, G.R.
No. 169718, December 13, 2010
Olacos death during the pendency of her appeal, extinguished not only her criminal liability for
qualified theft committed against private complainant Ruben Vinluan, but also her civil liability,

2015)
particularly the award for actual damages, solely arising from or based on said crime. - People of
the Philippines vs. Juliet Olaco y Poler, G.R. No. 197042, October 17, 2011
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
The court in which an action is pending may, in the exercise of a sound discretion, upon proper
application for a stay of that action, hold the action in abeyance to abide the outcome of another
pending in another court, especially where the parties and the issues are the same, for there is
power inherent in every court to control the disposition of causes on its dockets with economy of
time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants. Where the rights of parties to the second
action cannot be properly determined until the questions raised in the first action are settled the
second action should be stayed. - Sta. Lucia Realty & Development vs. City of Pasig, Municipality
of Cainta, Province of Rizal, Intervenor, G.R. No. 166838, June 15, 2011
ARREST
Settled is the rule that no arrest, search or seizure can be made without a valid warrant issued by a
competent judicial authority. Nevertheless, the constitutional proscription against warrantless
searches and seizures admits of certain legal and judicial exceptions. On the other hand, Section 5,
Rule 113 of the Rules of Court provides that a lawful arrest without a warrant may be made by a
peace officer or a private person. - People of the Philippines vs. Nelida Dequina y Dimapanan,
Joselito Jundoc y Japitana & Nora Jingabo y Cruz, G.R. No. 177570, January 19, 2011
Without valid justification for the in flagrante delicto arrests of accused-appellants, the search of
accused-appellants persons incidental to said arrests, and the eventual seizure of the shabu from
accused-appellants possession, are also considered unlawful and, thus, the seized shabu is
excluded in evidence as fruit of a poisonous tree. Without the corpus delicti for the crime charged,
then the acquittal of accused-appellants is inevitable. - People of the Philippines vs. Rolando S.
Delos Reyes, alias "Botong," and Raymundo G. Reyes, alias "Mac-Mac," G.R. No. 174774,
August 31, 2011
The court shall not order the arrest of the accused except for failure to appear whenever required.
When two cases involve same accused, proceedings in one case, such as the issuance of a warrant of
arrest, should not be extended or made applicable to the other.
Moreover, a case which has not been previously referred to the Lupong Tagapamayapa when
required to for conciliation shall be dismissed without prejudice. A motion to dismiss on the ground
of failure to comply with the Lupon requirement is an exception to the pleadings prohibited by the
Revised Rule on Summary Procedure. - Gerlie M. Uy and Ma. Consolacion T. Bascug vs. Judge
Erwin B. Javellana, Municipal Trial Court, La Castellana, Negros Occidental, A.M. No. MTJ-071666, September 5, 2012
Non-flight does not connote innocence. - People of the Philippines vs. Ramil Mores, G.R. No.
189846, June 26, 2013
Any objection involving a warrant of arrest or the procedure by which the court acquired
jurisdiction of the person of the accused must be made before he enters his plea; otherwise, the
objection is deemed waived. Nevertheless, the illegal arrest of an accused is not sufficient cause for

2015)
setting aside a valid judgment rendered upon a sufficient complaint after a trial free from error. People of the Philippines vs. Roberto Velasco, G.R. No. 190318, November 27, 2013
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
Illegal Search and Warrant
In Microsoft Corporation v. Maxicorp, Inc., this Court held that the quantum of evidence required to
prove probable cause is not the same quantum of evidence needed to establish proof beyond
reasonable doubt which is required in a criminal case that may be subsequently filed. We ruled in
this case that the determination of probable cause does not call for the application of rules and
standards of proof that a judgment of conviction requires after trial on the merits. As implied by the
words themselves, probable cause is concerned with probability, not absolute or even moral
certainty. The prosecution need not present at this stage proof beyond reasonable doubt. The
standards of judgment are those of a reasonably prudent man, not the exacting calibrations of a
judge after a full-blown trial. Taken together, the aforementioned pieces of evidence are more than
sufficient to support a finding that test calls were indeed made by PLDTs witnesses using Mabuhay
card with PIN code number 332 1479224 and, more importantly, that probable cause necessary to
engender a belief that HPS Corporation, et al. had probably committed the crime of Theft through
illegal ISR activities exists. To reiterate, evidence to show probable cause to issue a search warrant
must be distinguished from proof beyond reasonable doubt which, at this juncture of the criminal
case, is not required. - HPS Software and Communications Corp. and Hyman Yap vs. PLDT, G.R.
No. 170217 and G.R. No. 170694, December 10, 2012
Where the accused is charged of illegal possession of prohibited drugs and now questioning the
legality of his arrest as the same was done without a valid search warrant and warrant of arrest, the
Court ruled that the accused was caught in flagrante delicto and had reiterated that warrantless
searches and seizures have long been deemed permissible by jurisprudence in instances of (1)
search of moving vehicles, (2) seizure in plain view, (3) customs searches, (4) waiver or consented
searches, (5) stop and frisk situations (Terry search), and search incidental to a lawful arrest. The
last includes a valid warrantless arrest, for, while as a rule, an arrest is considered legitimate [if]
effected with a valid warrant of arrest, the Rules of Court recognize permissible warrantless arrest,
to wit: (1) arrest in flagrante delicto, (2) arrest effected in hot pursuit, and (3) arrest of escaped
prisoners. - People of the Philippines vs. Donald Vasquez y Sandigan, G.R. No. 200304, January
15, 2014
ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA BARGAINING
It is not enough to inquire as to the voluntariness of the plea; the court must explain fully to the
accused that once convicted, he could be meted the death penalty; that death is a single and
indivisible penalty and will be imposed regardless of any mitigating circumstance that may have
attended the commission of the felony. Thus, the importance of the courts obligation cannot be
overemphasized, for one cannot dispel the possibility that the accused may have been led to believe
that due to his voluntary plea of guilty, he may be imposed a lesser penalty, which was precisely
what happened here. - People of the Philippines vs. Joselito A. Lopit, G.R. No. 177742,
December 17, 2008
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

2015)
Respondent Mayor Henry Barrera was charged for violation of anti graft and corrupt practices for
ousting the vendors in the market however he filed demurrer to evidence. The court granted
demurrer to evidence for elements of such crime was not present in the case specifically manifest
partiality. For an act to be considered as exhibiting manifest partiality, there must be a showing of a
clear, notorious or plain inclination or predilection to favor one side rather than the other. Partiality
is synonymous with bias which excites a disposition to see and report matters as they are wished for
rather than as they are. Evident bad faith, on the other hand, is something which does not simply
connote bad judgment or negligence; it imputes a dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity and
conscious doing of a wrong; a breach of sworn duty through some motive or intent or ill will; It
partakes of the nature of fraud. - People of the Philippines vs. The Hon. Sandiganbayan (4TH Div.)
and Henry Barrera,, G.R. Nos. 153952-71 August 23, 2010
SEARCH WARRANT
The Director of NBI may delegate his duty of signing the authorization to apply for search warrant
to a subordinate. Such delegation of duty shall not make the application or the resulting search
warrant null and void. Furthermore, the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure did not repeal A.M.
No. 99-10-09-SC which authorized the Executive Judges and Vice Executive Judges of the RTCs of
Manila and Quezon City to act on all applications for search warrants involving dangerous drugs
which may be served in places outside their territorial jurisdiction. - Spouses Joel and
Marietta Marimla vs. People of the Philippines and Hon. Omar T. Viola, RTC Judge, Branch 57,
Angeles City, G.R. No. 158467, October 16, 2009
Tuan was charged with Illegal possession of dangerous drugs and contended that the issuance of
search warrant was not justified for the Search Warrant did not describe with particularity the
place to be searched. The court ruled that a description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the
officer serving the warrant can, with reasonable effort, ascertain and identify the place intended
and distinguish it from other places in the community. A designation or description that points out
the place to be searched to the exclusion of all others, and on inquiry unerringly leads the peace
officers to it, satisfies the constitutional requirement of definiteness. - People of the Philippines
vs. Estela Tuan y Baludda, G.R. No. 176066 August 11, 2010
EVIDENCE
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
In resolving the admissibility of and relying on out-of-court identification of suspects, courts have
adopted the totality of circumstances test which considers the following factors: (1) the witness
opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime; (2) the witness degree of attention at that
time; (3) the accuracy of any prior description given by the witness; (4) the level of certainty
demonstrated by the witness at the identification; (5) the length of time between the crime and the
identification; and, (6) the suggestiveness of the identification procedure.
It is settled that an out-of-court identification does not necessarily foreclose the admissibility of an
independent in-court identification and that, even assuming that an out-of-court identification was
tainted with irregularity, the subsequent identification in court cured any flaw that may have
attended it. - People of the Philippines vs. Gerry Sabangan and Noli Bornasal, G.R. No.
191722, December 11, 2013

