ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.

com™

Like 0 Tweet Share

Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2014 > October 2014 Decisions > G.R. No. 203254, October 08,
2014 - DR. JOY MARGATE LEE, Petitioner, v. P/SUPT. NERI A. ILAGAN, Respondent.:

Custom Search
Search G.R. No. 203254, October 08, 2014 - DR. JOY MARGATE LEE, Petitioner, v. P/SUPT. NERI A. ILAGAN,
Respondent.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 203254, October 08, 2014

DR. JOY MARGATE LEE, Petitioner, v. P/SUPT. NERI A. ILAGAN, Respondent.

DECISION

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari1 assailing the Decision2 dated August 30, 2012 of
the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 224 (RTC) in SP No. 12-71527, which extended the
privilege of the writ of habeas data in favor of respondent Police Superintendent Neri A. Ilagan (Ilagan).

The Facts

DebtKollect Company, Inc.
In his Petition for Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Data3 dated June 22, 2012, Ilagan alleged that he and
petitioner Dr. Joy Margate Lee (Lee) were former common law partners. Sometime in July 2011, he
visited Lee at the latter’s condominium, rested for a while and thereafter,proceeded to his office. Upon
arrival, Ilagan noticed that his digital camera was missing.4 On August 23, 2011, Lee confronted Ilagan
at the latter’s office regarding a purported sex video (subject video) she discovered from the aforesaid
camera involving Ilagan and another woman. Ilagan denied the video and demanded Lee to return the
camera, but to no avail.5 During the confrontation, Ilagan allegedly slammed Lee’s head against a wall
inside his office and walked away.6Subsequently, Lee utilized the said video as evidence in filing various
complaints against Ilagan, namely: (a) a criminal complaint for violation of Republic Act No.
9262,7otherwise known as the “Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004,” before the
Office of the City Prosecutor of Makati; and (b) an administrative complaint for grave misconduct before
the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM).8 Ilagan claimed that Lee’s acts of reproducing the subject
video and threatening to distribute the same to the upper echelons of the NAPOLCOM and uploading it to
the internet violated not only his right to life, liberty, security, and privacy but also that of the other
woman, and thus, the issuance of a writ of habeas data in his favor is warranted.9

Finding the petition prima facie meritorious, the RTC issued a Writ of Habeas Data10 dated June 25,
2012, directing Lee to appear before the court a quo, and to produce Ilagan’s digital camera, as well as
the negative and/or original of the subject video and copies thereof, and to file a verified written return
within five (5) working days from date of receipt thereof.

In her Verified Return11 dated July 2, 2012, Lee admitted that she indeed kept the memory card of the
digital camera and reproduced the aforesaid video but averred that she only did so to utilize the same as
evidence in the cases she filed against Ilagan. She also admitted that her relationship with Ilagan started
sometime in 2003 and ended under disturbing circumstances in August 2011, and that she only
happened to discover the subject video when Ilagan left his camera in her condominium. Accordingly, Lee
contended that Ilagan’s petition for the issuance of the writ of habeas data should be dismissed because:
(a) its filing was only aimed at suppressing the evidence against Ilagan in the cases she filed; and (b)
she is not engaged in the gathering, collecting, or storing of data regarding the person of Ilagan.12
ChanRobles Intellectual Property
Division The RTC Ruling

