Justice Teresita

Leonardo-De
Castro Cases
(2008-2015)

8th Floor Pacific Star Building, Sen. Gil Puyat Avenue corner,
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c. Makati Avenue, Makati City (632) 822-0808/ (632) 822-7878
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Mercantile Law
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
CORPORATION LAW
DOCTRINE OF SEPARATE LEGAL PERSONALITY
Stockholders cannot claim ownership over corporate properties
by virtue of the Minutes of a Stockholder’s 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 plaintiff’s 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
corporation’s 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 corporation’s 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 defendant’s 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 defendant’s 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
8 th F lo o r Pa c i f i c S ta r B u i l di n g, Se n . G i l P uya t Ave n ue c o r ne r ,
Ma ka t i Ave n ue , Ma ka ti C it y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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. Viarivs.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 party-litigant 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, Felipe Galindo, Leonardo Miguel, Julius Rubin,
Page 1 of 2
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Mercantile Law
EdelRoderos, 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
motuproprio. 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 TsungChieh 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
individual’s 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.
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
BangkoSentral 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 BIR’s
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 Gemma’s 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
*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form
without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris Reviews
and Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).
Page 2 of 2
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
R e v i e w s a n d S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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 respondent’s 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.
8 t h F l o o r P a c i f i c S t a r B u i l d i n g , S e n . G i l P u y a t A ve n u e c o r n e r ,
M a k a t i A ve n u e , M a k a t i C i t y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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 attorney’s fees. They
conspicuously did not pray for the annulment or cancellation of
Certificate of Title No. 1. Evidently, the Spouses Decaleng’s
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
Page 1 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
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 buyer’s 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 party’s
consent, otherwise, the latter’s 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.
Page 2 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
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 Nuñez, 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 agent’s 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
agent’s 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 owner’s 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 one’s 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 re-acquire 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 Galas’s TCT contained a restriction on further encumbrances
without the mortgagee’s 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 Galas’s 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, Villar’s 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 Galas’s failure to pay the
Page 3 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
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
creditor’s 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 peitioner’s 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
Page 4 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
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 A-Ang, 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
Page 5 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law
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 ALI’s 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 re-conveyance, 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 Muñoz 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 owner’s 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 respondent’s 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 Juan’s 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.
Page 6 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Civil Law

Court of Appeals (Ninth Division), Gay T. Leaño, Lemuel T. provision of the Civil Code. - Development Bank of the
Leaño, Noel T. Leaño, Jedd Anthony Leaño Cuison and Philippines vs. Traverse Development Corporation and
Jason Anthony Leaño Cuison, G.R. No. 170182, June 18, Central Surety and Insurance Company, G.R. No. 169293,
2009 October 5, 2011

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
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

The award of exemplary damages is justified if an aggravating

circumstance, either qualifying or generic, accompanies the *No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or
crime. In the case at bar, the qualifying circumstance of evident form without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris
premeditation was duly alleged in the Information and proved Reviews and Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).
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

ATTORNEY’S FEES

The stipulation on attorney’s 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 attorney’s 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 attorney’s
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
attorney’s 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, attorney’s
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 attorney’s fees and cost of litigation under the above

Page 7 of 7
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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 the special
competence of administrative agencies even if the question
involved is also judicial in nature. - BF Homes, Inc. and The
8 t h F l o o r P a c i f i c S t a r B u i ld i n g , S e n . G i l P u y a t A v e n u e c o r n e r ,
M ak at i A ve nu e, M ak at i Cit y ( 63 2) 8 22 - 08 08/ ( 6 32) 82 2 - 7 878
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, Parañaque 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,
Page 1 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
In His Capacity As Director, NCR and 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 APPELLANT’S 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. - 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
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 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
Page 2 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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 re-opening 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
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 Brar’s
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 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 APPELANT’S 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. - 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
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
Page 3 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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
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 Chartered’s
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 Court’s 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 Multi-Purpose 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.
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 action—the 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 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
Page 4 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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. -
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 petitioner’s 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 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 sheriff’s expenses
in implementing a writ of execution. Respondent as an officer of
the court should have shown a high degree of professionalism
Page 5 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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 well-settled 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 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
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 complainant’s 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,
Page 6 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
upon the applicant’s 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
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
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 person’s 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
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 victim’s 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
Page 7 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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,
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-07-1666,
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 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 PLDT’s 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
Page 8 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE
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
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 perpetrator’s 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 appellant’s contention
that the witnesses presented were not credible, the Court
reiterated the jurisprudential principle affording great respect
and even finality to the trial court’s 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)
Page 9 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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
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
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
Page 10 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
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
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 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 AAA’s 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 court’s 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 court’s 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
Estoya likewise makes much of the inconsistencies between
CCC’s Sinumpaang Salaysay and his testimony in open court.
Said inconsistencies do not at all damage CCC’s 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 BBB’s house; he saw AAA crying; and he
Page 11 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
immediately ran to ask help from their neighbor, DDD.
Moreover, as we pronounced previously herein, AAA’s
testimony alone already established the elements of rape
committed against her by Estoya. At most, CCC’s 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
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 victim’s 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
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
Ramos’s 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 AAA’s 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
Page 12 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law
DYING DECLARATION
The RTC admitted Aurelio’s 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 evidence―an
exception to the hearsay rule―are four, which must concur, to
wit: a.) the dying declaration must concern the crime and the
surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s 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
Rarugal’s stabbing 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
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. - 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
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
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 Arrisma’s exoneration from the charge against
him/her. - People of the Philippines vs. Nelly Ulama y
Arrisma, G.R. No. 186530, December 14, 2011
Page 13 of 14
Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Remedial Law