2015)
The accused cannot claim that the evidence obtained from a search conducted incident to an arrest
is inadmissible because it is violative of the plain view doctrine. The plain view doctrine only
applies to cases where the arresting officer is not searching for evidence against the accused, but
nonetheless inadvertently comes across an incriminating object. - People of the Philippines vs.
Medario Calantiao y Dimalanta, G.R. No. 203984, June 18, 2014
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
This circumstantial evidence constitutes positive identification of Gil as the perpetrator of the crime
charged, to the exclusion of others. She was the person who had the motive to commit the crime
and the series of events following her threat to cause chaos and arson in her neighbourhood the
fire that started in her room, and her actuations and remarks during, as well as immediately before
and after the fire sufficiently points to Gil as the author of the said crime.
A well-entrenched legal precept, the factual findings of the trial court, its calibration of the
testimonies of the witnesses and its assessment of their probative weight are given high respect, if
not conclusive effect, unless it ignored, misconstrued, misunderstood or misinterpreted cogent
facts and circumstances of substance, which if considered, will alter the outcome of the case and the
said trial court is in the best position to ascertain and measure the sincerity and spontaneity of
witnesses through actual observation of the witnesses manner of testifying, demeanor and
behaviour while in the witness box. - People of the Philippines vs. Julie Villacorta Gil, G.R. No.
172468, October 15, 2008
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if the following requisites concur: (a) there is
more than one circumstance; (b) the facts from which the inferences are derived have been
established; and (c) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to warrant a finding of guilt
beyond reasonable doubt.
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, courts should consider, inter alia, the following
factors: how the samples were collected, how they were handled, the possibility of contamination of
the samples, the procedure followed in analyzing the samples, whether the proper standards and
procedures were followed in conducting the tests, and the qualification of the analyst who
conducted the tests. - People of the Philippines vs. Alfredo Pascual y Ildefonso, G. R. No.
172326, January 19, 2009
The Trial Court correctly convicted the accused of the crime of qualified Carnapping based on
circumstantial evidence, when the combination of circumstances are interwoven in such a way as to
leave no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused. - People of the Philippines vs. Renato
Lagat y Gawan A.K.A. Renat Gawan and James Palalay y Villarosa, G.R. No. 187044, September
14, 2011
The accused was convicted of rape with homicide. The accused on appeal raised the issue of the
absence of direct evidence and the credibility of the witnesses. In this regard, the Supreme Court
held that circumstantial evidence may be resorted to establish the complicity of the perpetrators
crime when these are credible and sufficient, and could lead to the inescapable conclusion that the
appellant committed the complex crime of rape with homicide. With respect to the appellants
contention that the witnesses presented were not credible, the Court reiterated the jurisprudential

2015)
principle affording great respect and even finality to the trial courts assessment of the credibility of
witnesses especially if the factual findings are affirmed by the Court of Appeals. - People of the
Philippines vs. Bernesto De La Cruz @ Berning, G.R. No. 183091, June 19, 2013
Circumstantial evidence is that evidence which proves a fact or series of facts from which the facts
in issue may be established by inference. It consists of proof of collateral facts and circumstances
from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common
experience. - People of the Philippines vs. Ex-Mayor Carlos Estonilo, Sr., et al., G.R. No. 201565,
October 13, 2014
PRESUMPTIONS
The fact that a deed is notarized is not a guarantee of the validity of its contents. The presumption
of regularity of notarized documents is not absolute and may be rebutted by clear and convincing
evidence to the contrary. - Vicente Manzano, Jr. vs. Marcelino Garcia, G.R. No. 179323,
November 28, 2011
QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE (Substantial Evidence)
This Court has consistently held that substantial evidence is all that is needed to support an
administrative finding of fact where the decision of the Ombudsman is not supported by
substantial evidence, but based on speculations, surmises and conjectures, as in the present case,
this Court finds sufficient reason to overturn the same. - Marita C. Bernaldo vs. The
Ombudsman and The Department Of Public Works and Highways, G.R. No. 156286, August
13, 2008
The burden of proof rests upon the party who asserts the affirmative of an issue. And in labor cases,
the quantum of proof necessary is substantial evidence, or such amount of relevant evidence which
a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. - Wilfredo Y. Antiquina vs.
Magsaysay Maritime Corporation and/or Masterbulk, Pte., Ltd., G.R. No. 168922, April 13,
2011
Administrative proceedings are governed by the "substantial evidence rule." Otherwise stated, a
finding of guilt in an administrative case would have to be sustained for as long as it is supported by
substantial evidence that the respondent has committed acts stated in the complaint. Substantial
evidence is more than a mere scintilla of evidence. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if other minds equally reasonable
might conceivably opine otherwise.
As a general rule, only questions of law may be raised in a petition for review on certiorari because
the Court is not a trier of facts. When supported by substantial evidence, the findings of fact of the
Court of Appeals are conclusive and binding on the parties and are not reviewable by this Court,
unless the case falls under any of the following recognized exceptions. - Office of the Ombudsman
vs. Arnel A. Bernardo, Attorney V, Bureau Of Internal Revenue (BIR), G.R. No. 181598, March
6, 2013
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

2015)
It is well-settled that a judicial admission conclusively binds the party making it. Acts or facts
admitted do not require proof and cannot be contradicted unless it is shown that the admission was
made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made. Viola Cahilig et al., vs. Hon.
Eustaquio G. Terencio et al., G.R. No. 164470, November 28, 2011
BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Although the best evidence rule admits of exceptions and there are instances where the
presentation of secondary evidence would be allowed, such as when the original is lost or the
original is a public record, the basis for the presentation of secondary evidence must still be
established. - Heirs of Teofilo Gabatan vs. Court of Appeals and Lourdes Pacana, G.R. No.
150206, March 13, 2009
PAROLE EVIDENCE
A CBA is more than a contract; it is a generalized code to govern a myriad of cases which the
draftsmen cannot wholly anticipate. It covers the whole employment relationship and prescribes
the rights and duties of the parties. If the terms of the CBA are clear and have no doubt upon the
intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulation shall prevail. However, if
the CBA imports ambiguity, then the parties intention as shown by their conduct, words, actions
and deeds prior to, during, and after executing the agreement, must be ascertained. That there is
an apparent ambiguity or a failure to express the true intention of the parties, especially with
regard to the retirement provisions of the CBA, is evident in the opposing interpretations of the
same by the Labor Arbiter and the CA on one hand and the NLRC on the other. It is settled that the
parole evidence rule admits of exceptions. A party may present evidence to modify, explain or add
to the terms of the written agreement if he raises as an issue, among others, an intrinsic ambiguity
in the written agreement or its failure to express the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto. - Flavio S. Suarez, Jr., Renato A. De Asis, Francisco G. Adorable, et al., vs. National Steel
Corporation, G.R. No. 150180, October 17, 2008
The Parol Evidence Rule provides that when the terms of the agreement have been reduced into
writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the
parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the
written agreement. A party may not modify, explain, or add to the terms in the two written Deeds of
Absolute Quitclaim since he did not put in issue in his pleadings any of those allowed by the Rules. Maria Torbela, represented by her heirs, Eulogio Tosino et al., vs. Spouses Andres T. Rosario
et al., G.R. No. 140528, December 7, 2011
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Public Documents
As pointed out by the trial court, the Restructuring Agreement, being notarized, is a public
document enjoying a prima facie presumption of authenticity and due execution. Clear and
convincing evidence must be presented to overcome such legal presumption. The spouses Tiu, who
attested before the notary public that the Restructuring Agreement "is their own free and voluntary
act and deed," failed to present sufficient evidence to prove otherwise. - Union Bank of the
Philippines vs. Spouses Rodolfo T. Tiu and Victoria N. Tiu, G.R. Nos. 173090-91, September
7, 2011

2015)
Notarized documents (e. g. the notarized Answer to Interrogatories in the case at bar is proof that
Philtrust had been served with Written Interrogatories) are merely proof of the fact which gave rise
to their execution and of the date of the latter but is not prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. The presumption that official duty has been regularly performed therefore applies only to
the portion wherein the notary public merely attests that the affidavit was subscribed and sworn to
before him or her, on the date mentioned thereon. Thus, even though affidavits are notarized
documents, we have ruled that affidavits, being self-serving, must be received with caution. Philippine Trust Company (also known as Philtrust Bank) vs. Hon. Court Of Appeals and
Forfom Development Corporation, G.R. No. 150318, November 22, 2010
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
The inconsistencies in the testimonies of the police officers if does not dwell on material points
shall not negate the finding of guilt. Also, the failure on the part of the police officer to issue an
official receipt for the confiscated items is not fatal defect because the issuance of the same is not an
element of the crime of possession of illegal drugs. - People of the Philippines vs. Randy
Magbanua alias Boyung and Wilson Magbanua, G.R. No. 170137, August 27, 2009
Mere inconsistencies as to minor details in the testimony of the witness does not affect his
credibility. It may also strengthen his position as the court abhors memorized statements. The
accused must prove ill motive on the part of the witness, otherwise, his statement shall be given
full credence by the court. - People of the Philippines vs. Arnold Garchitorena y Camba A.K.A.
Junior; Joey Pamplona A.K.A. Nato And Jessie Garcia y Adorino, G. R. No. 175605, August 28,
2009
Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus is not an absolute rule of law and is in fact rarely applied in modern
jurisprudence. It deals only with the weight of evidence and is not a positive rule of law, and the
same is not an inflexible one of universal application. Thus, the modern trend of jurisprudence is
that the testimony of a witness may be believed in part and disbelieved in part, depending upon the
corroborative evidence and the probabilities and improbabilities of the case. - People of the
Philippines vs. Jose Galvez y Blanca, G.R. No. 181827, February 2, 2011
The RTC observed that AAA was in the custody of the DSWD when she testified for the prosecution,
and was returned to the family of the Aniceto Bulagao during the time when SHE recanted her
testimony. Courts look with disfavor upon retractions, because they can easily be obtained from
witnesses through intimidation or for monetary considerations. Hence, a retraction does not
necessarily negate an earlier declaration. It would be a dangerous rule to reject the testimony taken
before a court of justice, simply because the witness who has given it later on changes his mind for
one reason or another. - People of the Philippines vs. Aniceto Bulagao, G.R. No. 184757,
October 5, 2011
Despite all these findings, Gemma has posited from the RTC all the way up to the Supreme Court
that she is not the Gemma Ong named and accused in the case. Positive identification of a culprit is
of great weight in determining whether an accused is guilty or not. Thus, it cannot take precedence
over the positive testimony of the offended party. The defense of denial is unavailing when placed
astride the undisputed fact that there was positive identification of the accused. - Gemma