October-2014 Jurisprudence
A.M. No. RTJ-08-2140 (Formerly A.M. No. 00-2-86-
RTC), October 07, 2014 - OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. EXECUTIVE JUDGE
OWEN B. AMOR, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, DAET,
CAMARINES NORTE, Respondent.
A.C. No. 7919, October 08, 2014 - DOMADO
DISOMIMBA SULTAN, Complainant, v. ATTY. CASAN
MACABANDING, Respondent.
A.M. No. P-14-3246 [Formerly A.M. OCA I.P.I. No.
11-3580-P], October 15, 2014 - ATTY. RICO PAOLO R.
QUICHO, REPRESENTING BANK OF COMMERCE,
Complainant, v. BIENVENIDO S. REYES, JR. , SHERIFF
IV, BRANCH 98, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, QUEZON
CITY, Respondent.
G.R. No. 205821, October 01, 2014 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GARRY DELA
CRUZ Y DE GUZMAN, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 188753, October 01, 2014 - AM-PHIL
FOOD CONCEPTS, INC., Petitioner, v. PAOLO JESUS T.
PADILLA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 198528, October 13, 2014 - MAGSAYSAY
MITSUI OSK MARINE, INC. AND/OR MOL TANKSHIP
MANAGEMENT (ASIA) PTE LTD., Petitioners, v.
JUANITO G. BENGSON,* Respondent.
A.M. No. P-14-3217 (Formerly OCA IPI NO. 14-
4252-RTJ), October 08, 2014 - RE: ANONYMOUS
LETTER, Complainant, v. JUDGE CORAZON D.
SOLUREN, PRESIDING JUDGE, AND RABINDRANATH
A. TUZON, LEGAL RESEARCHER II, BOTH OF BRANCH
91, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BALER, AURORA,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 196005, October 01, 2014 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. CHARLIE FIELDAD,
RYAN CORNISTA, AND EDGAR PIMENTEL, Appellants.
G.R. No. 189358, October 08, 2014 - CENTENNIAL
GUARANTEE ASSURANCE CORPORATION, Petitioner,
v. UNIVERSAL MOTORS CORPORATION, RODRIGO T.
JANEO, JR., GERARDO GELLE, NISSAN CAGAYAN DE
ORO DISTRIBUTORS, INC., JEFFERSON U. ROLIDA,
AND PETER YAP, Respondents.
G.R. No. 198636, October 08, 2014 - ESPERANZA C.
CARINAN, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES GAVINO CUETO
AND CARMELITA CUETO, Respondents.
G.R. No. 183272, October 15, 2014 - SUN LIFE OF
CANADA (PHILIPPINES), INC., Petitioner, v. SANDRA
TAN KIT AND THE ESTATE OF THE DECEASED
NORBERTO TAN KIT, Respondents.
G.R. No. 198878, October 15, 2014 - RESIDENTS OF
LOWER ATAB & TEACHERS’ VILLAGE, STO. TOMAS
PROPER BARANGAY, BAGUIO CITY, REPRESENTED BY
BEATRICE T. PULAS, CRISTINA A. LAPPAO. MICHAEL
MADIGUID, FLORENCIO MABUDYANG AND FERNANDO
DOSALIN, Petitioners, v. STA. MONICA INDUSTRIAL &
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent.
G.R. No. 185745, October 15, 2014 - SPOUSES
DOMINADOR MARCOS AND GLORIA MARCOS,
Petitioners, v. HEIRS OF ISIDRO BANGI AND
In a Decision13 dated August 30, 2012, the RTC granted the privilege of the writ of habeas data in
Ilagan’s favor, and accordingly, ordered the implementing officer to turn-over copies of the subject video
to him, and enjoined Lee from further reproducing the same.14
The RTC did not give credence to Lee’s defense that she is not engaged in the gathering, collecting or
storing of data regarding the person of Ilagan, finding that her acts of reproducing the subject video and
showing it to other people, i.e., the NAPOLCOM officers, violated the latter’s right to privacy in life and
caused him to suffer humiliation and mental anguish. In this relation, the RTC opined that Lee’s use of
the subject video as evidence in the various cases she filed against Ilagan is not enough justification for
its reproduction. Nevertheless, the RTC clarified that it is only ruling on the return of the aforesaid video
and not on its admissibility before other tribunals.15
Dissatisfied, Lee filed this petition.
The Issue Before the Court
The essential issue for the Court’s resolution is whether or not the RTC correctly extended the privilege of
the writ of habeas data in favor of Ilagan.
The Court’s Ruling
The petition is meritorious.
A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC, or the Rule on the Writ of Habeas Data (Habeas Data Rule), was conceived as a
response, given the lack of effective and available remedies, to address the extraordinary rise in the
number of killings and enforced disappearances.16 It was conceptualized as a judicial remedy enforcing
the right to privacy, most especially the right to informational privacy of individuals,17 which is
defined as “the right to control the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of data about
oneself.”18
As defined in Section 1 of the Habeas Data Rule, the writ of habeas data now stands as “a remedy
available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by
an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in
the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home, and
correspondence of the aggrieved party.” Thus, in order to support a petition for the issuance of such
writ, Section 6 of the Habeas Data Rule essentially requires that the petition sufficiently alleges, among
others, “[t]he manner the right to privacy is violated or threatened and how it affects the right
to life, liberty or security of the aggrieved party.” In other words, the petition must adequately
show that there exists a nexus between the right to privacy on the one hand, and the right to
life, liberty or security on the other .19 Corollarily, the allegations in the petition must be supported
by substantial evidence showing an actual or threatened violation of the right to privacy in life, liberty
or security of the victim.20 In this relation, it bears pointing out that the writ of habeas data will not issue