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

*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form without
permission by the Lecturer and Magnificus Juris Reviews and Seminars, Inc.
(“Magnificus”).

Page 14 of 14
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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
8 t h Fl o o r P a c i f i c S t a r B u i l di n g , S e n . Gi l P u ya t A ve n u e c o rn e r,
M a k a t i A ve n u e , M a k a t i C i t y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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 danger—not 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 self-defense. 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 one’s self may be justified only if it is taken
as a last resort and with the least possible prejudice to another.
Page 1 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 one’s 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 self-defense. 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
Page 2 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 court’s 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
buy-bust 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-appellant’s 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
Page 3 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 Rosario’s
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 drug’s 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 Court’s 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
Page 4 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 prosecution’s 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 accused’s 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
Page 5 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
the evidence’s 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 prosecution’s 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 accused’s 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 Cañete, 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 victim’s 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 victim’s house and later shoot the victim
and the CA affirmed the trial court’s 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
Ardet’s 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 Piñas, Jimmy Delizo and
Merwin Las Piñas, 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
Page 6 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 woman’s 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
victim’s minority and her relationship to the accused-appellant
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 woman’s 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 evidence—by 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 . N o . 1 7 5 5 9 5
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, accused’s defense
of denial will not stand as against the victim’s 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 former’s 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
Page 7 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 victim’s 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 victim’s 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 victim’s
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 victim’s mother or relatives concerning the victim’s age, the
complainant’s 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,
appellant’s succeeding in having non-consensual sexual
intercourse with ABC through intimidation using a knife plainly
Page 8 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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 victim’s credibility becomes
the primordial consideration. . Inconsistencies in the victim’s
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
common-law-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 victim’s father,
stepfather, uncle, or the common-law 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 victim’s father, stepfather, uncle, or the common-law
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 perpetrator’s
awareness of his victim’s mental condition. However, the
perpetrator’s knowledge of the victim’s 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 victim’s 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
prosecution’s 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 victim’s 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 victim’s 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 victim’s 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
Page 9 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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. Vidaña, 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
complainant’s 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 victim’s 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 victim’s testimony. In this regard, the Court defers to the
trial court’s assessment of the credibility of victim’s 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 victim’s ability to identify him or anyone for
that matter, is downright erroneous. The victim never claimed to
have seen her attacker inside the "kamalig." W hat 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 AAA’s testimony, which was
corroborated by the medical findings of Dr. Rivamonte and Dr.
Arellano that the victim’s hymen had "complete healed
lacerations at 1, 3, 6, 9 o’clock 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
Page 10 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law
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
girl’s credible, positive and categorical testimony relative to the
circumstances surrounding her rape; and the physical evidence
consistent with victim’s 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 one’s 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 victim’s 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
Page 11 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Criminal Law

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
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