2015)
Ong a.k.a. Maria Teresa Gemma Catacutan vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 169440,
November 23, 2011
Delay in making criminal accusations will not necessarily impair the credibility of a witness if such
delay is satisfactorily explained. Furthermore, the positive identification of the witnesses is more
than enough to prove the accused guilt beyond reasonable doubt. - People of the Philippines vs.
Noel T. Adallom, G.R. No. 182522, March 7, 2012
Dulay points out that the prosecution failed to present the informant in court, alleging that the same
was necessary to corroborate the testimony of PO1 Guadamor, since it was only the informant and
PO1 Guadamor who witnessed the actual transaction. The Court disagrees. It is settled that the
identity or testimony of the informant is not indispensable in drugs cases, since his testimony
would only corroborate that of the poseur-buyer. The Court has repeatedly held that it is up to the
prosecution to determine who should be presented as witnesses on the basis of its own assessment
of their necessity. After all, the testimony of a single witness, if trustworthy and reliable, or if
credible and positive, would be sufficient to support a conviction. Moreover, in determining values
and credibility of evidence, witnesses are to be weighed, not numbered. - People of the
Philippines vs. Catalino Dulay, G.R. No. 188345, November 10, 2012
QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS
A deaf-mute may not be able to hear and speak but his/her other senses, such as his/her sense of
sight, remain functional and allow him/her to make observations about his/her environment and
experiences Thus, a deaf-mute is competent to be a witness so long as he/she has the faculty to
make observations and he/she can make those observations known to others. - People of the
Philippines vs. Edwin Aleman y Longhas, G.R. No. 181539, July 24, 2013
CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS
As a rule, appellate courts will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court in passing upon the
credibility of a witness, unless there appears on the record some fact or circumstance of weight and
influence which has been overlooked, or the significance of which has been misinterpreted or
misapprehended. The reason for this is that the assessment of the credibility of witnesses and their
testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to
observe the witnesses firsthand and to note their demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grilling
examination. - People of the Philippines vs. Salvador C. Daco, G.R. No. 168166, October 10,
2008
The issue of credibility of witnesses is a question best addressed to the province of the trial court
because of its unique position of having observed that elusive and incommunicable evidence of the
witnesses' deportment on the stand while testifying which opportunity is denied to the appellate
courts. and absent any substantial reason which would justify the reversal of the trial court's
assessments and conclusions, the reviewing court is generally bound by the former's findings. People of the Philippines vs. Domingo Dominguez, Jr., alias Sandy, G.R. No. 180914,
November 24, 2010
The victim s delay in reporting the rapes does not undermine her credibility. In a long line of cases,
the Court pronounced that the failure of the victim to immediately report the rape is not necessarily

2015)
an indication of a fabricated charge. Moreover, Jurisprudence teaches that between categorical
testimonies that ring of truth, on one hand, and a bare denial, on the other, the Court has strongly
ruled that the former must prevail. Indeed, positive identification of the accused, when categorical
and consistent, and without any ill motive on the part of the eyewitnesses testifying on the matter,
prevails over alibi and denial. - People of the Philippines vs. Roger Tejero, G.R. No. 187744,
June 20, 2012
The purported inconsistency between the testimonies of AAA and her mother BBB merely refers to
a minor detail. The central fact is that Batula, by means of force, threats, and intimidation, and use
of a bolo, succeeded in having carnal knowledge of AAA. Whether AAA was able to name Batula as
the perpetrator immediately after the rape or AAA was able to identify Batula as her rapist at a later
time, does not depart from the fact that Batula raped AAA. We have said time and again that a few
discrepancies and inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses referring to minor details and not
in actuality touching upon the central fact of the crime do not impair the credibility of the
witnesses. Instead of weakening their testimonies, such inconsistencies tend to strengthen their
credibility because they discount the possibility of their being rehearsed testimony. - People of the
Philippines vs. Jerry Batula, G.R. No. 181699, November 28, 2012
In People v. Paringit, this Court has declared that not all blows leave marks. Thus, the fact that the
medico-legal officer found no signs of external injuries on AAA, especially on her face, which
supposedly had been slapped several times, does not invalidate her statement that Mangune
slapped her to silence her. But, even granting that there were no extra-genital injuries on the victim,
it had been held that the absence of external signs or physical injuries does not negate the
commission of the crime of rape. The same rule applies even though no medical certificate is
presented in evidence. Proof of injuries is not necessary because this is not an essential element of
the crime This Court, in a long line of cases, has ruled that the absence of external signs of physical
injuries does not negate rape. The doctrine is thus well- entrenched in our jurisprudence, and the
Court of Appeals correctly applied it. - People of the Philippines vs. William Mangune, G.R. No.
186463, November 14, 2012
Alleged inconsistencies do not detract from AAAs credibility as a witness. A rape victim is not
expected to make an errorless recollection of the incident, so humiliating and painful that she might
in fact be trying to obliterate it from her memory. Thus, a few inconsistent remarks in rape cases
will not necessarily impair the testimony of the offended party. We reiterate the jurisprudential
principle of affording great respect and even finality to the trial courts assessment of the credibility
of witnesses. In People v. Arpon, we stated that when the decision hinges on the credibility of
witnesses and their respective testimonies, the trial courts observations and conclusions deserve
great respect and are often accorded finality. The trial judge has the advantage of observing the
witness deportment and manner of testifying. Her furtive glance, blush of conscious shame,
hesitation, flippant or sneering tone, calmness, sigh, or the scant or full realization of an oath are all
useful aids for an accurate determination of a witness honesty and sincerity. The trial judge,
therefore, can better determine if witnesses are telling the truth, being in the ideal position to
weigh conflicting testimonies. Unless certain facts of substance and value were overlooked which, if
considered, might affect the result of the case, its assessment must be respected for it had the
opportunity to observe the conduct and demeanor of the witnesses while testifying and detect if
they were lying. The rule finds an even more stringent application where said findings are
sustained by the Court of Appeals. - People of the Philippines vs. Felix Morante, G.R. No.
187732, November 28, 2012

2015)
Estoya likewise makes much of the inconsistencies between CCCs Sinumpaang Salaysay and his
testimony in open court. Said inconsistencies do not at all damage CCCs credibility as a witness. It
is doctrinally settled that discrepancies and/or inconsistencies between a witness affidavit and
testimony in open court do not impair credibility as affidavits are taken ex parte and are often
incomplete or inaccurate for lack of or absence of searching inquiries by the investigating officer.
We also add that CCC was only 10 years of age when he executed his Sinumpaang Salaysay and
testified in court. It is not difficult to imagine that CCC was also overwhelmed by the circumstances,
young as he was when these all happened. The important thing is that CCC was consistent in saying
that he saw Estoya with AAA in BBBs house he saw AAA crying and he immediately ran to ask
help from their neighbor, DDD. Moreover, as we pronounced previously herein, AAAs testimony
alone already established the elements of rape committed against her by Estoya. At most, CCCs
testimony on the events that occurred in 2006 is merely corroborative. - People of the
Philippines vs. Radby Estoya, G.R. No. 200531, December 5, 2012
The issue raised by accused-appellant involves the credibility of witness, which is best addressed
by the trial court, it being in a better position to decide such question, having heard the witness and
observed his demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grueling examination. These are the most
significant factors in evaluating the sincerity of witnesses and in unearthing the truth, especially in
the face of conflicting testimonies. Through its observations during the entire proceedings, the trial
court can be expected to determine, with reasonable discretion, whose testimony to accept and
which witness to believe. Verily, findings of the trial court on such matters will not be disturbed on
appeal unless some facts or circumstances of weight have been overlooked, misapprehended or
misinterpreted so as to materially affect the disposition of the case. - People of the Philippines vs.
Welvin Diu y Kotsesa, and Dennis Dayaon y Tupit, G.R. No. 201449, April 3, 2013
In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the
victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of
things, as in this case. There is a plethora of cases which tend to disfavor the accused in a rape case
by holding that when a woman declares that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is
necessary to show that rape has been committed and, where her testimony passes the test of
credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof. Furthermore, the Court has
repeatedly declared that it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to
concoct a story which would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the
rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame. - People of the Philippines vs. Edmundo
Vitero, G.R. No. 175327, April 3, 2013
When the issues revolve on matters of credibility of witnesses, the findings of fact of the trial court,
its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses, and its assessment of the probative weight
thereof, as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings, are accorded high respect, if not
conclusive effect. - People of the Philippines vs. Abel Diaz, G.R. No. 200882, June 13, 2013
Inconsistencies and discrepancies in the testimony referring to minor details and not upon the
basic aspect of the crime do not diminish the witnesses credibility.
The testimonies of police officers who conducted the buy-bust are generally accorded full faith and
credit, in view of the presumption of regularity in the performance of public duties. - People of the
Philippines vs. Mercidita T. Resurreccion, G.R. No. 188310, June 13, 2013