to protect purely property or commercial concerns nor when the grounds invoked in support of the
petitions therefor are vague and doubtful.21
In this case, the Court finds that Ilagan was not able to sufficiently allege that his right to privacy in life,
liberty or security was or would be violated through the supposed reproduction and threatened
dissemination of the subject sex video. While Ilagan purports a privacy interest in the suppression of this
video – which he fears would somehow find its way to Quiapo or be uploaded in the internet for public
consumption – he failed to explain the connection between such interest and any violation of his right to
life, liberty or security. Indeed, courts cannot speculate or contrive versions of possible transgressions. As
the rules and existing jurisprudence on the matter evoke, alleging and eventually proving the nexus
between one’s privacy right to the cogent rights to life, liberty or security are crucial in habeas data
cases, so much so that a failure on either account certainly renders a habeas data petition dismissible, as
in this case.
In fact, even discounting the insufficiency of the allegations, the petition would equally be dismissible due
to the inadequacy of the evidence presented. As the records show, all that Ilagan submitted in support of
his petition was his self-serving testimony which hardly meets the substantial evidence requirement as
prescribed by the Habeas Data Rule. This is because nothing therein would indicate that Lee actually
proceeded to commit any overt act towards the end of violating Ilagan’s right to privacy in life, liberty or
security. Nor would anything on record even lead a reasonable mind to conclude22 that Lee was going to
use the subject video in order to achieve unlawful ends – say for instance, to spread it to the public so as
to ruin Ilagan’s reputation. Contrastingly, Lee even made it clear in her testimony that the only reason
why she reproduced the subject video was to legitimately utilize the same as evidence in the criminal and
administrative cases that she filed against Ilagan.23 Hence, due to the insufficiency of the allegations as
well as the glaring absence of substantial evidence, the Court finds it proper to reverse the RTC Decision
and dismiss the habeas data petition.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated August 30, 2012 of the Regional Trial Court
of Quezon City, Branch 224 in SP No. 12-71527is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accordingly, the
Petition for Issuance of the Writ of Habeas Data filed by respondent P/Supt. Neri A. Ilagan is
DISMISSED for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
Sereno, C.J., (Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Bersamin, and Perez, JJ., concur.
Endnotes:
1Rollo, pp. 3-37.
2 Id. at 38-41. Penned by Presiding Judge Tita Marilyn Payoyo-Villordon.
3
Records, Vol. I, pp. 6-11.
4 Id. at 7.
5 Id. at 7. See also rollo, p. 38.
6
See records, Vol. I, p. 26.
7 Entitled “AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN,
PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIVE MEASURES FOR VICTIMS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES
THEREFORE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.”
GENOVEVA DICCION, REPRESENTED BY NOLITO 8 Records, Vol. I, p. 7; rollo, p. 38.
SABIANO, Respondents.
9 Records, Vol. I, pp. 8-9; rollo, p. 38.
G.R. No. 193650, October 08, 2014 - GEORGE
PHILIP P. PALILEO AND JOSE DE LA CRUZ,
10 Records, Vol. I, p. 24; rollo, p. 50.
Petitioners, v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK,
Respondent.
11 Records, Vol. I, pp. 26-29.
G.R. No. 190161, October 13, 2014 - ANITA N.
CANUEL, FOR HERSELF AND ON BEHALF OF HER 12
MINOR CHILDREN, NAMELY: CHARMAINE, CHARLENE, See id.; rollo, p. 38.
AND CHARL SMITH, ALL SURNAMED CANUEL,
13Rollo, pp. 38-41.
Petitioners, v. MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORPORATION,
EDUARDO U. MANESE, AND KOTANI
SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED, Respondents. 14 Id. at 41.
G.R. No. 176492, October 20, 2014 - MARIETTA N. 15
BARRIDO, Petitioner, v. LEONARDO V. NONATO,
See id. at 40-41.
Respondent.
16Manila Electric Company v. Lim, G.R. No. 184769, October 5, 2010, 632 SCRA 195, 202.
G.R. No. 197228, October 08, 2014 - DUTY FREE
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. BUREAU OF INTERNAL 17Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 189155, September 7, 2010, 630 SCRA 211, 239.
REVENUE, REPRESENTED BY HON. ANSELMO G.
ADRIANO, ACTING REGIONAL DIRECTOR, REVENUE 18
REGION NO. 8, MAKATI CITY, Respondent.
See footnote 62 of Ople v. Torres, 354 Phil. 948, 979 (1998), citing Hancock, G.,
“California’s Privacy Act: Controlling Government’s Use of Information?” 32 Stanford Law
G.R. No. 197380, October 08, 2014 - ELIZA Review No. 5, p. 1001 (May 1980).
ZUÑIGA-SANTOS,* REPRESENTED BY HER ATTORNEY-
IN FACT, NYMPHA Z. SALES, Petitioners, v. MARIA 19Gamboa v. Chan, G.R. No. 193636, July 24, 2012, 677 SCRA 385, 400.
DIVINA GRACIA SANTOS-GRAN** AND REGISTER OF
DEEDS OF MARIKINA CITY, Respondents. 20Roxas v. Macapagal-Arroyo, supra note 17, at 239-240.
G.R. No. 191225, October 13, 2014 - ZARSONA 21
MEDICAL CLINIC, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE HEALTH See Manila Electric Company v. Lim, supra note 16, at 202-203, citing Castillo v. Cruz,
INSURANCE CORPORATION, Respondent. G.R. No. 182165, November 25, 2009, 605 SCRA 628, 636-637.