It is elementary that denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and
duty but merely to injure the reputation of the person defamed,
convincing evidence, is negative and self-serving evidence
and implies an intention to do ulterior and unjustifiable
which has far less evidentiary value than the testimony of harm. Malice is present when it is shown that the author of the
credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters. - People
libelous remarks made such remarks with knowledge that it was
of the Philippines vs. Virginia Baby P. Montaner, G.R. No.
false or with reckless disregard as to the truth or falsity thereof.
184053, August 31, 2011
- Isagani M. Yambot, Letty Jimenez-Magsanoc, Jose Ma. D.
Nolasco, Artemio T. Engracia, Jr. and Volt Contreras vs.
It is settled that a person may be charged and convicted Hon. Artemio Tuquero in his capacity as Secretary of
separately of illegal recruitment and Estafa. Roderick’s Justice, and Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr., G.R. No. 169895,
contention that he cannot be convicted of estafa because the March 23, 2011
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 *No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or
appellant and his co-accused, for a fee, can deploy private
form without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris
complainants abroad for employment. - People of the
Reviews and Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).
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, Ochoa’s 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 Ochoa’s 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.
Page 12 of 12
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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 lawyer’s 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 lawyer’s 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 client’s 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
8 t h F l o o r P a c i f i c S t a r B u i l d i n g , S e n . G i l P u y a t A ve n u e c o r n e r ,
M a k a t i A ve n u e , M a k a t i C i t y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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 latter’s
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 court’s
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
Page 1 of 5
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics
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 complainant’s 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 complainant’s
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. -
AureoBayaca vs. Judge Tranquilino Ramos, A.M. No. MTJ-
07-1676, 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 judge’s 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 people’s 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. - VenancioInonogvs.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
Page 2 of 5
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics
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 HadjiAmer R. Sampiano, Somer Abdullah, Salic
Tampugao, Anthony Abi, Saga Pole Inog, TororacDomato,
King Maronsing, Margarita Solaiman,
HadjiAcmadMamenting 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.
Aragonesvs.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
non-appearance 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
GadrinabSenarlovs.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 judge’s 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 well-settled 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. Bernasvs. 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 court’s 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 judge’s 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. -
Page 3 of 5
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics
Falsification of Daily Time Records of Ma. Emcisa A.
Benedictos, AdministrativeOfficer 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
Court’s 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. P-11-2950, 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. Hipevs. 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 prosecutor’s
resolution of dismissal that had been reversed by the city
prosecutor should still form part of the records. - City
Prosecutor Armando P. Abanadovs.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. Valente’s failure
to secure Panaligan’s 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. - AnecitaPanaliganvs.
Ethelda B. Valente, Clerk of Court II, 3rd Municipal Circuit
Trial Court, Patnoñgon, 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. Lugaresvs.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
individual’s excessive or ostentatious pride especially in one’s
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 NazarVda. De Feliciano vs. Romeo L. Rivera, Sheriff
Page 4 of 5
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Legal Ethics
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 respondent’s
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 BienvenidoSaniel, 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-13-3105, 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 CelestinoTeves represented
by Paul John Teves Abad Elsa C. Aquino and Felimon E.
Fernanvs. 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 Server’s 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 judge’s 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 people’s 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 90-dayrequirement; he/she should instead
persevere in itsimplementation.Heavy caseload and
demanding workload are notvalid reasons to fall behind the
mandatory period for disposition ofcases.The Court usually
allows reasonable extensions of time todecide cases in view of
the heavy caseload of the trial courts. If ajudge is unable to
comply with the 90dayreglementary period fordeciding cases
or matters, he/she can, for good reasons, ask for anextension
and such request is generally granted.But JudgeBustamante
did not ask for an extension in any of these cases. Having
failed to decide acase within the required period, without any
order of extensiongranted by the Court, Judge Bustamante is
liable for undue delaythat 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 HizonAlano, Mary Annabelle
A. Katipunan, Suzee Wong Jamotillo, Analie Del Rio
Balitung, Edwino Jayson Oliveros and Roberto
Babaodono vs. Padma LatipSahi, A.M. No. P-11-302, June
25, 2014, J. Leonardo-De Castro
*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form
without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris Reviews
and Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).
Page 5 of 5
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law
8th Floor Pacific Star Building, Sen. Gil Puyat A venue co rner,
R e v i e w s an d S e m i n a r s, I n c.
POLICE POWER
Ayala Land Inc sold parcel of land to Spouses Jose
CritinaYuson 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 80of 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
M a k a t i A ve n u e , M a k a t i C i t y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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 Estrada’s 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 People’s Republic of China. Simply put, the
bases are presidential communications privilege and executive
privilege on matters relating to diplomacy or foreign relations.
Page 1 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law
Using the above elements, we are convinced that, indeed,
thecommunications elicited by the three (3) questions are
covered bythe presidential communications privilege. First,
thecommunications relate to a quintessential and non-
delegablepower of the President, i.e. the power to enter into an
executiveagreement with other countries. This authority of the
President toenter into executive agreements without the
concurrence of theLegislature has traditionally been
recognized in Philippinejurisprudence.Second, the
communications are received by aclose advisor of the
President. Under the operational proximity test, petitioner can
be considered a close advisor, being a member of President
Arroyo’s cabinet. And third, there is no adequate showing of a
compelling need that would justify the limitation of theprivilege
and of the unavailability of the information elsewhere byan
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.
ChiongFor 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. Yapvs.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. - LintangBedol 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 authority’s
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. GovernorErico 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.
Page 2 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law
There was a violation of the equal protection clause of the
Constitution when the former President gave preferential
treatment to respondents Guidote-Alvarez, Caparas, Mañosa
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 VirgilioAlmario 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 Philippinesvs. 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 accused’s 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 wife’s assets and
business interest. - Office of the Ombudsmanvs.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. -JudgeAdoracion 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,
GenerosoDerramas, Vicente Duran, Ricardo Araque,
MerlindaDegala, Gabriel Aranas, Ernesto Bitoon and Juvic
Deslate,vs.Pio Jude S. Belo, Rodolfo Deocampo and
Lorencito Diaz, G.R. No. 158734, October 2, 200
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
Page 3 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Political Law