2015)
Jurisprudence is consistent in reiterating that the trial court is in a better position to adjudge the
credibility of witnesses especially if it is affirmed by the Court of Appeals. - People of the
Philippines vs. Gary Vergara y Oriel and Joseph Inocencio y Paulino, G.R. No. 177763, July 3,
2013
Where the ten-year old son of the victim was able to witness the death of his father and was the
lone witness to testify in the case, the Court ruled that when it comes to the matter of credibility of
a witness, settled are the guiding rules some of which are that (1) the appellate court will not
disturb the factual findings of the lower court, unless there is a showing that it had overlooked,
misunderstood or misapplied some fact or circumstance of weight and substance that would have
affected the result of the case, which showing is absent herein; (2) the findings of the trial court
pertaining to the credibility of a witness is entitled to great respect since it had the opportunity to
examine his demeanor as he testified on the witness stand, and, therefore, can discern if such
witness is telling the truth or not; and (3) a witness who testifies in a categorical, straightforward,
spontaneous and frank manner and remains consistent on cross-examination is a credible witness.
Furthermore, Jurisprudence also tells us that when a testimony is given in a candid and
straightforward manner, there is no room for doubt that the witness is telling the truth. - People of
the Philippines vs. Joel Aquino y Cendana, G.R. No. 201092, January 15, 2014
When the accused questions the credibility and demeanor of the victim as witness, the recognized
rule is that the "assessment of the credibility of witnesses is a domain best left to the trial court
judge because of his unique opportunity to observe their deportment and demeanor on the witness
stand; a vantage point denied appellate courts-and when his findings have been affirmed by the
Court of Appeals, these are generally binding and conclusive upon this Court." Furthermore,
inaccuracies and inconsistencies in a rape victims testimony are generally expected. Since human
memory is fickle and prone to the stresses of emotions, accuracy in a testimonial account has never
been used as a standard in testing the credibility of a witness. - People of the Philippines vs.
Bernabe Pareja y Cruz, G.R. No. 202122
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Estoppel
The mortgagor is already estopped from challenging the validity of the foreclosure sale, after
entering into a Contract of Lease with the buyer over one of the foreclosed properties the title of
the landlord is a conclusive presumption as against the tenant or lessee. - Century Savings Bank
vs. Spouses Danilo T. Samonte and Rosalinda M. Samonte, G.R. No. 176212, October 20, 2010
One who claims the benefit of an estoppel on the ground that he has been misled by the
representations of another must not have been misled through his own want of reasonable care and
circumspection. A lack of diligence by a party claiming an estoppel is generally fatal. If the party
conducts himself with careless indifference to means of information reasonably at hand, or ignores
highly suspicious circumstances, he may not invoke the doctrine of estoppel. - F.A.T. Kee
Computer Systems, Inc. vs. Online Networks International, Inc.,G.R. No. 171238, February 2,
2011

2015)
In the interest of justice and within the sound discretion of the appellate court, a party may change
his legal theory on appeal only when the factual bases thereof would not require presentation of
any further evidence by the adverse party in order to enable it to properly meet the issue raised in
the new theory. None of the above exceptions, however, applies to the instant case. As regards the
first exception, the issue of jurisdiction was never raised at any point in this case. Anent the second
exception, the Court finds that the application of the same in the case would be improper, as further
evidence is needed in order to answer and/or refute the issue raised in Ramoss new theory. Ramona Ramos and The Estate Of Luis T. Ramos vs. Philippine National Bank, Opal Portfolio
Investments (SPV-AMC), Inc. and Golden Dragon Star Equities, Inc., G.R. No. 178218,
December 14, 2011
HEARSAY RULE
Under the doctrine of independently relevant statements, the hearsay rule does not apply where
only the fact of such statements were made is relevant, and the truth or falsity thereof is immaterial.
- People of the Philippines vs. Jesusa Figueroa y Coronado, G.R. No. 186141, April 11, 2012
A witness can testify only on the facts that she knows of his own personal knowledge, or more
precisely, those which are derived from her own perception. A witness may not testify on what she
merely learned, read or heard from others because such testimony is considered hearsay and may
not be received as proof of the truth of what she has learned, read or heard. Notwithstanding the
inadmissibility of the details of the rape which BBB merely heard from AAAs narration, we
nevertheless find no reason to disturb the findings of fact of the trial court. - People of the
Philippines vs. Leonardo Cataytay y Silvano, G.R. No. 196315, October 22, 2014
DYING DECLARATION
The RTC admitted Aurelios dying declaration to prove the identity of his assailants and the
circumstances that led to his death because it qualifies as an exception to the hearsay rule with the
concurrence of all four essential requisites, to wit: One of the most reliable pieces of evidence for
convicting a person is the dying declaration of the victim. Courts accord credibility of the highest
order to such declarations on the truism that no man conscious of his impending death will still
resort to falsehood. The requisites for admitting such declaration as evidencean exception to the
hearsay ruleare four, which must concur, to wit: a.) the dying declaration must concern the crime
and the surrounding circumstances of the declarants death b.) at the time it was made the
declarant was under a consciousness of an impending death c.) the declarant was competent as a
witness and d.) the declaration was offered in a criminal case for homicide, murder, or parricide in
which the decedent was the victim. (People v. Sacario, 14 SCRA 468 People v. Almeda, 124 SCRA
487).The four requisites are undoubtedly present in this case. - People of the Philippines vs.
Dante Edjillo and Gervacio Hoyle, Jr., G.R. No. 187732, December 10, 2012
Under the rules, statement made by a person under the consciousness of an impending death is
admissible as evidence of the circumstances of his death. The positive identification made by the
victim before he died, under the consciousness of an impending death is a strong evidence
indicating the liability of herein Rarugal. It is of no moment that the victim died seven days from
the stabbing incident and after receiving adequate care and treatment, because the apparent
proximate cause of his death, the punctures in his lungs, was a consequence of Rarugals stabbing

2015)
him in the chest. - People of the Philippines vs. Ramil Rarugal alias "Amay Bisaya," G.R. No.
188603, January 16, 2013
ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
Cash examination report contains entries made in the performance of official functions and is, thus,
sufficient by itself to establish prima facie the truth of the facts stated therein without the need of
presenting other evidence following the rule laid down by Section 44, Rule 130 of the Revised
Rules of Evidence. - Narciso C. Loguinsa, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 146949, February 13,
2009
EXPERT WITNESS
The trial court may validly determine forgery from its own independent examination of the
documentary evidence at hand. This the trial court judge can do without necessarily resorting to
experts, especially when the question involved is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity,
which can be determined by a visual comparison of specimen of the questioned signatures with
those of the currently existing ones. - Vicente Manzano, Jr. vs. Marcelino Garcia , G.R. No.
179323, November 28, 2011
RULE ON EXAMINATION OF CHILD WITNESS
It should be remembered that the declarations on the witness stand of rape victims who are young
and immature deserve full credence. Succinctly, when the offended parties are young and immature
girls from the ages of twelve to sixteen, courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what
transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability but also the shame and embarrassment
to which they would be exposed by court trial if the matter about which they testified were not
true. - People of the Philippines vs. Ronaldo Saludo, G.R. No. 178406, April 6, 2011
disregard the procedural lapses on the mere self-serving claim that their case is meritorious. - MCAMBF Countdown Cards Philippines Inc., Amable R. Aguiluz V, Amable C. Aguiluz IX, Cielo C.
Aguiluz, Alberto L. Buenviaje, Vicente Acsay and MCA Holdings And Management Corporation
vs. MBf Card International Limited and MBf Discount Card Limited, G.R. No. 173586, March
14, 2012
Testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, for when a woman or a girl-child says
that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed
committed. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Pamintuan y Sahagun, G.R. No. 192239,
June 5, 2013
Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl,
particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to
show that rape has in fact been committed. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Piosang, G.R.
No. 200329, June 5, 2013