G.R. No. 203583, October 13, 2014 - LEONORA B.
RIMANDO, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES WINSTON AND
ELENITA ALDABA AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 187240, October 15, 2014 - CARLOS A.
LORIA, Petitioner, v. LUDOLFO P. MUÑOZ, JR.,
Respondent.
22 “Substantial evidence is defined as such amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It is more than a mere
scintilla of evidence.” (Miro v. Mendoza Vda. de Erederos, G.R. Nos. 172532 and 172544-
45, November 20, 2013, 710 SCRA 371, 388.)
23
See records, Vol. II, pp. 259-265 and 272-275.

G.R. No. 204800, October 14, 2014 - NATIONAL

TRANSMISSION CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.
COMMISSION ON AUDIT, ATTY. JOSEPHINE A. TILAN,
REGIONAL CLUSTER DIRECTOR AND MR. ROBERTO G. Back to Home | Back to Main
PADILLA, STATE AUDITOR IV, Respondents.

G.R. No. 191838, October 20, 2014 - YKR

CORPORATION, MA. TERESA J. YULO-GOMEZ, JOSE QUICK SEARCH
ENRIQUE J. YULO, MA. ANTONIA J. YULO-LOYZAGA,
JOSE MANUEL J. YULO, MA. CARMEN J. YULO AND
JOSE MARIA J. YULO, Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE
AGRI-BUSINESS CENTER CORPORATION,
Respondent.; G.R. No. 191863 - REPUBLIC OF THE 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE AGRI- 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
BUSINESS CENTER CORPORATION, Respondent.
1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
G.R. No. 192518, October 15, 2014 - PHILIPPINE 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY AND/OR
ERNANI TUMIMBANG, Petitioners, v. HENRY 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
ESTRANERO, Respondent. 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948

G.R. No. 194884, October 22, 2014 - IMASEN

1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
PHILIPPINE MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
Petitioner, v. RAMONCHITO T. ALCON AND JOANN S.
PAPA, Respondents. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
G.R. No. 186223, October 01, 2014 -
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
v. PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATED SMELTING AND 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
REFINING CORPORATION, Respondent.
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
G.R. No. 191101, October 01, 2014 - SPOUSES 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
MARIO OCAMPO AND CARMELITA F. OCAMPO,
Petitioners, v. HEIRS OF BERNARDINO U. DIONISIO,
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
REPRESENTED BY ARTEMIO SJ. DIONISIO,
Respondents.

A.M. No. P-14-3271 [formerly OCA IPI No. 11-

3640-P], October 22, 2014 - ATTY. ALAN A. TAN,
Complainant, v. ELMER S. AZCUETA, PROCESS
SERVER, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 22, IMUS,
Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!
CAVITE, Respondent.