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,
GenerosoDerramas, Vicente Duran, Ricardo Araque,
MerlindaDegala, Gabriel Aranas, Ernesto Bitoon and Juvic
Deslatevs.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 Bulilisvs.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
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 NHA’s Order of relocating [Petitioner Magkalas]
to her assigned lot and demolishing her property on account of
her refusal to vacate was consistent with the law’s 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. - CaridadMagkalas 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. 10-10-4-SC, March 8, 2011
*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form
without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris Reviews
and Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).

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 project’s
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

Page 4 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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
Philippinesvs.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
petitioner’s 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
Respondent’s disability can only be assessed by the company-
designated physician. If the company-designated 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 latter’s 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
8 th F lo o r Pa c i f i c S ta r B u i l di n g, Se n . G i l P uya t Ave n ue c o r ne r ,
Ma ka t i Ave n ue , Ma ka ti C it y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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
Page 1 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law
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 latter’s 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 employer’s 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 employee’s 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.
Bilbaovs. 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 opposedto a temporary layoffas is
the case here. There is no specific provision oflaw which treats
of a temporary retrenchment or layoffand provides for
therequisites in effecting it or a period or duration therefor.
These employeescannot forever be temporarily laid- off.To
remedy this situation or fill thehiatus, Article 286 may be
applied but only by analogy to set a specificperiod that
employees may remain temporarily laid-offor 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 Sebugueroapplies to this case, the consequences
arrived at in Sebugueroalsoapply. Layoffis essentially
retrenchment and under Article 283 ofthe 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.
NagkahiusangMamumuosaMinterbo –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
Page 2 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law
regarding her teaching. Far from being tainted with bad faith,
respondent’s 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 Mccauleyvs.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
Corporationvs.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 Sugueet. 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 member’s 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
Chapter-Federation 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
Page 3 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Labor Law

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 Universityvs.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 Associationvs.Pilipinas Shell
Petroleum Corporation, G.R. No. 170007, April 7, 2014
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. -
BanahawBroadcasting Corporationvs.CayetanoPacana 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
*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form without
permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris Reviews and Seminars, Inc.
(“Magnificus”).

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 petitioner’s 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 employer’s 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 Lunavs.Allado Construction Co., Inc., and/or
Ramon Allado, G.R. No. 175251, May 30, 2011

Page 4 of 4
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation
R e v i e w s and S e m i n a r s, I n c.
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 VAT-exempt 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
8 th F lo o r Pa c i f i c S ta r B u i l di n g, Se n . G i l P uya t Ave n ue c o r ne r ,
Ma ka t i Ave n ue , Ma ka ti C it y ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 0 8 0 8 / ( 6 3 2 ) 8 2 2 - 7 8 7 8
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
Page 1 of 2
 Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro Cases (2008-2015) Taxation

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 Revenue’s (BIR’s) 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

*No part of this material may be reproduced in any manner or form

without permission by the Author and Magnificus Juris Reviews and
Seminars, Inc. (“Magnificus”).

Page 2 of 2