2015)
In rape cases, where the victim was only a child and was able to narrate how the accused had been
raping her since 2003 and describe in great detail the last rape that occurred on September 12,
2004, it is settled jurisprudence that testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit,
because when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all
that is necessary to show that rape was committed. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of
truth and sincerity. - People of the Philippines vs. Roel Vergara y Clavero, G.R. No. 199226,
January 15, 2014
OFFER OF EVIDENCE
While it is a basic procedural rule that the court shall consider no evidence which has not been
formally offered, evidence not formally offered may be admitted and considered by the trial court
provided the following requirements are present, viz: first, the same must have been duly identified
by testimony duly recorded and, second, the same must have been incorporated in the records of
the case. - The Heirs of Romana Saves, et. al. vs. The Heirs of Escolastico Saves, et. al., G.R. No.
152866, October 6, 2010
OBJECTIONS
Objection to evidence cannot be raised for the first time on appeal; when a party desires the court to
reject the evidence offered, he must so state in the form of objection. Without such objection he
cannot raise the question for the first time on appeal. - People of the Philippines vs. Emily
Mendoza y Sartin, G.R. No. 189327, February 29, 2012
Objection to evidence cannot be raised for the first time on appeal; when a party to desires the
court to reject the evidence offered, he must so state in the form of objection. Without such
objection he cannot raise the question for the first time on appeal. - People of the Philippines vs.
Roselito Taculod y Elle, G.R. No. 198108, December 11, 2013
CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN DRUGS CASES
Sonny Padua was charged with Illegal Sale of Dangerous drugs and thereby contended that the
Officer has failed to comply with the process of chain of custody of the drugs and thereby absolving
him to such crime. The court ruled that Non-compliance with the stipulated procedure of Chain of
Custody, under justifiable grounds, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody
over said items, for as long as the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized items are properly
preserved by the apprehending officers. - People of the Philippines vs. Sonny Padua y Reyes,
G.R. No. 174097, July 21, 2010
Non-compliance with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 does not render an accused's arrest
illegal or the items seized/confiscated from him inadmissible. What is of utmost importance is the
preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be
utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused. - People of the Philippines
vs. Reynald Dela Cruz y Libantocia, G.R. No. 177324, March 30, 2011
The failure to conduct an inventory and to photograph the confiscated items in the manner
prescribed under Section 21, paragraph 1 of Republic Act No. 9165 cannot be used as a ground for

2015)
Arrismas exoneration from the charge against him/her. - People of the Philippines vs. Nelly
Ulama y Arrisma, G.R. No. 186530, December 14, 2011
Marking of the seized drugs must be done immediately after they are seized from the accused and
failure to do so suffices to rebut the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties
and raises reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the corpus delict. Marking of the seized drugs
serves to separate the marked evidence from the corpus of all other similar or related evidence
from the time they are seized from the accused until they are disposed of at the end of criminal
proceedings, obviating switching, "planting," or contamination of evidence. - People of the
Philippines vs. Reynaldo Nacua, G.R. No. 200165, January 30, 2013
Consistency with the chain of custody rule requires that the marking of the seized items to
truly ensure that they are the same items that enter the chain and are eventually the ones offered in
evidence should be done (1) in the presence of the apprehended violator (2) immediately upon
confiscation. - People of the Philippines vs. Reynaldo Andy Somoza y Handaya, G.R. No.
197250, July 17, 2013
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics

LEGAL ETHICS
UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW
Respondent Court Stenographer Monilla prepared an extra judicial settlement of estate for the
complainant Arienda and her siblings. In ruling that the respondent is guilty of simple misconduct,
the Supreme Court held that the preparation of an extrajudicial settlement of estate constitutes
practice of law as defined in Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991) to wit: Practice of law
means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience. - Leticia A. Arienda vs. Evelyn A. Monilla, Court
Stenographer III, Regional Trial Court, Branch 4, Legazpi City, A.M. No. P112980, June 10,
2013
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
The right to institute a disbarment proceeding is not confined to clients nor is it necessary that the
person complaining suffered injury from the alleged wrongdoing.
A lawyer who paid another with a personal check from a bank account which he knew has already
been closed exhibited an extremely low regard to his commitment to the oath he took when he
joined his peers, thereby seriously tarnishing the image of the profession which he should hold in
high esteem. - Cecilia A. Agno vs. Atty. Marciano J. Cagatan, A.C. No. 4515, July 14, 2008
Clearly, therefore, the act of a lawyer in issuing a check without sufficient funds to cover the same
constitutes such wilful dishonesty and immoral conduct as to undermine the public confidence in
the legal profession. He cannot justify his act of issuing worthless checks by his dire financial
condition. Moya II should have contracted debts which are beyond his financial capacity to pay. If
he suffered a reversal of fortune, he should have explained with particularity the circumstances
which cause his failure to meet his obligations. His generalized and unsubs-tantiated allegations as
to why he reneged in the payment of his debts promptly despite repeated demands and sufficient
time afforded him cannot withstand scrutiny. - Jerry T. Wong vs. Atty. Salvador N. Moya II, A.C.
No. 6972, October 17, 2008
The Court have held that the issuance of checks which were later dishonored for having been
drawn against a closed account indicates a lawyers unfitness for the trust and confidence reposed
on her. It shows a lack of personal honesty and good moral character as to render her unworthy of
public confidence. The issuance of a series of worthless checks also shows the remorseless attitude
of respondent, unmindful to the deleterious effects of such act to the public interest and public
order. It also manifests a lawyers low regard to her commitment to the oath she has taken when
she joined her peers, seriously and irreparably tarnishing the image of the profession she should
hold in high esteem. - Walter Wilkie vs. Atty. Sinamar E. Limos, A.C. No. 7505, October 24, 2008
A lawyer has the responsibility to diligently prosecute the case of his clients to the best of his ability
within the bounds of law. A lawyer, when he undertakes his clients cause, makes a covenant that he
will exert all efforts for its prosecution until its final conclusion. - Cesar Talento and Modesta
Herrera Talento vs. Atty. Agustin F. Paneda, A.C. No. 7433, December 23 2009

Once he agrees to take up the cause of a client, the lawyer owes fidelity to such cause and must
always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. He must serve the client with
competence and diligence, and champion the latters cause with wholehearted fidelity, care, and
devotion. This simply means that his client is entitled to the benefit of any and every remedy and
defense that is authorized by the law of the land and he may expect his lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense. - Spouses Virgilio and Angelina Aranda vs. Atty. Emmanuel F. Elayda, A.C.
No. 7907, December 15, 2010
RE-ADMISSION TO THE BAR
It is well settled that the objective of a disciplinary case is not so much to punish the individual
attorney as to protect the dispensation of justice by sheltering the judiciary and the public from the
misconduct or inefficiency of officers of the court. Restorative justice, not retribution, is our goal in
disciplinary proceedings. - Constancia L. Valencia vs. Atty. Dionisio C. Antiniw, A.C. No. 1302,
June 30, 2008
NOTARIAL PRACTICE
By failing to comply with the conditions set for SC Circular No. 190 and violating the provision of
the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004, respondent judge failed to conduct himself in a manner that
is beyond reproach and suspicion. Judges are enjoined by the Code of Judicial Conduct to regulate
their extrajudicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties. Geronimo C. Fuentes vs. Judge Romualdo G. Buno, A.M. No. MTJ991204, July 28, 2008
JUDICIAL ETHICS
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
The Court has always impressed upon all members of the judiciary the need to decide cases
promptly and expeditiously under the timehonored precept that justice delayed is justice denied.
The Constitution itself, under Section 15, Article VIII, mandates that lower courts have three (3)
months from the date of submission within which to decide the cases or matters pending before
them. Rule 3.05, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct directs judges to dispose of the courts
business promptly and decide cases within the required periods. Finally, Canons 6 and 7 of the
Canons of Judicial Ethics exhort judges to be prompt and punctual in the disposition and resolution
of cases and matters pending before their court. - Re: Judicial Audit Conducted In The Regional
Trial Court (RTC), Branch 14, Davao City, Presided over by Judge William M. Layague, A.M.
RTJ072039, April 18, 2008
The image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the
men and women therein, from the judge to the least and lowest of its personnel; hence, it becomes
imperative and sacred duty of each and everyone in the court to maintain its good name and good
standing as a true temple of justice. The conduct of court personnel must be, and also perceived to
be, free from any whiff of impropriety, with respect not only to their duties in the judiciary but also
in their behavior outside the court. Ronnie C. Dela Cruz vs. Redentor A. Zapico, Quirino Y.
Itliong II, and Odon C. Balani, A.M. No. 2007-25-SC, September 18, 2008