G.R. No. 188066, October 22, 2014 - OFFICE OF

THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, v. CYNTHIA E.
CABEROY, Respondent.

G.R. No. 192150, October 01, 2014 - FEDERICO

SABAY, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 195832, October 01, 2014 - FORMERLY

INC SHIPMANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED (NOW INC
NAVIGATION CO. PHILIPPINES, INC.), REYNALDO M.
RAMIREZ AND/OR INTERORIENT NAVIGATION CO.,
LTD./LIMASSOL, CYPRUS, Petitioners, v. BENJAMIN I.
ROSALES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 191034, October 01, 2014 - AGILE

MARITIME RESOURCES INC., ATTY. IMELDA LIM
BARCELONA AND PRONAV SHIP MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Petitioners, v. APOLINARIO N. SIADOR, Respondent.

A.M. NO. P-09-2691 (FORMERLY A.M. OCA IPI NO.

09-3040-P), October 13, 2014 - IRENEO GARCIA,
RECORDS OFFICER I, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT, CALOOCAN CITY,
Complainant, v. CLERK OF COURT IV ATTY. MONALISA
A. BUENCAMINO, RECORDS OFFICER II JOVITA P.
FLORES AND PROCESS SERVER SALVADOR F.
TORIAGA, ALL OF METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT, CALOOCAN CITY,
Respondents.; A.M. No. P-09-2687 (Formerly A.M.
OCA IPI No. 09-3093-P) - EXECUTIVE JUDGE MARIAM
G. BIEN, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 53,
CALOOCAN CITY, Complainant, v. IRENEO GARCIA,
RECORDS OFFICER I AND SALVADOR F. TORIAGA,
PROCESS SERVER, BOTH OF THE METROPOLITAN
TRIAL COURT, OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COURT,
CALOOCAN CITY, Respondents.; A.M. NO. P-14-3247
(FORMERLY A.M. OCA IPI NO. 09-3238-P) - CLERK OF
COURT IV ATTY. MONALISA A. BUENCAMINO,
RECORDS OFFICER II JOVITA P. FLORES, AND
PROCESS SERVER SALVADOR F. TORIAGA OF THE
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, OFFICE OF THE CLERK
OF COURT, CALOOCAN CITY, Complainants, v. IRENEO
GARCIA AND UTILITY WORKER I HONEYLEE VARGAS
GATBUNTON-GUEVARRA, Respondents.

G.R. No. 192573, October 22, 2014 - RICARDO N.

AZUELO, Petitioner, v. ZAMECO II ELECTRIC
COOPERATIVE, INC., Respondent.

G.R. No. 192026, October 01, 2014 - AUTOMAT

REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, LITO
CECILIA AND LEONOR LIM, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES
MARCIANO DELA CRUZ, SR. AND OFELIA DELA CRUZ,
Respondents.

A.M. No. P-14-3252 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 08-

2960-P], October 14, 2014 - JUDGE JUAN GABRIEL H.
ALANO, Complainant, v. PADMA L. SAHI, COURT
INTERPRETER, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT,
MALUSO, BASILAN, Respondent.

G.R. No. 172505, October 01, 2014 - ANTONIO M.

GARCIA, Petitioner, v. FERRO CHEMICALS, INC.,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 174938, October 01, 2014 - GERARDO

LANUZA, JR. AND ANTONIO O. OLBES, Petitioners, v.
BF CORPORATION, SHANGRI-LA PROPERTIES, INC.,
ALFREDO C. RAMOS, RUFO B. COLAYCO, MAXIMO G.
LICAUCO III, AND BENJAMIN C. RAMOS,
Respondents.

G.R. No. 206234, October 22, 2014 - HEIRS OF

JULIO SOBREMONTE AND FELIPA LABAPIS
SOBREMONTE, NAMELY, MARIA LOURDES
SOBREMONTE DE NORBE, DIOSCORA SOBREMONTE
DE BUSLON, NESTOR L. SOBREMONTE, AVELINA
SOBREMONTE DE DELIGERO, HELEN SOBREMONTE DE
CABASE, LAURA SOBREMONTE DE DAGOY AND
RODULFO LABAPIS REPOLLO, ALL REPRESENTED BY
AVELINA SOBREMONTE DELIGERO AS THEIR
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, Petitioners, v. COURT OF
APPEALS, HONORABLE VIRGILIO REYES, IN HIS
CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
AGRARIAN REFORM AND FELICIANO TAPIL, MARCELO
BAYNO, VICENTE BAYNO, ROMUALDO DIAPANA,
HILARIO RECTA, NEMESIA RECTA, POLICARPIO
RECTA, AMPARO R. DIAPANA, BASILIO SAYSON
BUENAVENTURA BAYNO AND BASILIO BAFLOR,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 163654, October 08, 2014 - BPI EXPRESS

CARD CORPORATION,* Petitioner, v. MA. ANTONIA R.
ARMOVIT, Respondent.

G.R. No. 164277, October 08, 2014 - FE U.

QUIJANO, Petitioner, v. ATTY. DARYLL A. AMANTE,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 183700, October 13, 2014 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PABLITO
ANDAYA Y REANO, Accused-Appellant.

G.R. No. 169568, October 22, 2014 - ROLANDO

ROBLES, REPRESENTED BY ATTY. CLARA C. ESPIRITU,
Petitioner, v. FERNANDO FIDEL YAPCINCO,
PATROCINIO B. YAPCINCO, MARIA CORAZON B.
YAPCINCO, AND MARIA ASUNCION B. YAPCINCO-
FRONDA, Respondents.

A.M. No. P-14-3278 [Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 09-

3222-P], October 21, 2014 - CONCERNED CITIZENS
OF NAVAL, BILIRAN, Complainants, v. FLORANTE F.
RALAR, COURT STENOGRAPHER III, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, BRANCH 37, CAIBIRAN, BILIRAN,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 200857, October 22, 2014 - FVR SKILLS

AND SERVICES EXPONENTS, INC. (SKILLEX),
FULGENCIO V. RANA AND MONINA R. BURGOS,
Petitioners, v. JOVERT SEVA, JOSUEL V.
VALENCERINA, JANET ALCAZAR, ANGELITO AMPARO,
BENJAMIN ANAEN, JR., JOHN HILBERT BARBA,
BONIFACIO BATANG, JR., VALERIANO BINGCO, JR.,
RONALD CASTRO, MARLON CONSORTE, ROLANDO
CORNELIO, EDITO CULDORA, RUEL DUNCIL, MERV1N
FLORES, LORD GALISIM, SOTERO GARCIA, JR., REY
GONZALES, DANTE ISIP, RYAN ISMEN, JOEL JUNIO,
CARLITO LATOJA, ZALDY MARRA, MICHAEL PANTANO,
GLENN PILOTON, NORELDO QUIRANTE, ROEL RANCE,
RENANTE ROSARIO AND LEONARDA TANAEL,
Respondents.
 A.M. No. P-09-2673 (A.M. OCA IPI No. 00-857-P),
October 21, 2014 - FRUMENCIO E. PULGAR,
Petitioner, v. PAUL M. RESURRECCION AND MARICAR
M. EUGENIO, Respondents.

G.R. No. 166441, October 08, 2014 - NORBERTO

CRUZ Y BARTOLOME, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 175507, October 08, 2014 - RAMON CHING

AND PO WING PROPERTIES, INC., Petitioners, v.
JOSEPH CHENG, JAIME CHENG, MERCEDES IGNE1 AND
LUCINA SANTOS, Respondents.

G.R. No. 183421, October 22, 2014 -

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v. AICHI FORGING COMPANY OF ASIA, INC.,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 208169, October 08, 2014 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDWARD
ADRIANO Y SALES, Accused-Appellant.

G.R. No. 204964, October 15, 2014 - REMIGIO D.

ESPIRITU AND NOELAGUSTIN, Petitioners, v.
LUTGARDA TORRES DEL ROSARIO REPRESENTED BY
SYLVIA R. ASPERILLA, Respondents.

G.R. No. 190021, October 22, 2014 -

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner,
v. BURMEISTER AND WAIN SCANDINAVIAN
CONTRACTOR MINDANAO, INC., Respondent.

G.R. No. 173988, October 08, 2014 - FELINA

ROSALDES, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 200454, October 22, 2014 - HOLY TRINITY

REALTY & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Petitioner,
v. VICTORIO DELA CRUZ, LORENZO MANALAYSAY,
RICARDO MARCELO, JR. AND LEONCIO DE GUZMAN,
Respondents.