It must be stressed that all judicial employees must devote their official time to govern-ment
service. They must exercise at all times a high degree of professionalism and responsibility, as
service in the judiciary is not only a duty; it is a mission. To inspire public respect for the justice
system, court officials and employees are at all times behoved to strictly observe official time. Strict
observance of official time is mandatory lest the dignity of the justice system be compromised.
Thus, Section 1, Canon IV of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel mandates that the same shall
commit themselves exclusively to the business and responsibilities of their office during working
hours.
In the case at bar, we find that [Pacariem] has failed to live up to the standard of efficiency and
professionalism that the judiciary demands from its court personnel. Furthermore, by writing false
and inaccurate entries in her former offices Logbook of Permission Slips and Logbook of Daily
Attendance of Court Personnel, [Pacariem] likewise failed to meet the standard of honesty. - Judge
Placido C. Marquez and Atty. Lyn L. Llamasares vs. Lucila C. Pacariem, A.M. No. P-06-2249,
October 8, 2008
The unreasonable delay of the respondent judge in resolving the motion submitted for his
resolution clearly constituted a violation of complainants constitutional right to a speedy
disposition of his case. Having failed to resolve the Motion for Reconsideration within the
prescribed period of time, respondent judge is liable for undue delay in resolving a decision or
order which is considered a less serious offense. - Atty. Raul H. Sesbreo vs. Judge Ireneo L. Gako,
Jr. and Manuel G. Nollora, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2144, November 3, 2008
Raffling of cases: Respondent judge cannot excuse himself from his duty as Executive Judge by
dispensing with the raffle of the case and dismissing it outright on the pretext that it would be just a
waste of time on his part to raffle and entertain the case. As Executive Judge, he ought to know that
raffling of cases is his personal duty and responsibility. He is expected to keep abreast and be
conversant with Supreme Court rules and circulars that affect the conduct of cases before him and
strictly comply therewith at all times. Failure to abide by these rules undermines the wisdom
behind them and diminishes respect for the rule of law. Judges should therefore administer their
office with due regard to the integrity of the system of law itself, remembering that they are not
depositories of arbitrary power, but judges under the sanction of law.
Contempt of court: The salutary rule is that the power to punish for contempt must be exercised on
the preservative, not vindictive principle, and on the corrective and not retaliatory idea of
punishment. The courts must exercise the power to punish for contempt for purposes that are
impersonal, because that power is intended as a safeguard not for the judges as persons but for the
functions that they exercise. - Sergio & Gracelda N. Andres vs. Judge Jose S. Majaducon, A.M. No.
RTJ-03-1762, December 17, 2008
Complainant contends that she does not know how to sign her name and only affixes her
thumbmark to documents to signify her consent, while the signature of her husband appearing on
the document is very different from his customary signature. Respondent failed to sufficiently rebut
the complainants assertion that her signature in the deed of sale is forged, as complainant does not
know how to read and write and instead of signing documents, she merely affixes her thumbmark. Dominga C. Menor vs. Teodora P. Guillermo, A.M. No. P-08-2587, December 18, 2008
The Court has incessantly admonished members of the bench to administer justice without undue
delay, for justice delayed is justice denied. The present clogged dockets in all levels of our judicial

system cannot be cleared unless every magistrate earnestly, painstakingly and faithfully complies
with the mandate of the law. Undue delay in the disposition of cases amounts to a denial of justice
which, in turn, brings the courts into disrepute and ultimately erodes the faith and confidence of the
public in the judiciary.
The Court wishes to remind that as an official of the Judiciary, a Judge is expected to follow the rules
laid down by this Court for the prompt and speedy disposition of cases. Failure to decide cases and
other matters within the reglementary period constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants the
imposition of administrative sanction. If a judge can not comply with this Courts directives on the
matter of disposition of cases, he may seek extensions from this Court to avoid administrative
liability.
Letter
of
Judge
Josefina
D.
Farrales,
Acting
Presiding
Judge, RTC, Br.72, Olongapo City Re: 30 Cases and 84 Motions Submitted For Decision/
Resolution in the said Court, A.M. No. 06-3-196-RTC, December 24, 2008
As a trial judge, respondent is the visible representation of law and justice. Under Canon 1.01 of the
Code of Judicial Conduct, she is expected to be the embodiment of competence, integrity and
independence. Judges are expected to keep abreast of developments in law and jurisprudence. He
should strive for excellence exceeded only by his passion for truth, to the end that he be the
personification of justice and the Rule of Law. When the law is sufficiently basic, a judge owes it to
his office to simply apply it; anything less than that would be gross ignorance of the law. - Office of
the Court Administrator vs. Judge Norma C. Perello, former Clerk of Court Luis C. Bucayon II,
Court Stenographers Thelma A. Mangilit, Cecilio B. Argame, Maricar N. Eugenio, and
Radigunda R. Laman and Interpreter Paul M. Resurreccion, all of the Regional Trial Court,
Branch 276, Muntinlupa City, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1952, December 24, 2008
The withdrawal of complaints cannot divest the Court of its jurisdiction nor strip it of its power to
determine the veracity of the charges made and to discipline, such as the results of its investigation
may warrant, an erring respondent. - Aureo Bayaca vs. Judge Tranquilino Ramos, A.M. No. MTJ07-1676, January 29, 2009
The sheriff, as an officer of the court upon whom the execution of a final judgment depends, must
necessarily be circumspect and proper in his behavior. - Emilia Marias vs. Terencio G. Florendo,
A.M. No. P-07-2304, February 12, 2009
At the core of a judges esteemed position is obedience to the dictates of the law and justice and so a
judge must be the first to exhibit respect for authority. - Ma. Theresa G. Winterniitz and Raquel
Gonzales vs. Judge Lizabeth Gutierrez-Torres, A.M. No. MTJ-09-1733, February 24, 2009
Any delay in the administration of justice, no matter how brief, deprives the litigant of his right to a
speedy disposition of his case, for, not only does it magnify the cost of seeking justice, it undermines
the peoples faith and confidence in the judiciary, lowers its standards and brings it to disrepute.
Marietta Duque vs. Judge Crisostomo L. Garrido, A.M. NO. RTJ-06-2027, February 27, 2009
The failure to implement a writ of execution maybe classified as a less grave offense of simple
neglect of duty punishable by suspension from office for one month and one day to six months for
the first offense. - Estelito R. Marabe vs. Tyrone V. Tan, Sheriff IV, OCC, Regional Trial Court,
Malaybalay City, Bukidnon, A.M. No. P-05-1996, April 21, 2009

Dishonesty or grave misconduct carries the extreme penalty of dismissal from the service with
forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits but the court may nevertheless
impose fines to be deducted from the accrued leave credits for judgment based on another set of
facts. - Peter B. Mallonga vs. Marites R. Manio, Court Interpreter III, Regional Trial Court
(RTC), Branch 4, Tuguegarao City, A.M. No. P-07-2298, April 24, 2009
A person cannot, for disobedience, be punished for contempt unless the act which is forbidden or
required to be done is clearly and exactly defined, so that there can be no reasonable doubt or
uncertainty as to what specific act or thing is forbidden or required. - Venancio Inonog vs. Judge
Francisco B. Ibay, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2175, July 28, 2009
The act of a married man cohabiting with a woman not his spouse constitutes an immoral conduct
and the employment of the defense of denial cannot overthrow the positive testimonies of the
witnesses. - Lolita S. Regir vs. Joel T. Regir, A.M. No. P-06-2282, August 4, 2009
Judges must avoid not only impropriety but also the appearance of impropriety. They are mandated
not to allow family, social or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment, nor
convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the
judge. Heirs of the Late Rev. Fr. Jose O. Aspiras vs. Judge Clifton U. Ganay, Presiding Judge of
the Regional Trial Court, Branch 31, Agoo, La Union, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2055, December 17,
2009
The Rules of Court expressly prohibits the grant of preliminary injunction without hearing and
prior notice to the party or person sought to be enjoined. In this case, the judge has issued an order
which was in effect a TRO ex parte in violation of the rules, and thus, is found guilty of ignorance of
law. - Mayor Hadji Amer R. Sampiano, Somer Abdullah, Salic Tampugao, Anthony Abi, Saga
Pole Inog, Tororac Domato, King Maronsing, Margarita Solaiman, Hadji Acmad Mamenting
and Billie Jai Laine T. Ogka vs. Judge Cader P. Indar, Acting Presiding Judge, Regional Trial
Court, Branch 12, Malabang, Lanao del Sur, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1953, December 21, 2009
Sheriffs play an important role in the administration of justice, and as agents of the law, high
standards are expected of them. They are duty-bound to know and to comply with the very basic
rules relative to the implementation of writs of execution. - Emma B. Ramos vs. Apollo R. Ragot,
Sheriff III, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Gingoog City, A.M. No. P-09-2600, December 23
2009
Absent any evidence showing outright bad faith, a judge should not be held liable for gross
misconduct and gross ignorance of the law. Thus, for committing acts that manifested poor
judgment and negligence, he is only guilty of simple misconduct and a penalty of suspension for a
period of three months shall be imposed upon him. - Walter J. Aragones vs. Hon. Hector B.
Barillo, Municipal Trial Court, Guihulngan, Negros Oriental, A.M. No. MTJ-10-1752, March 10,
2010
A judge must not sacrifice the orderly administration of justice in favor of a speedy but reckless
disposition of a case. A prudent judge should have ascertained the facts before reaching conclusions
and issuing orders. Thus, a judge is liable for simple negligence in dismissing a case due to the nonappearance of the plaintiff on the scheduled date for mediation, the latter being declared a regular
holiday and despite the request for the resetting of the same. - Cecilia Gadrinab Senarlo vs. Judge

Maximo G.W. Paderanga, RTC, Branch 38, Cagayan De Oro City, A.M. No. RTJ-06-2025, April 5,
2010
Every judge should decide cases with dispatch and should be careful, punctual, and observant in the
performance of his functions for delay in the disposition of cases erodes the faith and confidence of
our people in the judiciary, lowers its standards and brings it into disrepute. However, in imposing
the penalty of fine, other circumstances may be considered such as the judges continuous service in
the judiciary, his avowed dire need of funds, and his expressed willingness to abide by whatever
penalty the Court may impose upon him. - Re: Cases Submitted for Decision Before Hon.
Teresito A. Andoy, former Judge, Municipal Trial Court, Cainta, Rizal, A.M. No. 09-9-163-MTC,
May 6, 2010
Judge Francisco filed contempt against his two employees which thereby is baseless. It is wellsettled that the power to punish a person in contempt of court is inherent in all courts to preserve
order in judicial proceedings and to uphold the orderly administration of justice. However, judges
are enjoined to exercise the power judiciously and sparingly, with utmost restraint, and with the
end in view of utilizing the same for correction and preservation of the dignity of the court, and not
for retaliation or vindictiveness. It bears stressing that the power to declare for contempt must be
exercised on the preservative, not vindictive principle, and on the corrective and not retaliatory
idea of punishment. - Olivia Laurel vs. Judge Pablo B. Francisco, A.M. No. RTJ-06-1992, July 6,
2010, J. Leonardo-De Castro
Judge was charged of being manifest bias, partiality and grave abuse of authority. The court ruled
Established is the norm that judges should not only be impartial but should also appear
impartial. Judges must not only render just, correct and impartial decisions, but must do so in a
manner free from any suspicion as to their fairness, impartiality and integrity. - Atty. Jose A.
Bernas vs. Judge Julia A. Reyes, Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 69, Pasig City, A.M. No.
MTJ-09-1728, July 21, 2010
Canons 2, 6 and 31 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics, provide, respectively, that the administration of
justice should be speedy and careful that judges should be prompt in disposing of all matters
submitted to them, remembering that justice delayed is often justice denied and that in the
discharge of his judicial duties, a judge should be conscientious thorough.
Rule 3.05, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct expressly directs that a judge should dispose of
the courts business promptly and decide cases within the required periods. - Narciso Bernardo,
Jr. vs. Judge Peter M. Montojo, Municipal Trial Court, Romblon, A.M. No. MTJ-10-1754,
October 20, 2010
A judges submission of false certificates of service seriously undermines and reflects on the
honesty and integrity expected of an officer of the court. This is so because a certificate of service is
not merely a means to one's paycheck but is an instrument by which the Court can fulfill the
constitutional mandate of the people ' s right to a speedy disposition of cases. - Atty. Norlinda R.
Amante-Descallar vs. Hon. Reinerio (Abraham) B. Ramas, A.M. No. RTJ-06-2015, December
15, 2010
The accomplishment of the PDS is a requirement under the Civil Service Rules and Regulations for
employment in the government. Since truthful completion of PDS is a requirement for employment
in the Judiciary, the importance of answering the same with candor need not be gainsaid.

Furthermore, in the determination of the penalties to be imposed, extenuating, mitigating,
aggravating or alternative circumstances attendant to the commission of the offense shall be
considered. Among the circumstances that may be allowed to modify the penalty are (1) length of
service in the government, (2) good faith, and (3) other analogous circumstances. - Office of the
Court Administrator vs. Judge Ma. Ellen M. Aguilar, Regional Trial Court, Branch 70, Burgos,
Pangasinan, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2087, June 7, 2011
Where the law involved is simple and elementary, lack of conversance therewith constitutes gross
ignorance of the law. Judges are expected to exhibit more than just cursory acquaintance with
statutes and procedural laws. They must know the laws and apply them properly in all good faith.
Judicial competence requires no less. The mistake committed by respondent Judge is not a mere
error of judgment that can be brushed aside for being minor. The disregard of established rule of
law which amounts to gross ignorance of the law makes a judge subject to disciplinary action. Atty. Facundo T. Bautista vs. Judge Blas O. Causapin, Jr., Presiding Judge, Regional Trial
Court, Branch 32, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, A.M. No. RTJ-07-2044, June 22, 2011
The Ombudsman rendered a decision adjudging both LTO officers, Reyes, guilty of grave
misconduct and Pealoza guilty of simple misconduct. In administrative and quasi-judicial
proceedings, only substantial evidence is necessary to establish the case for or against a party,
however, under well-established doctrine of due process in administrative proceedings, the filing of
charges and giving reasonable opportunity for the person so charged to answer the accusations
against him constitute the minimum requirements of due process. - Office of the Ombudsman vs.
Antonio T. Reyes, G.R. No. 170512, October 5, 2011
The Court deems Benedictos falsification of her bundy cards tantamount to dishonesty. Benedictos
silence on a principal charge against her is admission, especially considering that she was given
ample opportunity to deny the same. In several administrative cases, the Court refrained from
imposing the actual penalties in the presence of mitigating factors. - Falsification of Daily Time
Records of Ma. Emcisa A. Benedictos, Administrative Officer I, Regional Trial Court, Malolos
City, Bulacan, A.M. No. P-10-2784, October 19, 2011
"A resolution of the Supreme Court should not be construed as a mere request, [and] should be
complied with promptly and completely." Such "failure to comply betrays not only a recalcitrant
streak in character, but also a disrespect for the Courts lawful order and directive." Furthermore,
this contumacious conduct of refusing to abide by the lawful directives issued by the Court has
likewise been considered as an utter lack of interest to remain with, if not contempt of, the system.
The conduct or behavior of all court personnel is circumscribed with the heavy burden of
responsibility. Time and again, the High Court affirms the practical reality that the image of the
court as a true temple of justice is mirrored by the conduct of everyone who works therein, from
the judge to the lowest clerk. It is therefore imperative that those involved in the administration of
justice must live up to the highest standard of honesty and integrity in the public service. - Re:
Report on Financial Audit Conducted at MCTC, Santiago-San Esteban, Ilocos Sur, A.M. No. P11-2950, January 17, 2012
It is well to remind Gutierrez that dishonesty is a malevolent act that has no place in the judiciary.
Public service requires utmost integrity and discipline. A public servant must exhibit at all times the
highest sense of honesty and integrity, for no less than the Constitution declares that a public office

is a public trust, and all public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the
people, and serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency. These are not
mere rhetorical words to be taken lightly as idealistic sentiments, but as working standards and
attainable goals that should be matched with actual deeds. - Leave Division, Office of
Administrative Services, Office of the Court Administrator vs. Leoncio K. Gutierrez III, Clerk
III, Regional Trial Court, Branch 116, Pasay City, A.M. No. P-11-2951, February 15, 2012
Competence is a mark of a good judge. When a judge displays an utter lack of familiarity with the
rules, he erodes the publics confidence in the competence of our courts. It is highly imperative that
judges be conversant with the law and basic legal principles. Basic legal procedures must be at the
palm of a judges hands. - Dr. Ramie G. Hipe vs. Judge Rolando T. Literato, Municpal Trial Court,
Mainit, Surigao Norte, A.M. No. MTJ-11-1781, April 25, 2012
Section 15(1), Article VIII of the Constitution, mandates that cases or matters filed with the lower
courts must be decided or resolved within three months from the date they are submitted for
decision or resolution. With respect to cases falling under the Rule on Summary Procedure, first
level courts are only allowed 30 days following the receipt of the last affidavit and position paper,
or the expiration of the period for filing the same, within which to render judgment. Unfortunately,
Judge Torres failed to live up to the exacting standards of duty and responsibility that her position
requires. Civil Case No. 20191 was submitted for resolution on July 19, 2006, yet it was still pending
when Valdez filed the present administrative complaint on June 4, 2010, and remained unresolved
per complainants manifestation filed on September 8, 2010. More than four years after being
submitted for resolution, Civil Case No. 20191 was still awaiting decision by respondent. Records
also do not show that Judge Torres made any previous attempt to report and request for extension
of time to resolve Civil Case No. 20191. - Fe D. Valdez vs. Judge Lizabeth G. Torres, MeTC,
Branch 60, Mandaluyong City, A.M. No. MTJ-11-1796, June 13, 2012
Not every judicial error is tantamount to ignorance of the law and if it was committed in good faith,
the judge need not be subjected to administrative sanction. While Judge Bayona admitted that he
erred in insisting on the production of the Jarder Resolution despite the provisions of the DOJ-NPS
Manual, such error cannot be categorized as gross ignorance of the law as he did not appear to be
motivated by bad faith. Indeed, the rules of procedure in the prosecution office were not clear as to
whether or not an investigating prosecutors resolution of dismissal that had been reversed by the
city prosecutor should still form part of the records. - City Prosecutor Armando P. Abanado vs.
Judge Abraham A. Bayona, Presiding Judge, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 7, Bacolod
City, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1804, July 30, 2012
The rule is that those involved in the administration of justice from the highest official to the lowest
clerk must live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service. As an
officer of the court, Valente was duty-bound to use reasonable skill and diligence in the
performance of her officially-designated duties as clerk of court. If indeed Panaligan was at the
MCTC office and was personally furnished a copy of the notice of hearing by Valente herself, then
Valente should have required Panaligan to sign the original copy of said notice as proof of receipt.
Valentes failure to secure Panaligans signature as proof of receipt of a copy of the notice of hearing
exhibited lack of due diligence required by her position as Clerk of Court. - Anecita Panaligan vs.
Ethelda B. Valente, Clerk of Court II, 3rd Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Patnogon, Antique,
A.M. No. P-11-2952, July 30, 2012