G.R. No. 191090, October 13, 2014 -

EXTRAORDINARY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
Petitioner, v. HERMINIA F. SAMSON-BICO AND ELY B.
FLESTADO, Respondents.

G.R. No. 160107, October 22, 2014 - SPOUSES

JAIME SEBASTIAN AND EVANGELINE SEBASTIAN,
Petitioners, v. BPI FAMILY BANK, INC., CARMELITA
ITAPO AND BENJAMIN HAO, Respondents.

G.R. No. 187702, October 22, 2014 - SECURITIES

AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. THE
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, OMICO
CORPORATION, EMILIO S. TENG AND TOMMY KIN
HING TIA, Respondents.; G.R. NO. 189014 - ASTRA
SECURITIES CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. OMICO
CORPORATION, EMILIO S. TENG AND TOMMY KIN
HING TIA, Respondents.

G.R. No. 166414, October 22, 2014 - GODOFREDO

ENRILE AND DR. FREDERICK ENRILE, Petitioners, v.
HON. DANILO A. MANALASTAS (AS PRESIDING
JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF MALOLOS
BULACAN, BR. VII), HON. ERANIO G. CEDILLO, SR.,
(AS PRESIDING JUDGE, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF
MEYCAUAYAN, BULACAN, BR. 1) AND PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondents.

G.R. No. 187581, October 20, 2014 - PHILIPPINE

BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS, Petitioner, v. BASIC
POLYPRINTERS AND PACKAGING CORPORATION,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 197442, October 22, 2014 - MAJESTIC

FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO., INC., Petitioner, v.
JOSE D. TITO, Respondent.; CORNELIO MENDOZA AND
PAULINA CRUZ, Petitioners-Intervenors, v. JOSE
NAZAL AND ROSITA NAZAL, Respondents-
Intervenors.

G.R. No. 167225, October 22, 2014 - RADIO

MINDANAO NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, v. MICHAEL
MAXIMO R. AMURAO III, Respondent.

G.R. No. 192912, October 03, 2014 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DEMOCRITO
PARAS, Accused-Appellants.

G.R. No. 205249, October 15, 2014 - SPOUSES

BENEDICT AND SANDRA MANUEL, Petitioners, v.
RAMON ONG, Respondent.

G.R. No. 208976, October 13, 2014 - THE

HONORABLE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner,
v. LEOVIGILDO DELOS REYES, JR. Respondent.

G.R. No. 207629, October 22, 2014 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARNEL
VILLALBA Y DURAN AND RANDY VILLALBA Y SARCO,
Accused-Appellants.

G.R. No. 181760, October 14, 2014 - ATTY.

ANACLETO B. BUENA, JR., MNSA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF REGIONAL OFFICE NO. XVI,
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, AUTONOMOUS REGION
IN MUSLIM MINDANAO, COTABATO CITY, Petitioner,
v. DR. SANGCAD D. BENITO, Respondent.
 G.R. No. 196315, October 22, 2014 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEONARDO
CATAYTAY Y SILVANO, Accused-Appellant.

G.R. No. 201565, October 13, 2014 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EX-MAYOR
CARLOS ESTONILO, SR., MAYOR REINARIO “REY”
ESTONILO, EDELBRANDO ESTONILO A.K.A. “EDEL
ESTONILO,” EUTIQUIANO ITCOBANES A.K.A.
“NONONG ITCOBANES,” NONOY ESTONILO-AT LARGE,
TITING BOOC-AT LARGE, GALI ITCOBANES-AT LARGE,
ORLANDO TAGALOG MATERDAM A.K.A. “NEGRO
MATERDAM,” AND CALVIN DELA CRUZ A.K.A.
“BULLDOG DELA CRUZ,” Accused, - EX-MAYOR
CARLOS ESTONILO, SR., MAYOR REINARIO “REY”
ESTONILO, EDELBRANDO ESTONILO A.K.A. “EDEL
ESTONILO,” EUTIQUIANO ITCOBANES A.K.A.
“NONONG ITCOBANES,” AND CALVIN DELA CRUZ
A.K.A. “BULLDOG DELA CRUZ,” Accused-Appellants.