The Court holds that the mistakes or errors in the contents of the orders, subpoena, and Minutes of
the Hearing committed by respondents Lagman (Legal Researcher) and Bassig (Stenographer)
could be attributed to their lack of attention or focus on the task at hand. These could have easily
been avoided had they exercised greater care and diligence in the performance of their duties. We
find respondents Lagman and Bassig liable for simple neglect of duty. - Memoranda of Judge Eliza
B. Yu issued to Legal Researcher Mariejoy P. Lagman and to Court Stenographer Soledad J.
Bassig, all of Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 47, Pasay City, A.M. No. P-12-3033, August 15,
2012
Neither the Rules nor jurisprudence recognizes any exception from the periodic filing of reports by
sheriffs as pursuant to Rule 39, Section 14 of the Rules of Court. If only Sheriff Roxas submitted such
periodic reports, he could have brought his predicament to the attention of the RTC and FGU and he
could have given the RTC and FGU the opportunity to act and/or move to address the same. Astorga and Repol Law Offices, represented Atty. Arnold B. Lugares vs. Leodel N. Roxas,
Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 66, Makati City, A.M. No. P-12-3029, August 15, 2012
Judges should remember that they must not only avoid impropriety, but the "appearance of
impropriety" as well.
Also, the previous Code of Judicial Conduct specifically warned the judges against seeking publicity
for personal vainglory. Vainglory, in its ordinary meaning, refers to an individuals excessive or
ostentatious pride especially in ones own achievements. - Gerlie M. Uy and Ma. Consolacion T.
Bascug vs. Judge Erwin B. Javellana, Municipal Trial Court, La Castellana, Negros Occidental,
A.M. No. MTJ-07-1666, September 5, 2012
When a motion to quash a writ of execution was filed by the petitioner and such motion was
already set for a hearing, the Court ruled that the prudent course of action of the Sheriff was to
defer implementation of the writ of execution until a determination of the motion to quash.
However, when a motion to quash the Writ was just filed and was not yet even set for hearing, in
the absence of a court order, Sheriff has to proceed without haste and to employ such means as
necessary to implement the subject Writ of Execution and to put complainant in possession of the
disputed properties.
Also, it is worthy to note that once the RTC has rendered a decision in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction, such decision shall, under Rule 70, Section 2120 of the Rules of Court, be immediately
executory, without prejudice to an appeal via petition for review before the Court of Appeals
and/or Supreme Court. The decision of the regional trial court in civil cases governed by this Rule,
including forcible entry and unlawful detainer, shall be immediately executory, without prejudice to
a further appeal that may be taken therefrom. - Lucia Nazar Vda. De Feliciano vs. Romeo L.
Rivera, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, Valenzuela City, A.M. No.
P-11-2920 September 19, 2012
In this case, there is absolutely no showing that Judge Sario was motivated by bad faith or ill motive
in rendering the decision in Civil Case No. CEB27778. Thus, any error Judge Sario may have
committed in dismissing Civil Case No. CEB-27778 may be corrected by filing an appeal of
respondents decision before the Court of Appeals, not by instituting an administrative case against
the respondent before this Court. Moreover, records show that Magdadaro did file an appeal before
the Court of Appeals. Said appeal, is still pending before the appellate court. An administrative
complaint against a judge cannot be pursued simultaneously with the judicial remedies accorded to

parties aggrieved by his erroneous order or judgment. Administrative remedies are neither
alternative nor cumulative to judicial review where such review is available to aggrieved parties
and the same has not yet been resolved with finality. For until there is a final declaration by the
appellate court that the challenged order or judgment is manifestly erroneous, there will be no
basis to conclude whether respondent judge is administratively liable. - Marcelino Magdadaro vs.
Judge Bienvenido Saniel, Jr., A.M. NO. RTJ-12-2331, December 10, 2012
Failure to decide a case within the reglementary period is not excusable and constitutes gross
inefficiency warranting the imposition of administrative sanctions on the defaulting judge. - Re:
Cases Submitted for Decision Before Hon. Teofilo D. Baluma, Former Judge, Branch 1,
Regional Trial Court, Tagbilaran City, Bohol, A.M. No. RTJ132355, August 28, 2013
Sheriffs and their deputies are the frontline representatives of the justice system, and if, through
their lack of care and diligence in the implementation of judicial writs, they lose the trust reposed
on them, they inevitably diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary As such, the Court will not
tolerate or condone any conduct of judicial agents or employees which would tend to or actually
diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary. - Office of the Court Administrator vs. Desiderio
W. Macusi, Jr., Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Branch 25, Tabuk City, Kalinga, A.M. No. P-133105, September 11, 2013
When a sheriff takes advantage of an erroneous increase of his parcel of land which was unknown
to the true owners by keeping silent on the error, securing a new title reflecting such increase and
afterwards destroying the boundary and improvements of the rightful owners, he is guilty of
dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the service, even if the act is not related to his official
functions. As long as the questioned conduct tarnishes the image and integrity of his public office,
the corresponding penalty may be meted on the erring public officer or employee. - Heirs of
Celestino Teves represented by Paul John Teves Abad Elsa C. Aquino and Felimon E. Fernan
vs. Augusto J. Felicidario, Sheriff IV, Office of the Clerk Of Court, Regional Trial Court of
Manila, A.M. No. P-12-3089, November 13, 2013
As clerk of Court and administrative assistant of the judge, one is tasked is tasked to keep a
calendar of cases for pre-trial, trial, and those with motions to set for hearing and to give preference
to habeas corpus cases, election cases, special civil actions, and those required by law. Here, the
clerk of court showed carelessness and indifference in the performance of his duties. He cannot
simply reason that he had nothing to do with the resetting and the setting of the hearings. That is
an unacceptable excuse, especially in light of Section 1, Canon IV of the Code of Conduct for Court
Personnel which requires that court personnel shall at all times perform official duties properly
and diligently. Furthermore, it is incumbent upon the clerk of court to regularly check not only the
status of the cases but also the functions of the other court personnel and employees under his
supervision. - Raul K. San Buenaventura vs. Timoteo A. Migrino, Clerk of Court III,
Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 69, Pasig City, A.M. No. P-08-2574, January 22, 2014
OCA Circular No. 7-2003 clearly states that court personnel should indicate in their bundy cards the
truthful and accurate times of their arrival at, and departure from, the office. Process Servers
entries in his DTRs for dates that had not yet come to pass were a clear violation of OCA Circular No.
7-2003. Furthermore, Section 4, Rule XVII (on Government Office Hours) of the Omnibus Rules
Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292 and Other Pertinent Civil Service Laws also
provides that falsification or irregularities in the keeping of time records will render the guilty
officer or employee administratively liable.
A judge who deliberately and continuously fails and refuses to comply with the resolution of the
Supreme Court is guilty of gross misconduct and insubordination. Thus, when it took three
directives and three years for a judge to submit his Comment on an administrative matter against
him and another, and failure to offer any apology and/or explanation for his long delay in
complying with the directives/orders of the OCA and this Court, said conduct constitutes no less
than a clear act of defiance, revealing the judges deliberate disrespect and indifference to the
authority of the Court. It is completely unacceptable especially for a judge. - Office of the Court
Administrator vs. Hon. Cader P. Indar, Al Haj, Presiding Judge and Abdulrahman D. Piang,
Process Server, Branch 14, Both of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 14, Cotabato City, A.M.
No. RTJ-11-2287, January 22, 2014
This Court has always emphasized the need for judges to decide cases within the constitutionally
prescribed 90-day period. Any delay in the administration of justice, no matter how brief, deprives
the litigant of his right to a speedy disposition of his case. Not only does it magnify the cost of
seeking justice, it undermines the peoples faith and confidence in the judiciary, lowers its
standards, and brings it to disrepute. A member of the bench cannot pay mere lip service to the 90day requirement he/she should instead persevere in its implementation. Heavy caseload and
demanding workload are not valid reasons to fall behind the mandatory period for disposition of
cases. The Court usually allows reasonable extensions of time to decide cases in view of the heavy
caseload of the trial courts. If a judge is unable to comply with the 90day reglementary period for
deciding cases or matters, he/she can, for good reasons, ask for an extension and such request is
generally granted. But Judge Bustamante did not ask for an extension in any of these cases. Having
failed to decide a case within the required period, without any order of extension granted by the
Court, Judge Bustamante is liable for undue delay that merits administrative sanction. In Office of
the Court Administrator v. Garcia-Blanco, the Court held that the 90-day reglementary period is
mandatory. Failure to decide cases within the reglementary period constitutes a ground for
administrative liability except when there are valid reasons for the delay. - Office of the Court
Administrator vs. Judge Borromeo Bustamante, A.M. NO. MTJ-12-1806, April 7, 2014
While it is true that respondent Sahi is merely human and may commit mistakes, there is simply no
excuse for making the same mistakes repeatedly despite her superior constantly calling her
attention to correct them. Granting that respondent Sahi was not good at using computers in the
beginning, she should have taken steps to learn and hone her computer skills which were essential
to her work. The conduct and behavior of everyone connected with an office charged with the
dispensation of justice, from the presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, must always be beyond
reproach and must be circumscribed with the heavy burden of responsibility. - Presiding Judge
Juan Gabriel Hizon Alano, Mary Annabelle A. Katipunan, Suzee Wong Jamotillo, Analie Del
Rio Balitung, Edwino Jayson Oliveros and Roberto Babaodono vs. Padma Latip Sahi, A.M. No.
P-11-302, June 25, 2014, J. Leonardo-De Castro

Syllabi-SC-decisions-by Justice de Castro-2015 Bar

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Syllabi-SC-decisions-by Justice de Castro-2015 Bar

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

June 27, 2012

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Mercantile Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Mercantile Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Mercantile Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008- Mercantile Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law