G.R. No. 187061, October 08, 2014 - CELERINA J.

SANTOS, Petitioner, v. RICARDO T. SANTOS,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 188801, October 15, 2014 - ROSARIO

MATA CASTRO AND JOANNE BENEDICTA CHARISSIMA
M. CASTRO, A.K.A. "MARIA SOCORRO M. CASTRO"
AND "JAYROSE M. CASTRO," Petitioners, v. JOSE
MARIA JED LEMUEL GREGORIO AND ANA MARIA
REGINA GREGORIO, Respondents.

A.M. No. P-14-3237 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 09-

3256-P], October 21, 2014 - JEAN PAUL V. GILLERA,
SUZETTE P. GILLERA, ATTY. JILLINA M. GERODIAS,
AND IBARRA BARCEBAL, Complainants, v. MARIA
CONSUELO JOIE A. LEONEN, AND FAJARDO, SHERIFF
IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 93, SAN
PEDRO, LAGUNA, Respondent.

G.R. No. 177332, October 01, 2014 - NATIONAL

POWER CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. CITY OF
CABANATUAN, REPRESENTED BY ITS CITY MAYOR,
HON. HONORATO PEREZ, Respondents.

G.R. No. 188487, October 22, 2014 - VAN D. LUSPO,

Petitioner, v, PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.; G.R. No. 188541 - SUPT. ARTURO H.
MONTANO AND MARGARITA B. TUGAOEN, Petitioners,
v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.; G.R.
No. 188556 - C/INSP. SALVADOR C. DURAN, SR.,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 203254, October 08, 2014 - DR. JOY

MARGATE LEE, Petitioner, v. P/SUPT. NERI A.
ILAGAN, Respondent.

G.R. No. 164686, October 22, 2014 - FOREST HILLS

GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC., Petitioner, v.
GARDPRO, INC., Respondent.

G.R. No. 173548, October 15, 2014 - ONOFRE

ANDRES, SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS, NAMELY:
FERDINAND, ROSALINA, ERIBERTO, FROILAN, MA.
CLEOFE, NELSON, GERMAN, GLORIA, ALEXANDER,
MAY, ABRAHAM, AND AFRICA, ALL SURNAMED
ANDRES, Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK,
Respondents.

G.R. Nos. 176935-36, October 20, 2014 -

ZAMBALES II ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. (ZAMECO
II) BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NAMELY, JOSE S.
DOMINGUEZ (PRESIDENT), ISAIAS Q. VIDUA (VICE-
PRESIDENT), VICENTE M . BARRETO (SECRETARY),
JOSE M. SANTIAGO (TREASURER), JOSE NASERIV C.
DOLOJAN, JUAN D. FERNANDEZ AND HONORIO L.
DILAG, JR. (MEMBERS), Petitioners, v. CASTILLEJOS
CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (CASCONA),
REPRESENTED BY DOMINADOR GALLARDO, DAVID
ESPOSO, CRISTITA DORADO, EDWIN CORPUZ, E.
ROGER DOROPAN, JOSEFINA RAMIREZ, FERNANDO
BOGNOT, JR., CARMELITA DE GUZMAN, MAXIMO DE
LOS SANTOS, AURELIO FASTIDIO, BUENAVENTURA
CELIS, ROBERTO LADRILLO, CORAZON ACAYAN,
CARLITO CARREON, EDUARDO GARCIA, MARCIAL
VILORIA, FILETO DE LEON AND MANUEL LEANDER,
Respondents; ZAMBALES II ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,
INC. (ZAMECO II) BOARD OF DIRECTORS, JOSE S.
DOMINGUEZ (PRESIDENT), ISAIAS Q. VIDUA (VICE-
PRESIDENT), VICENTE M . BARRETO (SECRETARY),
JOSE M. SANTIAGO (TREASURER), JOSE NASERIV C.
DOLOJAN, JUAN D. FERNANDEZ AND HONORIO L.
DILAG, JR. (MEMBERS), Petitioners, v. NATIONAL
ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION (NEA) NEA-
OFFICE OF THE ADMINISRATIVE COMMITTEE, ENGR.
PAULINO T. LOPEZ AND CASTILLEJOS CONSUMERS
ASSOCIATION, INC. (CASCONA), Respondents.

Copyright © 1998 - 2018 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED